and moderation so generally characterizing our ecclesiastical superiors; but wherever a case of manifest hardship has occurred, the unfortunate sufferer has so uniformly received substantial tokens of sympathy and regard, that a very careful and wise observer, who has enjoyed abundant opportunities of ascertaining the fact, has not hesitated to declare, that 'he had scarcely ever known an 'instance where a curate had been 'hardly dealt with, and had borne his trials with prudence and patience, but it had eventually turned out to his temporal as well as 'spiritual advantage.'

One evil, however, resulting from such expressions of Christian sympathy and regard is, that some young beginners in the Christian ministry have been encouraged to adopt a line of conduct very inconsistent with the situation in which they are placed, and exceedingly detrimental to the cause of true religion. We have here, for instance, the curate of a resident incumbent, within a few months after ordination, claiming the people and the pulpits as his own; dissuading the congregation from attending the ministry of his superior; setting himself up as a direct rival; behaving with great irregularity; disregarding all admonition, and at last, when quietly desired to seek another engagement, attempting by importunity, by all the machinery of petition, by threats of dissent, and, above all, by the menace of an appeal to the public, to force his bishop and rector to recall their dismissal, and to permit his continuance, even while tenaciously denying any sense of his misconduct, and thus destroying every hope of amendment.

Now, it is most obvious that the relation of a curate to his incumbent is that of an assistant. He may be very much the superior in talents, learning, piety, &c. but still he must be considered by

2

virtue of his situation as the inferior. If, therefore, the curate and the incumbent disagree, it is, generally speaking, expedient that a separation should take place, and there is surely nothing unreasonable in the idea that the principal should remain, and the curate should withdraw. Accordingly separations of this kind are frequently taking place, generally by mutual consent; usually at the pleasure of the curate, for the incumbent cannot dismiss a regularly licensed curate without the consent of the Bishop of the diocese. A curate may indeed be dismissed by the Bishop without any reason whatever; and such a dismissal may in extreme cases arise from the curate's attachment to the doctrines of the Reformation; but we apprehend this is rarely the sole cause; and where such is the case, as has been already hinted, it almost universally calls forth solid proofs of the public sympathy and support.

Such a case Mr. Bridgman would lead us to believe he has to produce. He attributes the whole of his sufferings to jealousy on the part of his incumbent-jealousy of his superior success among the people of the Forest--jealousy producing misrepresentation to the Bishop; an evil effect on his mind; a consequent dismissal of Mr. Bridgman; an inhibition from preaching in the diocese of Gloucester, and eventually a secession from the Church.

The perusal, however, of Mr. Bridgman's pamphlet, must produce a very different impression on every unbiassed mind. It decidedly proves him to be an imprudent man. He and his incumbent could not agree-an appeal is made to the Bishop of the diocese-he very properly directs the curate to gothe curate answers, I will not go; I will stay. It is melancholy that any man should be so rash or ill-advised as or ill-advised as to form such a resolution; but unquestionably,

when this is the case, there is but one line which a Bishop can adopt; and, however painful it may be, he must proceed to inhibit the curate from preaching in his diocese.

When, however, we turn to Mr. Berkin's pamphlet we are compelled to view Mr. Bridgman's conduct in a still more unfavourable light. Mr. Bridgman, be it remembered, imputes his dismissal entirely to Mr. Berkin's jealousy, and consequent dislike. But Mr. Berkin's pamphlet shows that this imputation is utterly unfounded; that so far from Mr. Bridgman's dismissal being occasioned by Mr. Berkin's interference, he was actually retained in the curacy several months at the intercession of Mr. Berkin; and Mr. Bridgman is also shown to have garbled the letters which he has published, in a most improper and unjustifiable manner.

We insert the following letter as a specimen: all the parts printed in italics are omitted in Mr. Bridgman's pamphlet; why they are omitted is, alas! too evident. The Bishop, Incumbent, and Curate, all appear in a very different light, according as the original or the abridged letter is read; and Mr. Bridgman must have been conscious that such would be the case. From the Bishop of Gloucester to Rev. I. Bridgman.

Deanery, Sept. 27, 1822.

