One party moves methodically within the prescribed formula and opinions, accepting every passage in the Bible, whether historical or doctrinal, as an immediate out-pouring of the Holy Ghost; nay, holds even the Thirty-nine Articles as quasi-inspired; while another ventures on rational explanations, or risks new interpretations and views. In how dangerous a position the latter stands is evidenced by the recent prosecution of the authors of Essays and Reviews. The project of rendering the English Church, apart from the jurisdiction of the Pope, as much as possible like the Catholic Church, is rendered more and more apparent since the time of Archbishop Laud. "There is a danger," writes Lord John Russell, in 1850, to the Bishop of Durham,* "which troubles me more than the jurisdiction of any foreign prince; clergymen of our own church, who have subscribed to the Thirty-nine Articles, and have acknowledged the supremacy of the Queen in entirely straightforward language, have been the most eager to lead their flocks step by step into the abyss. The veneration of saints, the infallibility of the church, the superstitious use of the sign of the cross, the intoning of the liturgy, whereby the words there written become unrecognizable, auricular confession, the giving of penance and absolution, all these are things which have been accounted recommendable by clergymen of the church." This movement, nicknamed "Puseyite" from its chief upholder Professor Pusey, of Oxford, is regarded by Cardinal Wiseman as a return to Catholicism. "It is impossible," says his Eminence, "to read the writings of the Oxford theologians, and especially to follow them up chronologically, without perceiving a daily increasing approach to our holy church, both in dogmas as well as in sentiments. Our saints, our Popes, have become to them by degrees more dear; our practices, our church offices, yea, our entire liturgy, are in their eyes precious inheritances, more precious, far, than to many of us. Whole parishes have taken the leaven, and it ferments; and, to spots where one might least expect it, it is brought by mysterious ways."† So long as this movement, which has not by a long way attained its highest level, does not extend to the jurisdiction, the Thirtynine Articles are not menaced with any real danger, and the Annual Register, p. 199. † Bucher, 177. slumberous calm which has endured since George II. between State and Church is not likely to be sorely troubled.* The popularity of the English High Church is by no means great amongst the lower classes; it was indeed but the exaggeration of a Radical, making political capital, when Sir Francis Burdett, in 1825, affirmed, "The Anglican prelates have no other motive than their personal interest, they themselves have no religion, but they make of religion an instrument to maintain their rule." Unnumbered thousands in England utter the same language. The Anglican Church is verily a church for well-to-do folks; for the common people the poor curate indeed has a heart, but the same cannot be affirmed of the higher clergy. Hence the profound indifferentism prevailing among the poorer dwellers in towns, as to matters of religious moment. We further adduce the opinion of a liberal-minded Catholic which no one who has studied the system of the English hierarchy will deem too harsh. (Franz Schulte, das Englische Parlament, 121). "The Anglican prince of the church readily inscribes his name for £100 in a newspaper subscription list for the distribution of the Bible in Germany and other foreign parts, or for the founding of a diocese, without diocesans, at Jerusalem. But it lies beyond the compass of his charge to trouble himself about the spiritual destitution prevailing in the precincts of his own Palace. Whosoever would be the better for his spiritual blessings and his worldly favour, should forswear the supremacy of the Pope, subscribe the Thirty-nine Articles, adopt conservative principles in matters ecclesiastical and political, and-behave respectably; the Anglican would fain wear a finespun coat, possess a Bible and Liturgy resplendent with golden clasps, and be able to pay as high a price as possible for his Sunday-sittings at church. His religion must be expensive, in conformity with the universal English maxim, 'That which costs nothing is worth nothing.' upholders of the ruling church consist, accordingly, in the main, of the higher and lower nobility, of the gentry or respectable middle class, having landed and other property, and of rich merchants; in a word, of those chiefly who can invite the clergyman to their table and whom he can in turn invite. Such are the pillars whereon the superstructure of the State-Church rests." The CHAPTER II. PRIVILEGES OF THE CLERGY. No immunity from Ordinary Jurisdiction.-Benefit of Clergy.-Exceptions.-Branding.-Extraordinary Punishments.-Worldly Offices.-Horne Tooke's Act.-No Obligation to Honorary Offices.-Legal Process against Clergymen. At a SINCE the reign of Henry VII. ecclesiastics are amenable to the ordinary courts in cases of felony and conspiracy to murder.