(5.) Canons.— In the Convocation which met at the time of the Parliament of 1604, the canons by which
ENGLAND, CHURCH OF 204 ENGLAND, CHURCH OF
the Church of England is still governed were passed. The}' are said to have been collected liy Bancroft from the canons of the ancient Church, and the articles, in- junctions, and acts of Convocation during the reigns of Edward and Elizabeth. They received the ro3-al sanction, but were not carried through the two houses of Parliament, and are not, therefore, laws of the realm. They liind the clergy only, and tliat by virtue of their promise of canonical obedience. Many of them have been virtually repealed by subsequent enactments, es- pecially the Toleration Act. Many of those that re- main are such that the best and wisest members of the Church would gladly see them repealed. See Canons OF THE Church of England.
((i.) Patronar/e. — The theory of the Church of Eng- land is that whoever originally built a church is en- titled to choose its minister in pevpetuit}' — i. e. is the patrcn of the living. Wliat follows on tliis point is from a Cliurch of England writer (Marsden, Churches and Sects, i, 332) : " In a few instances this right is still vested in the descendants of the original patron, but these must be rare. The right of patronage is now a salable commodit}^ transferred, or sold b}' auc- tion, to the highest bidder, like any other real propei-- ty, and the patronage of the Church of England is conseciuently dispersed wherever wealth has found its way : 114-1 benefices are in the gift of the crown ; 1853 in that of the bishops ; 938 in that of cathedral chap- ters and other dignitaries : 770 in that of the universi- ties and collegiate bodies ; 6092 in private persons ; and 931 (vicarages or perpetual curacies) in the in- cumbent of the mother church. The good and evil of this system are so nearl}' balanced that thoughtful and wise men are to be met with every day who, as they look at the favoi-able or dark side of the question, are disposed to cherish it as the nearest approach that is ever like'.y to be made in practice to a porfect the- oiy ; or, on the other hand, to reject it as unjust and full of danger. Its evils lie upon the surface, and they are by no means slight. It has a tendency to promote a subservient spirit, inconsistent with the courage and simplicitj' of the Christian minister, to- wards those in whose hands patronage is vested, for upon them advancement in the Church depends. It excludes many valuable men from livings of impor- tance, and thrusts many incompetent men into stations for which they are but meanly qualified. It fills our choicest parishes with men rather well bred than deeply learned — men of courtesy and benevolence rath- er than a fervent zeal ; and, consequently, the par- ish church wears to the poor man too frequenth' some- thing of a cold and aristocratic air. He is spoken to by his superior in the presence of his superiors, and he retires to the dissenting chapel, not that lie prefers dissent, but that he meets with sympathy and feels himself at home. Patronage is either held by individ- uals, or vested in corporations or in trustees ; but the individual ma}' have little sense of religion ; he may give away his church on considerations of friendship, or he may look upon it merely as a provision for a younger sou. Corporate bodies have less conscience than individuals. Previous to tiie act for reforming municipal corporations twenty years ago, most of the livings in our ancient towns and boroughs were in the gift of our municipal corporations. Their appoint- ments, on an average, were certainlj' not better than those of private patrons : religion slund)ered in our groat towns not less profoundly than in our country villages. Several trusts have been formed of late years for the purchase of advowsons (an advowson is the right of iiresentation in perpetuity), and none can deny them at least the praise of pure disinterestedness. They have exjtended large sums to obtain in return the right of placing zealous ministers of evangelical principles in populous places. I?iit all these various methods of patronage labor under the same defect — th'o congrega- tion whose spiritual interests are to be conimitted to
the new pastor, and the parishioners amongst whom, as their friend or their example, he is to live and die, have no voice whatever in the momentous choice. The party most interested looks on with indifierence, or hope, or silent resignation. The English lay church- man, in the most important event that can effect his parish during his lifetime, finds ever^-thing done for him ; it is only on trifling matters that he is consult- ed. He may help to liuild the school, he may dis- charge the duties of churchwarden, but w ith regard to the appointment of the minister he has no right to speak." A remarkable illustration of the wa}' in which ecclesiastical wealth is monopolized by certain families is aflbrded in the case of Richard and George Pretyman, sons of the bishop of Lincoln, which is stated in the Methodist Quarterlj/, 1853, p. 157.