INCORPORATED SOCIETY FOR PROMOTING THE ENLARGEMENT, BUILDING, AND REPAIRING OF CHURCHES AND CHAPELS.T A MEETING of this Society was held at their chambers in St. Martin's Place, on Monday, the 19th of March. His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury in the chair. There were present the Archbishop of York, the Bishops of London, St. Asaph, Bangor, Chester, and Hereford; the Hon. Lord Kenyon, Sir Stephen Gaselee, the Venerable Archdeacon Cambridge, the Revs. Dr. D'Oyly, Dr. Shepherd; H. H. Norris, T. D. Acland, Esq., M.P., Joshua Watson, J. II. Barchard, N. Connop, jun., Charles Bosanquet, J. Delafield, W. Davis, James Cocks, E. H. Locker, Esqrs., &c. Among other business transacted, grants were voted towards building a chapel at Bickerton, in the parish of Malpas, Cheshire; building a church at Leckhampton, Gloucestershire; increasing the accommodation in the church at Bramford, Suffolk; enlarging by rebuilding the chapel at Leeming, York; building a church at Shadford, in the parish of Pittington, Durham; increasing the accommodation in the church at Great Carlton, Lincoln; repewing the church at Buttington, Montgomery; enlarging the church at Burnham, Somerset; pewing the chapel at Kinnerton, in the parish of Old Radnor; building a chapel at Barking Side, in the parish of Great Ilford, Essex; repewing the church at Bighton, Southampton; increasing the accommodation in the church at Carew, Pembroke; enlarging by rebuilding the church at Meshaw, Devon ; enlarging by rebuilding the church at Chilcompton, Somerset ; enlarging by rebuilding the chapel at Howgill, York; building a chapel at Pennington, in the parish of Milford, Southampton; building a church at Burley Ville, Southampton. CHURCH MATTERS. EDUCATION SCHEMES. A distinct outline of the general bearings of this subject, and of the principles involved in it, may be obtained by reference to these publications; viz. : 1. What may this System of National Education be? By the Rev. Richard Burgess, B.D. (Hatchards.) 2. Useful Knowledge' no Substitute for Religious Knowledge, in a Scheme of National Education. A Sermon by the Rev. J. J. Blunt, B.D. (Murray.) 3. National Education. A Sermon by the Bishop of London. (Fellowes.) 4. The Systems of the National and Central Societies compared. A Sermon by the Rev. Thomas Dale, M.A. (Seeley.) MY DEAR SIR, — You ask from me some observations on Lord Brougham's Education Bill. As to that bill itself, it seems to me an object of very small concern. One needs must think and trust that it is quite impossible for it to pass a second reading. No such proposed enactments can be allowed to go into committee, until the church (not to say something much more) shall have a majority of enemies or at the best, of faithless friends-within the House of Lords. If, however, (to borrow words of Mr. Burgess,) this bill should appear to have affinity with certain " opinions and semi-official measures already made public through parliamentary reports and voluntary associations," it must be granted to be more deserving of attention. Then it is "time for the clergy throughout the land to rise as one man, and protest against any attempt to withdraw its children from the religious superintendence of the parochial minister, or, for the sake of a very limited number of dissenters, to render the Bible in its schools as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal.' "'* Under this feeling-though much more from anxiety to meet your own expressed wish, and to give this or any proof of a sincere good will-I set about expressing a few thoughts upon the general subject to the best of my ability. But inasmuch as these are of a cast not very likely to obtain large favour, it seems advisable to throw them into this form of letter, the more distinctly to exonerate yourself from all unwelcome responsibility on their account, although I suppose them to be intended for that part of the Magazine which is more prominently editorial. If I offend, let all the blame be mine, and mine alone. But how shall I approach, or how handle, a subject of such vast extent ? The present letter must at any rate be confined to matters preliminary. There is no reaching the provisions of the bill in question-supposing that we are to make the way at all clear-within due bounds. These must be kept for by-and-by; it is proposed at this time only to examine two points-the ascertained general complexion and much too evident design of the new-fangled theory, and the generic character of its promoters and supporters. To take the last of these points first. It is not my desire or purpose to write a single word of violence or reproach; but it is surely to be said that these promoters and supporters are, in their broad generic character, decided THEORISTS and lovers of change. It seems to be the genius of our times to theorize and to upset; or (if the phrase be preferable) to experimentalize on abstract principles, upon the widest scale, and in contempt or disregard of consequences. New fancies must be tried. That seems to be the ruling passion. And these our modern educationists are theorizers of this class. With scarcely an exception, they are men either leading or led on by what is called "the spirit of the age." The minds of most of them are somehow or other pre-occupied with visions of an ideal perfectibility, so as to render them unable or unwilling to look at things existing in any other view than one-which single