Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

154

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 14th.

SECTIONAL MEETING.

The LORD BISHOP of OXFORD presided over this section, and, on taking the chair, his Lordship remarked that there was not a more important subject before the Congress than that of Clergy Discipline.

CLERGY

DISCIPLINE.

BY THE REV. W. J. BEAMONT, M.A.

THE conduct of a public officer is open to exception under three principal heads,-Inexperience, Negligence, Crime. It is the wisdom of those in whose behalf he serves to provide against these three sources of detriment; the officer himself, if he be an honest, conscientious man, will approve, yea even desire, the enactment of all reasonable provisions. Failure in duty involves damage corresponding to the magnitude of the interests at stake; from the agents in large pecuniary concerns ample securities are demanded. If this be a just and necessary precaution against worldly loss, where the mischief is reparable, is not the obligation to vigilance at least equally strong where the injury is spiritual and irreparable?

The ordained ministers of our church are her public officers, who, like all others, may err from inexperience, negligence, or crime. How can we kindly, yet effectively, instruct the inexperienced, stimulate the negligent, correct the criminal?

The remedies which naturally suggest themselves in the three cases are counsel, admonition, punishment. To these branches of clergy discipline, a triple antidote for a triple evil, I invite your attention in the present paper.

1st, of Inexperience.

We may, I think, fairly assume that a large majority of Englishmen who bind themselves by solemn vows are sincerely desirous of fulfilling the obligations which those vows impose; hence failure will be more frequently unintentional than wilful or deliberate. The requirements of the ordination service are so solemn as often to raise the tone of those who, before ordination, may have been somewhat deficient in seriousness; but for the satisfactory discharge of the duties of a parish priest constant discretion is not less essential than fervent zeal.

We cannot deny that in numerous instances the welfare of a parish is prejudiced by the absence of tact and skilful management in its pastor. His intentions may be excellent, his moral character irreproachable, yet misunderstandings are continually arising to thwart his plans. The well-disposed laymen stand aloof; the indifferent hug themselves in their indifference; the cynical and irreligious sneer at the house divided against itself. Surely in such cases the clergyman would be thankful to receive from others hints whereby his own path might be smoothed, the influence of the Church extended, and, above all, the salvation of souls in his parish promoted. The desire of some mode of consultation and combination is very generally felt among the clergy. The want expresses itself in the formation of clerical societies, the bond of whose brotherhood varies

according to the theological bias or the social tendencies of their founders. Much profitable intercourse and many agreeable gatherings are often thus obtained; but the vital action is spasmodic, and may at any moment be paralysed by the withdrawal of an energetic debater, or the removal of a strenuous secretary. We have, however, already in existence an organization for mutual counsel, by the use of which many of the dangers incident to these voluntary associations may be avoided, and some advantages which they do not possess obtained.

Ever since the Norman Conquest, according to other accounts at a much earlier period of our history, Ruridecanal Districts have formed a prominent feature in the Ecclesiastical map of England. Contiguous parishes, ordinarily, as the name suggests, about ten in number, have been combined on the basis of neighbourhood and common interest, under the presidency of a rural dean, or archpresbyter. Possessing no inherent authority, this officer received a commission from the bishop to visit from time to time the several parishes within his rural deanery, to obtain information concerning them, and to present a report to the bishop. The questions to which replies were required varied on different occasions, and in different dioceses; but the instructions issued by various bishops to their rural deans, both in ancient and in modern times, amply prove that it is incumbent upon the holder of the ruridecanal office to stimulate by friendly advice the lukewarm pastor, to alarm the negligent and profane, by reminding him of the serious nature of his ministerial responsibility. It was, moreover, the duty of the rural dean to assemble ruridecanal chapters of the clergy within his district.*

At

Let this plan be universally, as it is already partially, revived. these meetings let the difficulties encountered by the clergy in the administration of their respective cures be plainly stated, and counsel for the good government of parishes be taken, pastor conferring with pastor. How might the heart of the isolated clergyman of some remote village, or of the overtasked incumbent of some densely crowded town district, be gladdened by these periodical meetings! How would his burden be lightened as he was reminded that he was not alone in the experience of indifference, opposition, and difficulty; how might the relation of obstacles similar to his own, surmounted by his brethren in the ministry, encourage him to make another, yet another effort, and send him on his way rejoicing!

Amongst the clergy included in a rural deanery will probably be found men of various shades of doctrinal opinion, and of very different tastes; hence the danger of a sectarian spirit will be diminished by the adoption of the ruridecanal basis.