"REV. AND DEAR SIR,

"I have received your letter. I have heard from Mr. Berkin upon the general matter of it, as well as upon some other points of your conduct; and have now entered fully into the subject in conversation with him. I have also heard from Mr. Fosbroke. The result of the whole, upon the best consideration which I can give it, is, that it will be far better for all parties, and for the ultimate and real interests of genuine religion, that you should leave the Forest of Dean.

"It is due to Mr. Berkin to add, that in all my various communications with him about you, he has uniformly shown the most Christian forbearance and kindness. He will give you a quarter's notice. I am willing to do full justice to your motives, and to your ardent zeal: but more of real humility, judgment, and temper, are in my

It appears, on the comparison of these two pamphlets, that Mr. Bridgman's whole conduct from his first entrance on the curacy was most irregular. His preaching is said to have been extravagant, desultory, and irreverent. In reading prayers he frequently altered the Liturgy, expounded the lessons, and deviated from the Rubric; and in visiting the people, he appears to have adopted a line of conduct very much tending to diminish his respectability and usefulness. On hearing of these things, the Bishop felt it necessary, in three months after his ordination, to send him an admonitory letter, which was transmitted to Mr. Berkin for him to peruse and forward. So far, however, from jealously watching occasion of offence, Mr. Berkin delayed this letter, and finally prevailed with the Bishop to recall it.

Shortly after this, Mr. Bridgman, in the highly excited state of the public mind on occasion of the Queen's death, gave notice from the pulpit, that he should preach a funeral sermon for Her Majesty. This Mr. Berkin thought unadvised and improper, and he therefore interfered to prevent it. Mr. Bridgman then gave notice, that " he had "been forbidden by high authority "to preach on this subject, and that "had he not obeyed, he would pro"bably never have preached in that "place again." The gross indiscretion and rash judgment of the first notice, and the ill-tempered and inflammatory nature of the second, naturally brought upon him a notice of dismissal. This order also was recalled in consequence of Mr. Berkin's kind interference.

After a few months, a third communication from the Bishop reached Mr. Berkin.

His Lordship recapitulated the former grounds of complaint against Mr. Bridgman on the score of irregularity; and added, that he had lately received, from most respectable authority, the same accounts as before, of his strange manners, and unguarded language in the pulpit, tending to bring contempt, in the minds of many persons, on the services of the Established Church. His Lordship allowed that his zeal might be great, and his intention perhaps good; but that such continued imprudence, after admonition given, seemed to forbid the hope of an amendment of conduct, and he could not therefore grant a longer toleration of it. I was still unwilling to come to that extremity, if it could possibly be avoided; and, under the influence, as I trust, of that charity which "hopeth all things," I again ventured to solicit the Bishop for a further trial, and again his Lordship most kindly acceded to the request.-P. 21.

Now really, after all this, we should never have conceived that any man could charge Mr. Berkin with jealous dislike, seeking to find fault with trifles in order to effect his removal. Yet such is Mr. Bridgman's accusation!

Circumstances,however,atlength `occurred, which rendered further lenity and forbearance impossible. The Rev. Rowland Hill, of Surrey Chapel, visited the neighbourhood of the Forest, and Mr. Bridgman, without consulting his incumbent, gave notice that Mr. Hill would preach at Lidbrook chapel, in Mr. Berkin's parish, the following week, and also at Ruardean church, the use of which the curate, Mr. Fosbroke, had allowed Mr. Bridgman for a weekly lecture.

On Mr. Berkin's learning these proceedings, he immediately urged his curate to inform Mr. Fosbroke of his intentions as 'to Ruardeau church, to which Mr. Bridgman appeared to consent. Mr. Berkin also, for his own part, declined permitting Mr. Hill to preach at Lidbrook. To this Mr. Bridgman replied, that as he considered the congregation at Lidbrook to have been raised by his means, he did not consider himself under the same obligation to acquaint Mr. Berkin of his

MAY 1823.

intentions. This extraordinary ašsumption awakened the incumbent to a just view of his curate's character. One principal reason why Mr.Berkin wished for a curate was, that he might establish the worship of God at Lidbrook. By great personal exertions he had raised the funds with which the chapel was built, and procured the Bishop's license, but had been prevented by illness from taking that share of the duty which he originally contemplated.