view unfortunately is, to look at their abuse • Let me subjoin here, in a note, this just language of another writer, whose vigorous words are not less worthy to be listened to for being anonymous :-" If the dissenters (of course meaning the religious ones) do not join with the church in reprobating and resisting this impious attempt to subvert the foundations of national religion, we shall be justified in the inference that their enmity to the establishment exceeds their attachment to Christianity; and that they prefer absolute irreligion to the doctrines which they profess to revere and to teach, if those doctrines are instilled through the instrumentality of the clergy." This proposition appears to me to be strictly just, and extremely well worthy of consideration. I give it only in this form, however, from a great individual dislike of ever referring to dissenters at all, holding it plainly best to leave them to their own course, and not in any way to seek them as allies. VOL. XIII.-April, 1838. 3 L only. Hence, reasoning and forming their opinions from this alone, they either overlook the use, or cast it from them as a mere grain or trifle in comparison with the abuse. I shall not stop to argue whether there be not in this much outrage even upon nature itself; it is enough, that no impartial person can with truth deny the charge, that our chief centralizers of education are, in their general character, THEORISTS. If we allow them to be plausible and self-complacent dreamers, (for, as the wont of theorists is, their self-complacency is quite unbounded,) possibly of sincere and good intentions, most certainly we do them ample justice. But presently the question will arise-"Are we at liberty to entertain their dreams?" Is it, however, fair to call their projects "dreams?" This may be matter of opinion; but take here, as a specimen of words which meet the eye or fall upon the ear, leaving no more impression than a sunken stone leaves on the lake's subsided surface, this high-sounding exordium of the president.+ "The progress of all social improvement is to be calculated with any degree of certainty at long intervals only, and after numerous comparisons. Taking our measure from aught less, we err ourselves and deceive others. We draw every thing into the present. It is the foreground of our picture; and from its position, far more than its importance, we allow it to shut out the past and future; yet it is only from a just appreciation of both that we are enabled to judge of what is before us. This is true of all human progress, and eminently so of that upon which all is founded-education." So far as any definite meaning is, after due consideration, to be collected from this pompous opening of an attack on all existing education, what is its measure or amount of truth? Very far indeed am I from admitting that we, the advocates of a religious national education, let anything shut out the future from our view, in any sense that is important; and as to the past, it is our very glory that we stand upon the old paths, which have advanced the nation to its present height of progress, and in which, if followed still, we judge its safety and prosperity largely to lie. If Mr. Wyse and his associates do-as I hope to shew with some clearness hereafter-strangely shut out the past from their view, and but imperfectly (as I must think) perceive the present, that is no solid ground for charging others with a like oversight, or for including all alike in one common accusation. As to the future of this life, who can command it by any mere contrivances of human 'My views (says Mr. Simpson) may differ from those of others, but I claim for my purpose as much respect, at least, as is due to the most zealous sectarian in the land." It were hardly reasonable to refuse him that. Thomas Wyse, Esq., M.P. Society's "First Publication," p. 27. It were improper to indulge in anything like levity or quibble upon such a subject; but alas, there is a future, which seems most lamentably put out of sight by one party in this controversy. Let a short extract from Mr. Blunt's admirable Colchester Sermon tell what it is. "There is another light yet in which religious education should be regarded, which makes such as is secular shrink in comparison before it. The great distinctive character of religious education is, that it stretches the view to another world; that of secular, that it circumscribes it to this. The difference, therefore, of the two systems is as marked as between the immortal and the mortal, between infinite and finite, between eternity and time."-Blunt, p. 15. skill or calculation? As touching that, we act upon the wise man's principle, and "in the morning sow our seed and in the evening withhold not our hand," leaving the event with HIM who can alone determine it in every case. But of the past we can command some knowledge, and for this very reason build our efforts and our expectations, so far, upon the solid ground of experience. That same experience has taught, for one thing, that the moral world has never been, and is not to be, set to rights, per saltum, by full-blown preconceived theories. To use a technical expression, its formations are gradual-the growth of circumstances not under man's control, working a higher will through agency of a perverse nature. Three thousand years ago it was pronounced, as the experience of three thousand years before, that "the thing which hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done." And what is the true inference from such a moral order of things? That THEORY has not, and cannot ever have, a power of directing them. On this view only of the conflicting estimates and views of the two parties in this education question, there can be little prospect of agreement between them. But it is necessary to examine the nature of the schemes proposed with closer scrutiny. If this be found decidedly ANTI-SCRIPTURAL, can we consent to it? The simple question is, whether it be such or no. Here, then, to save both time and trouble, let me again employ the words of Mr. Burgess.