Against danger from another quarter it is important to guard. The frequent contact of clergymen with members of their own order alone may tend to generate that spirit of exclusive clericism which, in time past, has wrought much evil amongst us, and led to convulsions which shook the Church of England to its very foundations. Recognising, as we do in the present day more frankly than in former times, the undeniable truth that the laity are no less a constitutional part of the Church than the clergy, let this element be introduced into ruridecanal consultations. The half-yearly or still more frequent presence of churchwardens, of sidesmen, or of other well disposed

*The reports of the rural deans have long been valuable, as furnishing useful statistics concerning the parishes of the rural deanery; they might be more valuable still if in every case the form of questions issued requesting information were thoughtfully and judiciously prepared.

laymen, in the ruridecanal parliament, would remind the clergy to look upon the Church from a lay as well as from a clerical point of view, and might enable them to avoid many errors into which ignorance and misapprehension of the opinions and feelings of their people are apt to betray them.

For the second element in clergy discipline we may again have recourse to the ancient constitution of our ecclesiastical system. Here we shall find a machinery sufficiently powerful, we might imagine, to move the tardiest, an agency sufficiently drastic to correct even the most stubborn negligence. Once at least, but more frequently twice in every year, at Easter and Michaelmas, a systematic scrutiny is instituted into the spiritual condition of every parish in the land. The presentment which churchwardens, upon their sincere and solemn declaration, are bound to make in answer to the Articles of Inquiry addressed to them, will, if conscientiously made, faithfully represent the manner in which the clergyman is discharging his ministerial duties. An Englishman of average ability is a competent judge whether the service of the Church is efficiently performed, and the sacraments duly administered; whether the minister is fervent in preaching, active in visiting the sick, diligent in catechising the young, sedulous in preparing candidates for confirmation, and whether he is himself of sober life and conversation.

Competent as the churchwardens generally are to form an opinion on these subjects, they are bound to record their opinion and to transmit it, together with the customary fees, to the archdeacon. It is the bounden duty of the archdeacon carefully to consider the presentments made by the churchwardens, and to endeavour to redress any grievances contained in them. He ought personally to admonish the offender, and, should his own admonition fail of effect, to procure a further admonition from the bishop. The steps which he has taken he ought, in all reason, to report to the churchwardens. We hear sometimes that the Articles of Inquiry need alteration in order to meet the changed circumstances of modern times. Probably some improvement might be effected by a judicious revision; but we might anticipate far greater benefit if the facilities already afforded by the present Articles of Inquiry were fully and faithfully used. I fear that neither archdeacons nor churchwardens are sufficiently alive to their duty in the matter of these periodical presentments. The Churchwardens' Association might render essential service to the Church if they would issue to every churchwarden throughout England, on his election, a short address, containing a summary of the duties of his office, and an exhortation to the faithful discharge of them. I am glad to learn from the chairman of the association that this subject is already under their consideration.

But suppose that the archdeacon takes no notice of the presentment by the churchwardens what is the next step? Who shall admonish the admonisher?

An annual visitation is held in every archdeaconry, either by the archdeacon or by the bishop. To such visitation the churchwardens are summoned. Let them come boldly forward and imperatively demand attention to their representations. Neither archdeacon nor bishop can refuse to listen to them. A churchwarden of my acquaintance stated to me that, if the inferior officer paid no respect to his complaints, he should consider it his duty to write to the

bishop. The course thus suggested is wise and strictly in order. Further, if the bishop should refuse redress, let the churchwardens appeal to the archbishop of the province; if still his suit be not heard, let him carry his complaint to the monarch of the realm, the chief ruler in all causes as well ecclesiastical as civil.

If legislative action here fail, we can go no further in legal appeal. But something we may still do. Let the earnest united voice of English Churchmen, both clerical and lay, be raised in favour of an authoritative stimulus to the zeal of negligent clergymen-it will sound an alarm which the dullest of archdeacons, the most luxurious of prelates, the most time-serving of ministers of the Crown will not venture to disregard. Let vigorous expression be given to the growing desire that clergy and laity should meet in archidiaconal and episcopal visitations, not merely to hear the charge-and subsequently to dine and drink the health of the visitor; but for a real genuine consultation on the spiritual welfare of the archdeaconry or of the diocese. I believe that we might anticipate, as the result of such meetings of the clergy and laity, an unspeakable kindling of ecclesiastical enthusiasm.