* They have now no longer any immunity from the ordinary jurisdiction, save in matters of discipline; so long as common offences were imputed, the bishops might reclaim any ecclesiastics who had been charged with any crime, cite them before their own tribunal, and there impose spiritual penalties. Thence originated a very important privilege which tended to soften the harshness of penal legislation. Bishops also reclaimed laymen who had been sentenced to death, on pretext that they were clerics. later period, however, the privilege of "reclaiming" ceased, and "benefit of clergy" could, subsequently, only be taken advantage of before the civil judge. The privilege was to be prayed for in express terms, otherwise the ordinary punishment fell upon the party found guilty. The form in which the benefit was prayed for was this:-The accused knelt down and entreated the judge to grant the "benefit of clergy;" the court thereupon decided whether he was a cleric, and this simply from the fact of the judge's testifying whether the accused could read or not ("legit ut clericus").† The passage that he had ordinarily to read was from the Psalms, usually the verse "Miserere mei Deus," which in popular language was styled "the neckverse." Jack Cade says, alluding to this legal custom, to Lord Say (II. Part, Henry VI. Act iv., Scene 7), "Thou hast appointed justices of the peace to call poor men before them about matters that they were not able to answer, and, because they could not read, thou hast hanged them." From this benefit all persons were excluded who, by reason of their condition, could not have been * Pauli v., 544. + Burns, E. L. I. 185. ecclesiastics, such as Jews, heretics, Mohammedans, women, the blind, and the lame. After the revolution of 1688, it was extended (by 3-4 William and Mary c. 9) to women, and by 5 Anne c. 6 to all persons who prayed for it, whether they could read or not. Down to the time of the Stuarts it was open to laymen to plead this benefit several times, and it might also be prayed for at any moment. In the reign of Elizabeth a case occurred where one who was condemned to death prayed for it while under the gallows and with success. From that time forth laymen could only claim the benefit once;* clergymen, on the other hand, as often as they were accused.† At an early period already this benefit was practically disallowed in the case of high treason. A statute of Henry VII. withheld it from soldiers who had abandoned the royal service without license. It remained in existence even down to our own century in cases of manslaughter, bigamy, greater and petty larceny; but the benefit was rendered almost ineffectual in many cases by reason of manifold restrictions. Henry VII. enacted that everyone who received "benefit of clergy" should be branded on the left thumb with an "M" for manslaughter, and with an "F" for other felonies.§ Other exceptional punishments were superadded. After a statute of William III. had prohibited branding on the back, the statute 5 Anne c. 6 abolished it entirely, substituting imprisonment in the house of correction from six months up to two years. Ordained clergymen never could be branded. T Under George I. seven years' transportation was introduced, as an extraordinary punishment, in case the privilege was taken advantage of, until a statute of the year 1827, 7-8 George IV. c. 27, 28, entirely abolished "benefit of clergy." In the case of Lord Cardigan, however, doubts arose as to whether "benefit of clergy" was abolished in regard to proceedings taken against a peer before the Upper House. The doubt was removed by 4-5 Vict. c. 22, which enacted that peers can no longer avail themselves of any such privilege of law.** In the middle ages the clergy of England filled a great number of civil offices. From St. Thomas à Becket down to Wolsey the Schmalz, Staatsverfassung Gross Britanniens, p. 170. Burns, iii. 348. Crabb, 434. "He should stand in fear of fire, being burnt i' the hand for stealing of sheep."-Shakspeare's Henry VI., Part ii. Act iv. Scene 2. || Crabb, 562. Burns iii., 348. **Kerr's Bl. Edit., 1857, Vol i. 407. chancellors were chiefly clerics; nor were they prohibited from undertaking other offices. In the middle ages, they appeared also as members of the Commons, to mediate respecting the taxation of the clergy. They were first forbidden to sit as members in the Commons by 41 George III. c. 63, the so-called "Horne Tooke Act;" for, notwithstanding the ancient custom which had prevailed through many centuries, this celebrated democratic clergyman appeared in 1801 as member for Old Sarum.* The statute passed in consequence of this excluded ordained clergymen from parliament once for all, whether really officiating clergymen or not. Although clergymen may enter upon functions not otherwise forbidden, they are not bound to undertake honorary offices, and cannot, especially, be summoned as jurymen. Legal process against clergymen only issues with regard to their non-ecclesiastical property. While clergymen are officiating, or are on their way to church, or returning thence, they cannot be arrested for debt.§ The practice of ecclesiastical taxation was discontinued in 1664; from this time the clergy have been taxed at the same rate and in the same manner with the laity. Having relinquished the right of self-taxation, they are subject to those burthens which exist by the common law,|| for the taxes imposed by parliament have effect as self-imposed taxes; and, as clergymen vote on election of members of parliament, they are regarded as consenting to the taxes. Pursuit of commerce and trade, and of agriculture partaking of the nature of trade, is disallowed in the case of clergymen.¶ *The representatives for this were said to be more in number than the constituents, and on one occasion, Lord Camelford, the owner, threatened to return his negro servant. 760. + Hansard, P. D. iii. Ser. xxvi. vol. Burns, iii. 352. |