Conversation between two electors on the church and state question

•"«

•Av

3

4t^

1/^

■^Mr:-

>

#^»

■(f® *«»

^rl>A

i

<i

CONVERSATION BETWEEN TWO ELECTORS

ON THE

CHURCH AND STATE QUESTION.

James, So, William, I hear we're to have a general election
very shortly?

William. Yes ; and I am very glad of it, for I shall then be
able to give my vote for religious liberty, and the removal of the
State Church from our midst.

James. Why, I thought you had all you want of religious
liberty already. You are a Nonconformist, and I am a Church-
man, and under our equal laws you have as much liberty to
worship God in the way you prefer as I have.

William. Yes; I know T have. But I don't like •your Lord
Bishops and your State-paid Clergy, and I want all religion put
on a level. It is not fair that we should pay for your Clergy.

James. Stop, William, stop. Some one has been misleading
you, or you have got hold of some of those bad tracts which tell
you all kinds of untrue things about the Church.

William. I don't know what you call untrue things, but I
know your Church was made by Act of Parliament in Henry
Vni.'s time, and got all her property originally from the Roman
Catholics, and I don't believe in a State-made Church, nor think
it fair that your Church should keep tight hold of property given
for the teaching of the Roman Catholic religion, and then go and
teach quite differently.

James. Just as I thought, William. You have quite got hold
of the wrong end of the stick. Our Church did not befrin at the
Reformation, nor did it get any Roman Catholic property at the
Reformation. Our Church is over 1,500 years old, and had
much of the property she now has before the time of William
the (.'onqueror.

William. You don't think I am going to believe that?

James. Whether you believe it or not will not alter the facts of
the case. Look into history and judge for yourself. The Church
of England is the old Church of the land, founded here in early
times before our Saxon forefathers came to Kngland. And now,
1,500 years after, she is the same Church, with the same Apos-

toHc Ministry, the same teaching, the same Sacraments as she
liad tlion.

Willimn. 1 never heard of this before.

James. Very likely not. Many men don't look into things
for themselves, but take for granted that all is true which other
])eo})le tell them, and so get led altogether astray.

William. Well, I should like to have a little more talk to you
about the Church. Tell me about the tithes ; did not the State
give y(m them by Act of Parliament?

James. Why, William, you almost make me laugh. The
State never gave the Church a penny of tithe. Tithe was paid
to the Clergy as God's ministers hundreds of years before there
ever was a Parliament in England. How, then, could Parlia-
ment have first given tithes to the Church ?

William. How did she get hold of them, then ?

James. I will tell you. When first the Gospel was preached
in England and men became Chrisdans they found the want of
resident Clerirv amonost them to teach themselves and their
children. So the lord of the manor, or the great man of the
place, went to the Bishop and asked for a Clergyman to live
amongst them and teach the people. And the Bishop said he
would send one if they would build a Church and a house for the
Parson to live in, and give a tithe of the produce of the land to
maintain him there for ever. They gladly agreed to this ; and
so a Parish was made, a Church built, and a tithe of the produce
given every year to the Parson. And all by the free gift of the
lord of the manor or the owner of the land in those days. And
now you know, William, how Parishes began, and where tithe
first came from, as well as I do.

William. When was this?

James. Well, you know. Parishes did not gro%v up all over
England in a day. They began to be formed very early, and
grew up bit by bit as Christianity spread from one part of the
country to the other. But in the seventh century, in the time
of Theodore, Archbishop of Canterbury, Parishes were spread
all over England, and tithes paid to the Clergy in them.

William. But what has that to do with your Church ? Then
[)eople were all Roman Catholics, were they not?

James. Not a bit of it. They were all English Churchmen,
belonging to the National Church. There never has been but
one Church in England from that day to this. The English
people never liked the interference of Home, and never willingly
tolerated Papal supremacy in this country.

William. This is all new light to me. I never heard any-
thing: about this before.

James. Very likely not; but before you vote against the
Church, my good friend, you sliould know something of her
true work and history.

William. But I have read in print all that I have told you.

Jaines. I am sure you have. But what I want you to do is
not to believe what the enemies of the Church tell you about
her, but to look into the matter for yourself.

William. Well, I am willing to do so.

James. Then you will soon change your mind, and like so
many others you will follow no longer the guidance of those who
have so long misled you.

Williajn. Tell me then wliat took place at the Reformation ?

James. Briefly this. The Clmrch of England, by the united
action of the authorities in Church and State, reformed herself.
The new rdditions Rome had made to the old faith were rejected.
The usurped jurisdiction exercised for a time by the Pope in
iMighmd was abolished. The Bible and the Prayer Book were
translated into English. These were the chief things that were
done.

William. But you have said nothing about what became of
the Churches and Church propert3\

James. The Cathedrals and the Parish Churches remained in
the same hands as before. Of the 9,000 English Clergy before
the Reformation all but 150 remained Clergy of the Church
after the Reformation. The tithes and lands remained also in the
hands of the Church, with the exception of those belonging to
the monasteries and chantries, which were conferred by the
Crown u[)on laymen.