Nor let us be content without the revival of diocesan synods. This revival is strictly in accordance with the wish of the leaders of our Reformation as expressed in the Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum. From deliberations on doctrine laymen might be excluded, if it were thought necessary, but on points of organisation they are sound advisers, and on questions of indolence and zeal are competent judges. I abstain from the further consideration of this important subject, which is reserved for a separate treatment in one of the papers to-morrow afternoon.

Thirdly: If the means hitherto suggested for invigorating clerical action be insufficient, and negligence pass into crime, or if the criminality be an infraction of the laws of chastity, temperance, honesty, or the like, recourse must needs be had to our third remedy, punishment. The provisions for inquiry of the Clergy Discipline Act are, as it seems to me, judicious. The high standard naturally required from a clergyman peculiarly invites shafts of slanderous, censorious tongues; the whiter the robe the more easily does it blacken in the smoke. It is wise, then, that a minister of Christ should not be condemned, or even tried, on light and frivolous charges, but that the bishop should in the first instance issue a commission to report whether there be grounds for further proceedings. The constitution of this Board of Inquiry is such that we need not apprehend that the commissioners will err on the score of undue severity. But should they, after mature deliberation, decide that there are fair grounds for ulterior measures, we might, I think, much facilitate the ends of justice by adopting the course ordinarily taken in common law courts. Let a jury be empanelled, consisting of six incumbents and six churchwardens of the diocese, to try the offender. The same right of objection to the panel should be given to the accused clergyman as is accorded to other persons accused of heinous crimes.* The steps taken to ascertain the truth should be similar, by which means the enormous expense of ecclesiastical prosecutions might be avoided. The character of the jury would incline them to leniency rather than to harshness in judgment; but if, after full and fair trial, the minds of the twelve men were satisfied of the guilt of the accused, the punish

*The Bishop of Melbourne informs me that in his diocese the Church Assembly every year elect1 by ballot, twelve clergymen and twelve laymen. These are called Triers, and from them a court for the decision of cases of clerical discipline is formed. The chancellor of the diocese presides.

ment ought to be sharp and decisive. No forbearance ought to be extended to the criminal because he has a wife and children, or because he will find a difficulty in earning his livelihood in employment other than parochial; the souls of men are far too precious a charge to be entrusted by the Church to the care of a contaminated physician. The scandalous, the immoral, the fraudulent ought to be ejected from their benefices without a prospect of restoration. Sequestration of livings for debt is a starvation of the flock to feed the wolf who has invaded the sheepfold. It ought to be felt that the clerical offender against morality transgresses not only the laws of Christian purity, but injures the character of the Christian priesthood, and impedes the salvation of souls, for whom his Master died. So awful is the offence, that the punishment ought to be signal and conspicuous. Lastly, the discipline of the clergy would be materially promoted by a revival of the old practice of parochial visitation. We may assume without fear of disproof, that it was the intention of the early Church that the bishops should be overseers of the parishes of their diocese; we may further assert that during the first six centuries they actually discharged this duty. Subsequently they divided their dioceses, and over each of these divisions appointed an archdeacon, who might assist them in the necessary duty of personal inspection. To the same end served also the office of the rural dean, or archpresbyter; though the latter never seems to have obtained the systematic jurisdiction which fell in certain cases to the archdeacon. The larger and more unmanageable the diocese, the greater the amount of work delegated to the archdeacons or rural deans. If the size of many dioceses in England be confessedly such as to prevent parochial visitations by the bishop, we have herein one of the strongest possible arguments for the increase of our home episcopate. The effort to revive this personal visitation in parochial confirmations and ordinations has already been made in various parts of our land. May God grant that the day be not far distant when the inhabitants of every parish shall learn to look upon their bishop not as a mere dignitary dwelling in an indistinct haze of episcopal splendour, but as an active living agent, a Father in God to them, whose voice they may hear from time to time in the beloved walls of their parish church, whose presence shall encourage the zealous to persevere in the path they are treading, that so they may attain to even higher measures of Christian faith and love, may rebuke the erring, and warn the negligent by the censure of kind, yet authoritative admonitions!

Were this discipline faithfully administered, and were it universal, we might expect an effective strengthening of our weak places; so might our Church of England, compacted and knit together by that which every joint supplieth, grow through the land a holy temple unto the Lord.

DISCUSSION.

Dr. A. F. BAYFORD said that from being accustomed to Ecclesiastical Courts he should look at the subject from the point as to what tribunal ought to try a clerical offence. Prior to the present Act of Church Discipline, the mode of procedure against an offending clergyman was first of all an appeal to the Bishop of the diocese, and he tried the cause first of all in the Consistory Court. There was then an appeal to the Bishop, a second appeal from the Bishop

« AnteriorContinuar »