* "The tendency of the opinions of all those witnesses from whose evidence the following extracts are taken is to effect two things. 1. To withdraw the instruction of the infant and juvenile population from the superintendence and interference of the clergy. 2. To exclude the Bible from the regular course of instruction, or else to have the scriptures read in such a way as would be worse than their entire exclusion." To say the least, this is a very temperate statement of the alleged tendency. For my own part, I think a summary of it, by the anonymous writer already once referred to, conveys a more condensed and pithy notion of the design contemplated-viz., that "the abolition of CHRISTIANITY by law is proposed without reserve;" but let us be content, in these conciliatory times, to take the milder representation. The question is-Is that borne out by evidence ?+ The Coryphæus of the party, as would seem, is Mr. Simpson, an advocate at the Scottish bar. His whole evidence, as given in the Appendix to the House of Commons' Report, extends through no fewer than eighty-six closely printed folio pages, and may be judged Page 10, (note.) In thus again referring to a very important pamphlet, I do not mean to imply consent to every proposition of it. That is not necessary. But Mr. B. has done a very valuable and effective service by exhibiting the true nature of the designs at work in a short and intelligible compass, and is entitled to respect and thanks accordingly. I am aware how slight and scanty some may think a few selections from an enormous heap of evidence to be; but everybody, who observes, must be aware that the convicting testimony, in all imaginable cases, is always found to centre in a few sifted points, frequently bearing no manner of proportion to the amount of depositions. virtually to embody the entire substantive provisions of Lord Brougham's bill.* This gentleman is asked what he means by education; and he replies thus "When I speak of education, I mean that it embraces physical and moral education, as well as intellectual. 1. The improvement, by proper exercise, of the several systems of the bodythe respiratory, the muscular, the nervous, the cerebral, the skin+constitutes physical education. 2. Moral education is the practical exercise of the pupil's moral feelings, in the society of his fellows, where, and where alone,+ such moral exercise can have adequate field. 3. Intellectual education is the training, exercising, and improving of the intellectual faculties to the increase of knowledge and wisdom." Surely, there is enough in this alone to make one pause at following such a guide, if over-doing be a capital error. But let this pass as mere mystification, and turn to something more directly to the point. "Do you prefer an INFANT SCHOOL to MATERNAL EDUCATION AT HOME?" "Very decidedly indeed." "On what ground?" « On this ground; that maternal education at home wants the element of numbers, and of a variety of dispositions, without which the moral faculties cannot be exercised." "With respect to education by the mother at home, it is generally assumed that mothers are capable of educating; is it not found from experience to be in a great measure the reverse?" "I do not know, in the present state of education of the middle and upper classes of society, that I could point out, within my own knowledge, half a dozen mothers who I should say are qualified to educate their own children." "In the lower classes (where the mothers are occupied), education is utterly neglected." Let sentiments like these be weighed in the balance of the sanctuary. I am not blind to facts, nor so unreasonable as to contend that there may not be too much truth mixed up with these answers, particularly with the last. In sorrow, I believe neglect of parents to be very, very great. But then-for what is that an argument, particularly as respects the lower classes, who must for ever constitute the great mass of society? Is it an argument for going on still more and more to quench their very consciousness of any parental duty-for more and more exonerating Christian fathers and mothers from the * Excepting only the "treachery aggravated by supreme absurdity" of Clause xxv., for which (in outline) see British Magazine, No. lxxiii., p. 74. + Profound and subtle as these niceties of distinction may appear to be, they are not so surely to be regarded as modern discoveries. Does not Horace imply some acquaintance with cerebral theories in his exclamation Dryden's translation may almost put this latter point, touching the education of the skin, beyond all doubt "I know thee to the bottom; from within Thy shallow centre, to the utmost skin.” Yet Mr. Simpson most probably cleaves also to the modern theory of "solitary confinement." Certainly many of his colleagues do. |