William. Then there was no new Church introduced into
England at the Reformation after all ?

James Certainly not.

William. But what did the Dissenters do at that time ?

James. There were no Dissenting bodies in England then.
They have all risen up since.

William. But 1 thought that the State had picked out the
Church from amongst the other religious bodies, and established
and endowed it, and that this was the cause of the grievance of
which the political Dissenters now complain so bittcrlv.

James. Then, my friend, you are altogether in the wrong.
Dissent arose from certain persons leaving the Church ol
Enixland and makin<x new religious bodies of their own accord.
They went out from the old Church and formed another religion
for themselves, with their own ministers and their own form of
worshij), and so Independents, Baptists, and other like sects first
began to exist in Eno-land.

William. So tliis is wliy Dissenters have no sliare in the
Cliurcli |)n)i)ortv, and have to ])ay tlieir own ministers and bnild
places of worshi)) for themselves ?

James Exactly so. They left the Chnrch of their own free
will, and so f»;Hve up their rights in her projjerty and her Churches.

William. That was only fair, when they did not wish to
worship any longer in her fold.

James. Just so. But from time to time many of the Dis-
senters have come back to the Church, and regained their old
position, and all could do so if they wished.

William. Many will never do that.

James. I fear not. But the Church is not to blame for that,
but themselves only-

Willlam. I understand now why it is the political Dissenters
want to disestablish and to disendow the Clmrcli. They find the
Church has a })osition they have not, and they want to j)ull it
down to their own level.

James. There, my friend, you have got very near to the
truth.

William. But tell me, did not the Church in days gone by
greatly persecute the Dissenters who had left her fold ?

James. In the days when Dissent first began in England, and
for a long time afterwards, religious toleration was a thing un-
known. The Church laid a heavy hand on Dissent, and Dissent,
when it had the chance, laid a heavy hand upon the Church.

William. But did not the Church in ad. 1662 eject 2,000
" godly ministers " from their livings and turn them out to
starve ?

James. Wait, my friend, you are a little too quick w^th your
history. 1 must ask you to go back for a few years and look
into the state of things then. You have heard of King
Charles I. ?

William. Of course I have

Ja^nes. Well, during his reign the Dissenters got the upper
hand over the Church. When they came into power, they first
killed the King, then upset the Bishops, next turned all the
Church of Eno;l«iHl C]ol'o:^' and their families out of their homes,
and put their " godly ministers " into them. So that they had
no objection to Establislnnent and Endowment for themselves.
II illiam. I had foriiotten all about this.

.James. So do many others when they talk about the *^ ])erse-
eution " of 166j!. The truth is, that when Charles II. was
restored in 1()60, Episopacy was brought back, and the starved
and exiled Enollsh Clergy came home acrain. But they found
the Puritan ministers in possession of their livings, and all who

conformed were allowed to remain, but some 1,400 at most (not
2000 as commonly stated) had to give up the livings they had
taken from the old Clergy, and these are the " 2000 persecuted
ministers " of whom you hear so much.

William. This gives a very diiferent view of the matter from
that which I had believed before.

James. But then you have been accustomed to believe history
as it is current amongst Dissenters, and have not looked into
it for yourself to find out the actual truth.

Williain. Yes, but I shall always do so in future.

James. An excellent resolution, which will save you from many
mistakes.

William. Now you have told me so much, I want to know a
little more. You have explained many things which enable
me to understand the situation much better than I did before.
But still there are several points on which I wish for informa-
tion. Would not the farmer be much better off if he paid no
tithes ?

James. In such a case he would be worse, not better off. The
farmer does not pay tithes now. When he took the lease of his
farm he paid so much less rent because of the titl^e. If the
latter were abolished, the rent would be raised just so much at
once ; but you forget into whose pockets the tithe goes now. The
Clergy spend it mostly in the district where theylive. It goes
into the pockets of the tradesmen and labourers of the locality,
and sometimes of the farmers themselves. The removal of the
tithe would impoverish many in the district and benefit nobody.

William. But are not the Irish people much better off for the
Disestablishment of the Irish Church ?

James. Not a penny the better. Tithe is still paid in Ireland
as before Disestablishment. Not to the Parson indeed, but to
tlie State. It is taken away from the locality and is paid to
the Government. So the people lose the benefit of the tithes
formerly spent amongst them, and the Church people besides
have an additional tax put upon them in order to pay their own
Parson, who formerly cost them nothing.

William. This must greatly impoverish a district where the
Clergyman was the chief resident gentleman before ?

James. Of course it does. The Clergyman spent his private
as well as his official income in the locality, and now in many
places both are gone. Since Disestablishment the Irish people
are more imj^overished, more discontented, and more averse to
English rule than they were before.

William. This is very different from what we were told when
we were asked to vote for Irish Church Disestablishment.

6

James. Yes. And fine tliin^js are now ])roinise(l to th(3 Eng-
lish people if the Church of Eiif^hmd were disestablished ; but,
as the evil results hero would be far deeper and more wide-spread,
so the ruin would bo far greater than in Ireland.