When, however, Mr. Bridgman proceeded so far as to fancy himself the founder and sole pastor of the congregation, Mr. Berkin discovered what had long before been apparent to others, that his curate's mind was so occupied with erroneous views as to his real situation, and that his judgment was so warped on various points, that there was no rational prospect of amendment, and that the best way for all parties was that which his Diocesan had pointed out a year before, namely, to part.

The remainder of the narrative recounts little more than a series of efforts on the part of Mr. Bridgman to shake the determination of his superiors. Tears and entreaties were abundantly employed to excite the compassion of the people, and induce them to petition for his continuance; and the countenance Mr. B. received stimulated him to higher efforts. He soon began to aim at the entire possession of Lidbrook chapel. He writes to Mr. Berkin, "Give me Lidbrook, and the wound may yet be healed;" and he writes to the Bishop requesting "the perpetual curacy of Lidbrook chapel, with a salary." Now, to say nothing of the modesty of such a request from a person who was finally dismissed, after repeated warnings, it must be sufficiently obvious that it was impracticable. No minister can be licensed to a church without the consent of the incumbent and Bishop, and we do not conceive

CC

that in the case before us it was possible for them both, even if they were so disposed, to secure to Mr. Bridgman the perpetual curacy of Lidbrook chapel, with a salary.

Foiled in all his efforts, Mr. Bridgman at length succeeds in exciting the passions of the people so as to inflame their resentment against Mr. Berkin, and to lead to a serious disturbance during divine worship. The natural consequence of such conduct was, an inhibition from his diocesan; and this was followed by a hasty resolution on his part to secede from the Establishment.

It pains us to add, that this individual, guilty as he plainly was of the greatest degree of insubordination and contumacy towards his superiors, has been received with open arms by very respectable persons among our dissenting brethren, and welcomed to some of the first congregations in the metropolis as a persecuted brother. Knowing well, as they necessarily must, the mildness of the Bishop of Gloucester's character, that devoted piety and enlarged liberality which he has so uniformly manifested, they should, at least, have paused before, on an ex parte statement, they had so opened their pulpits and their purses to a person of whom, even on his own showing, it was most obvious, that he deserved censure, however justly he might also be an object of compassion.

In the ordinary concerns of life a very different course of conduct is observed: no man thinks of receiving a servant into his family who has been dismissed from a respectable situation, without, at least, inquiring from others as well as himself the grounds on which he has been dismissed. No jury ever comes to a decision on the bare statement of the prisoner without considering the evidence against him; yet here an individual is taken up, brought forwards, strongly recommended, and reported to have

received subscriptions to a considerable amount, whose only claim to such a remuneration appears to have been, that, after having drawn upon himself a deliberate sentence from one of the most pious, exemplary, and considerate prelates who has ever existed, he thinks proper to secede from the Establishment. That our dissenting brethren should receive with open arms those who secede from conscientious motives, can neither be matter of surprise or censure; but we must consider it both surprising and criminal, that an individual of another communion, who had incurred repeated censure from his superiors, should be received and welcomed with such fluttering eagerness. This sentiment has, we know, been expressed by some of the most valued and revered ministers among the dissenters; and we are sure that the encouragement in this case afforded to rashness and imprudence, to adopt no stronger language, must be deeply lamented by all of every denomination who simply labour for peace.

We feel for Mr. Bridgman's situation-we pity his misconduct, and consequent disappointment.We regret that in days like these any man should retire from the Establishment; but in our deliberate opinion Mr. Bridgman's pamphlet shows that the Bishop of Gloucester could not have acted otherwise, and Mr. Berkin's pamphlet throws the whole weight of blame on Mr. Bridgman alone; nor can we shrink from such an avowal without neglecting that duty which we owe to the religious world in general, and our readers in particular; at the same time we earnestly pray, that Mr. Bridgman may learn prudence, forbearance, and due consideration for the feelings and circumstances of others in any situation to which he may be called, and that, in whatever line he may hereafter labour, he may indeed promote the glory of God and the good of souls.

THE last few weeks have been distinguished in the metropolis by the Anniversaries of four of its Auxiliary Bible Societies, the proceedings of each of which would, if at all adequately reported, occupy far more than the whole space which we can devote to religious intelligence; it is obvious, therefore, that we cannot attempt even an abstract of their proceedings, and can, indeed, do little more than insert the mere names of the several societies and their principal speakers. The first in order of time, and which took place at Freemasons' Hall, on Monday, March 31, was the

BLOOMSBURY AND SOUTH PANCRAS
AUXILIARY SOCIETY.

