dictates of common sense allow us to suppose. As the principle has never yet obtained a fair trial,' experience can supply no certain criterion. To infer from its partial success, its universal efficiency in a regenerated state of society, is not unreasonable; but, though this may be a true hypothesis, it stands in the condition of those truths which have yet to become facts, and which, till then, remain probable, and not proved.

But what is meant by the voluntary system? Mr. Ballantyne seems in some places to identify it exclusively with Dissenting "Churches,' although it is the system which equally maintains the Romish orders and the hierarchy of the Romish Church, in countries where Popery is not established. The efficiency of the voluntary system was shewn, in the fourteenth century, in raising up and supporting the Mendicant orders; and it is now marvellously displaying its vital energies in maintaining the Irish priesthood, whose ascendancy is so much dreaded by the endowed and opulent order of established clergy. Even the Established Churches themselves, this Writer justly remarks, act partially under the principles of the voluntary system, and always with success. Their chapels of ease are all supported on the prin6 ciple of voluntary contribution, and yet they seldom fail.'* But, while this fact illustrates the efficiency and prevalence of the voluntary system, it proves at the same time, that it is not so contrary to the principle of Establishments, as may at first sight appear, since it is thus capable of coalescing and blending with it.

6

The principle of voluntary contribution is (strictly speaking) opposed, not simply to State Establishments, but to private endowments; and those are at least consistent reasoners, who deprecate all endowments whatsoever for the support of religion, as positively or inevitably mischievous. And yet, what but the same voluntary system is the origin of all endowments not immediately emanating from the State? That voluntary endowments may be injurious at once to religion and to the interests of the body politic, by their disproportionate magnitude or accumulation, and that the pious, but misguided beneficence of individuals may require to be brought under legislative regulation, the Statutes of Mortmain testify, which were designed to prevent the friars from receiving landed property. Endowed charities, en

In the neighbourhood of Edinburgh', Mr. Ballantyne says, two chapels of ease were lately erected in one parish, and with such decisive results, that the rate of about 2000l. annually was obtained for their sittings in the course of a few weeks. In eleven Established Churches in Edinburgh, more than 5000l. were obtained the other year for sittings-a sum so completely beyond their needs, that the magistrates are said to have employed the surplus in paving the

streets.'

dowed colleges, and endowed churches are all equally liable to be perverted by corrupt management into sources of snug monopoly and private advantage, unless the abuse of trust is prevented by the most vigilant exercise of public opinion, the only efficient executor of bequests to posterity. An endowed church may, or may not be allied to the State by exclusive privileges. Were the political alliance between the Church and the State in this country dissolved, the right of the Church to retain all its endowments would remain the same, including among its endowments the Tithes themselves. That is to say, it would have all the legal right that a public corporation can have to retain the revenues bequeathed to it; and which is considered as not only a legal, but an equitable right, till abuse of trust has vitiated the tenure, or some paramount necessity calls for the sovereign interference of the highest national authorities. Church property has nothing in it that distinguishes it from other corporate property, except this; that other corporations are sometimes voluntary associations of men for their own benefit; whereas a church is a corporation endowed, whether by the State or by individuals, for the benefit of others. The property of the Goldsmiths' or the Drapers' Company, that of Dulwich College, that of Guy's Hospital, that of the Wesleyan Conference, or of any Dissenting Academy, is as sacred, neither more nor less, as the tithes or other revenues of the Church. To maintain, on the one hand, that the Church of England has, as an ecclesiastical corporation, no collective right of property, appears to us a most untenable and monstrous assertion. On the other hand, to contend, that that right is absolute, independent on the Crown, the sovereign proprietor in the eye of the law, of whom all property is held,-so as not to be controllable by either the jurisdiction of royal prerogative, or the conservative power of the legislature,-is to set up a claim, not to property, but to sovereignty: it is to make the Church imperium in imperio,-an independent power in the midst of the nation, greater than the nation itself. The best comment on such romantic claims, is supplied by History.

The treaty of Westphalia secularized many of the most opulent benefices of Germany, under the mediation and guarantee of the first Catholic powers in Europe. In our own island, on the abolition of Episcopacy in Scotland at the Revolution, the revenues of the Church peaceably devolved on the Sovereign, and he devoted a portion of them to the support of the new Establishment. When, at a still later period, the Jesuits were suppressed in most Catholic monarchies, the wealth of that formidable and opulent body was every where seized by the Sovereign. Appeal, &c., p. 153.

We do not say, with the Writer from whom the above paragraph is cited, that, in these memorable examples, no traces are

to be discovered of the pretended property of the Church.' As reasonably might it be affirmed, that, in the confiscation of the estates of an attainted peer, no trace is discoverable of the right of hereditary property. But these examples ought to stop the mouths of Papists exclaiming against Protestant spoliation on the one hand; while they admonish those churchmen, on the other hand, who talk of the sacred and indefeasible rights of the clergy, that the precedents of history, the most solemn acts of Catholic powers, the original claims of the Crown, the theory of the British Constitution, all ancient law, as well as all modern philosophy, concur in disproving such lofty pretensions.

It is, however, equally fallacious, to talk of the Church property as being vested in the Legislature. Dissenters who hold this language, expose themselves to the charge of being either very ignorant or guilty of wilful and malicious misrepresentation. The tithes are no more vested in the Legislature, than are the Irish estates of a London Company, or the endowments of our Dissenting academies and meeting-houses. The manner in which the abolition of tithes by a simple act of parliament is sometimes spoken of, as a thing quite feasible, legal, and desirable, might have suited a French constituent assembly. But that British Christians-nay, ministers of the Gospel-nay, individuals enjoying the benefit of endowments-should be so far misled by party zeal, as to join in the unprincipled clamour against church property, raised by the advocates of uncompensated spoliation,-forgetful alike of consistency, the decencies of their sacred office, and the plain dictates of common honesty,-this, we must avow it, has filled us with amazement and shame. The cause of Dissent is under small obligations to those who have brought down upon it this deep disgrace*.