William. It would be well for all classes of Eiuglishmen to
think about this before it is too late ; but after all are not at
least half the peoj)le of England Nonconformists at })resent?

James. Hei'e you ai*e quite mistaken. Englisli Dissent has
done its utmost to prevent the true number of Nonconformists
in England being known, and they have gone about boasting of
its increase of late years, whereas really it has gone down in
numbers all over the countr^^

William. But would not a relifjious Census easilv find out
the truth about this as in Ireland?

James. Yes, But English Dissenters vehemently o])pose the
truth being found out about this. Modern Nonconformists call
it an interference with their '' religious liberty," but the old
Nonconformists would never have been ashamed of having the
actual fact known. They gloried in being '•• a little flock," and
called the Church " a mixed nuiltitude."

William. But are there no means of finding out now some-
thing about the religious opinions of the people?

James. An official religious Census is the only thoroughly
trustworthy means of doing so. But official returns exist from
which a pretty accurate estimate can be formed.

William.. Tell me what they are.

James. Taking the latest official information, out of every
100 of the population, the

School returns show

Marriagre - - -

Navy

Army - _ _ ,

Cemeteries (Buried in J

Workhouses

So that tlic result of a real religious Census would probably
show that three-iourths of the people are Churchmen and one-
fourth are Nonconformists.

William. ]5ut how do Nonconformists get over these actual
facts ?

James. They have made a Census after a strange fashion of
their own. They build chapel after chapel not required by
the p( puiation ; they register ])ublic halls, rooms, barns, and
even '' Railway Arches," used for their services as '^ Dis-
senting places of worship," and then, reckoning up all the seats

72 Chi

iirchmen.

75

?>

75

?j

63

?>

70

?>

79

5?

in them, say Nonconformists have provided ^' so many sittings '
for public worship, wliich proves they have '' so many members."

William. This is an easy way of increasing a denomination —
but there will be a heavy day of reckoning for tiiem when the
actual number becomes known.

James. Just so. And that is why they fight so vehemently
aorainst a real rehVious Census.

Williani. But after all do not Nonconformists set a worth>-
example to the Church, by voluntarily paying for their own
ministers and their services, whilst your Clergy are paid by
endowments, so that you have to pay nothing ?

Jauies. There again you are greatly mistaken. Churchmen
give vast sums yearly for the support of the Church. For the last
forty years they have given 1,000,000/. every year for Church
building and Church restoration. In 1877 they gave b20,034/.
foi* voluntary schools, whilst the same year all the Dissenters
only subscribed 104,930/. for this purpose. So that probably in
addition to her endowments the Church raises yearly by volun-
tary subscriptions as much as all the Dissenters give for the
support of their religious worship.

William. Then the Church has a great voluntarj^ system of
her own.

James. Without doubt she has. And remember she oiFers
the ministrations of the Gospel to all the English poor without
money and without price. Whereas Noncoriformity, with rare
exceptions, only ministers to those who can aiford to pay for their
seats.

William. Why do so many Churchmen object to Dissenting
ministers burying the dead with their own services in the Parish
Churchyard ?

James. For two reasons. First, because they openly tell us
they want to get into our Churchyards, in order to get after-
wards into our Churches ; next, because the Churchyards have
been consecrated and solemnly set apart for Church services,
and to bring alien services into them would greatly offend the
consciences of many Churchmen ; and, lastly, because the law
has provided means by which Dissenting ministers can bury
their dead with their own services in every localit}-, if they wish
to do so.

William. But did not Nonconformists, some years ago, say
their consciences forbad their burying in your Churchyards or
using your Churches, and that therefore it was very unjust to
make them pay Church rates ?

James. Yes ; and they agitated till by the aid of Irishmen
and Scotchmen in Parliament they got Church rates abolished.

And now, wlien the whole expense of maintaining the Churca-
yards falls upon Churchmen, they want to force their services
into our Churchyards against the wish of the vast majority of
Churchmen, and all the while they call themselves the advocates
of religious liberty.

Willia7n. But are Protestant Nonconformists willing to ally
themselves with Irish Roman Catholics to pull down the old
National Church?

James. Certainly. The}^ have no hope of destroying the
Establishment without it. They will have to make a bargain
with the Irish Home Rulers to join them in pulling down and
robbing the National Church, and a heavy price the Irishmen
will demand for their share in the w^ork.

William. I don*t think Englishmen will ever stand this. I
am, as you know, a Nonconformist myself, but I should both
work and vote against the destruction of the Establishment by
Irish Roman Catholic votes.

James. And I believe many other honest and straightforward
Nonconformists, when they understand what this agitation for
Disestablishment will end in, will do the same thing.

William. Anyhow, I have heard enough to prevent my voting
for any Disestablishment candidate this election ; and 1 shall go
now and talk the matter over with some of mv friends, and tell
them a bit of my mnid.

James. There will be many more who will come to that way
of thinking if you tell them all the talk we have had together.

Printed for the Church Defence Institution, St. Stephen's Palace Chambers,
i), Bridge h>treet, Westminster, S.W.