THE venerable President, Mr. Grant, on taking the Chair remarked, that the Bible Society confers a privilege on every individual within the Christian pale, by enabling persons, without distinction of sex or age, to promote the circulation of the word of God and since every privilege implies a corresponding duty, it was doubtless the duty of all to assist in this important work: it was within the sphere of every individual to contribute by his zeal, as well as his pecuniary aid. The whole ultimate success must depend upon the zeal of individuals; in proportion to our power so was our responsibility, and if we met in this spirit, every Anniversary would give a new impulse to our zeal, and he trusted that zeal would always be connected with prudence, -Mr. G. then called upon the

Rev. T. Webster to read the Report of the Institution. This Report, in touching upon the local concerns of the Society, pressed strongly upon the subscribers the duty of coming forwards to supply the place of those collectors, &c. who were either removed by death, or prevented by increasing business or other engagements, from employing that time and zeal in the cause they had formerly manifested; it vindicated the propriety of ladies engaging as collectors, and impressed on persons connected with manufactories, the duty and, importance of establishing Bible Societies in them. The Report then referred to the deaths of Messrs. Dalziel, Blair, and Owen, and ended by briefly adverting to the continued prosperity of the Parent Institution.

The Meeting was then addressed by the Hon. Charles Shore, William Albin Garrat, Esq. Sir Robert Harry Inglis, the Rev. Joseph Hughes, Dr. Winter, Charles Stoke Dudley, Esq. the Right Hon. Charles Grant, M. P. the Rev. Henry Venn, Dr. Steinkopff, and the Rev. Daniel Wilson.

SOUTHWARK AUXILIARY BIBLE SOCIETY,

THIS Society assembled April 8, at the Horns Tavern, Kennington, when the Chair was taken by Charles Barclay, Esq., M. P. A very able and interesting Report was read by the Rev. Thos. Mortimer, one of the Secretaries. From this Report we were happy to learn, that the Southwark Bible Society still continues distinguished by zeal, activity, and usefulness. Several very interesting anecdotes were recited; some of which we hope to be able, at a future opportunity, to lay before our readers. The Report was followed by impressive speeches from the Rev. C. Burton, minister of All Saints Church, Manchester; the Rev. J. Townsend, Dr. Steinkopff, Thomas Webster, Mr. Samuel West, Jesse Curling, Esq. the Rev, R. Warren, Joseph Hughes, G. Phillips, Thomas Bartlett, and G. Clayton; when the meeting was closed by an appropriate speech from the Chairman.

THE NORTH-WEST LONDON AUXILIARY

ASSEMBLED at the Argyle Rooms, April 16th, at the usual time, and notwithstanding the unfavourableness of the morning, a numerous attendance of highly respectable persons collected together. The Chair was taken by the Hon. Charles Shore, when the Report was read by the Rev. Basil Woodd; which was followed by appropriate speeches from Sir Thomas Dyke Acland, M. P. the Rev. Dr. Steinkopff, Capt. Hillyer, R. N. Robert Grant, Esq. the Rev. Mr. Lawrance, E. Bell from Tyrone, E. Parsons, Dr. Jennings, and J. Stratton.

THE WESTMINSTER AUXILIARY BIBLE

SOCIETY

WAS held April 25th, at the King's Concert Room, in the Haymarket. Lord Calthorpe took the Chair, supported by the Bishop of Gloucester, the Right Hon. Lord Bexley, and the Earl of Rocksavage. In taking the Chair Lord Calthorpe remarked, that the benefits of the Institution were so generally known, that it was unnecessary for him to enlarge; but he was convinced that this Institution was faithful to its design, and in every respect promoting the com mand of God in circulating the book by which alone men can be saved. The Bible Society was unlimited in its extent; yet when seen in our own land, it manifested the same course of usefulness, and in all its ramifications has a most beneficial influence, especially in associations. These have been found not only most productive, but they also confer upon the lowest classes of society the privilege of being benefactors to their fellow-creatures-they are permitted