The Tithe system is open to so many political objections, that its conversion into some other species of property will ere long be found the only expedient for preserving the endowments of the Church. Dismissing, then, from present consideration, the specific nature of Church property, the question resolves itself into this: Whether all endowments having for their object the maintenance of the Christian ministry, are inexpedient and prejudicial,

* We have reason to know, that the two Numbers of the Library of Ecclesiastical Knowledge 'on Tithes', which have afforded the British Critic so fair a handle for vituperating the Dissenters, have been very generally disapproved for the spirit which pervades them. Indeed, some respectable individuals who originally joined in the Society with the purest intentions, have seceded from it in disappointment and disgust, on finding themselves committed as the patrons of a publication so little creditable to the learning, good taste, discretion, or temper of the body.

VOL. VII.-N.S.

-or only, when they are either excessive in amount, or unequally distributed, or when connected with a certain ecclesiastical polity, or with a State Establishment? This is a fair and most important subject for dispassionate inquiry; and we should be glad to see the question cleared from all the mystification and angry declamation by which it has been obscured. Establishments and endowments, though often confounded, are not inseparably connected with each other; and the advocates of the voluntary principle and the congregational system take the most disadvantageous position imaginable, when they undertake to prove, that were the Establishments cleared away, the free churches' would be adequate, by the mere native vitality of 'the spirit which animates them,' to provide for the instruction of the whole home population, and even to evangelize the world. It may be so-the Millennium is approaching; but we have no notion of being called upon to subscribe to a theory like this, as ' a principle of Dissent', denying, as we do, all human authority in matters of faith. Had we no fears or doubts of our own to surmount, the remarks of such a man as Mr. Douglas upon this subject would give us pause. The utility of religious establishments,' says that truly philosophical Christian writer, is a question of considerable nicety.'

The arguments against them are numerous and cogent, and again, the arguments in their favour are far from being inconsiderable. The balance, if we might speak as neutral persons, seems rather to incline against them in theory. On the other hand, the experience we have of the inadequacy of Dissenters to supply fit teachers over a large extent of country, pleads strongly in favour of establishments, as useful auxiliaries at least, especially when they are divested of circumstances not essential to them. There is great injustice in making any individual pay for the support of opinions which he deems to be erroneous; and equal injustice in making one man more eligible than another to civil situations, not on account of his aptitude for office, but on account of the peculiarity of his opinions. Neither of these two circumstances is in any way essential to a religious establishment. All Christians, and it is to be hoped soon all men, will be eligible to offices in Britain; and by the composition of tithes, and their transformation into land or other property, we should have a church establishment without any contribution from those who deem that establishment erroneous. An establishment, in its simple form, would merely be the endowment of a certain class of teachers, and would only differ from other denominations in the source from which the salaries of these teachers were derived. If tithes were converted into land, the established clergy would be a class of elective landowners, holding their lands on the tenure of giving lectures on religion.

Much may be said against establishments, and perhaps justly, for they have not yet received their best form; but the truth is, that all denominations of religion, that are permanent, become establishments.

Where a congregation is collected, it is necessary, or at least it is thought necessary, to build a church, for none, like the primitive Christians, will be contented with an upper room. For the building of a church, funds must be raised; and then the fundholders become the patrons of the church, although the power may remain nominally in the whole of the congregation.

Though Establishments and Dissenters are apparently opposed to each other, they have very much in common, and are deeply in each other's debt. An establishment always produces dissenters, where there is freedom of opinion; and dissenters, when they become rich and moderate in their views, return to the dignity and the repose of the establishment. Both have the same enemy, indifference to all religious opinions; and they profit alike when there is any great awakening and renewed concern about the truths of religion. We are indebted to the Church of England for the larger portion of works upon Christianity that deserve reading; and the Church of Scotland at one time was a model of the diligent instruction and remarkable success which every true minister of the gospel would strive to imitate, and desire to obtain.

Far from either being superfluous, both the Establishment and the Dissenters, were they cordially to unite their efforts for the good of the country, would come short of their aim, unless supported by the united prayers of every private Christian; and any religious institution whatsoever, whether connected with Government or not, would be productive of more evil than good, if it discouraged, or in any way seemed to supersede, the efforts of individuals.

Primitive Christianity owed its success, under God, to the prayers, the activity, and zeal of all its members. It could only be established by the efforts of three centuries of its suffering followers; and it was not till it triumphed over all obstacles, that the State took it by the hand, and encumbered it with help, though it might seem to promise it repose. The success of Christianity was insured by individual efforts, and by individual efforts it must still be sustained. Come what will of the favour of the State, it is fervent prayer and faithful preaching that must evangelize both our country and the world.

But whether the Establishment is retained or rejected, a prospect of good is opening out upon us, if the nation, by the Divine Mercy, be still spared. If the Establishment stand, it must become more popular. The primitive Christians had the choice of their pastors; and, though the endowment of churches might seem to entitle the patron to greater privileges and peculiar weight in the appointment of a minister, still, he would injure his own interests, as well as the souls of others, if he imposed upon a congregation a teacher who was distasteful to them, though in other respects unobjectionable.

There can be no cheaper or more meritorious popularity than that which arises from consulting the people as to the choice of their ministers. If this compliance was at all times desirable, it has now become necessary. In the convulsions of society which are about to take place, whatever has no foundation in public opinion will be swept away. The wealth of the Church of England, especially, will require many friends to defend it from the spoilers which its riches will ex