India with hardly any clergy, and a numerous clergy not acknowledging episcopal jurisdiction."-Ibid. p. 401.

These extracts need no comment. But it is not in the church abroad only that the society is calculated to produce inconvenience. It adopts a course of conduct, for the purpose of increasing its funds, which must prove highly detrimental to the interests of the church at home. I allude to the practice of holding some of its district meetings in parishes, not only without the concurrence of the parochial clergymen, but in direct opposition to their expressed wishes, and in defiance of their remonstrance. Now, to say nothing of the interference in another man's sphere, and the violation of the precept which our Lord declares to be "the law and the prophets," of which the clerical members, and more particularly the clerical deputation, of the society attending such meetings must unavoidably be guilty, is it not plain that the society by such a proceeding inflicts a serious injury on the clergyman of the parish, and on the people entrusted to his care?

Suppose the following case: A meeting of the society in question is announced by the usual placards to be held in a certain parish. As it is a meeting of a church missionary society, the parochial clergyman is, of course, expected to give it his countenance and support. The meeting however takes place, and the clergyman, not approving of the principles of the society, does not preside, and is not even present. His parishioners naturally inquire the reason. He has not an opportunity of explaining his views to all, and he is consequently obliged to rest under the unjust suspicion of being unfavourable to the missionary cause. The probability is, that the affections of some at least of his flock are alienated from him, and consequently his influence and the success of his ministrations greatly obstructed. Let me then ask, could an enemy of the church inflict on her or her minister a more serious injury? For my own part, as a parochial clergyman, I would rather have to encounter the fiercest opposition of the united band of Romish and protestant dissenters than be subjected to the puritanical interference of what is called a church society. Better, far better, that the citadel should be attacked from without, than that the garrison should be divided and weakened within.

I am, Sir, your most obedient servant, A COUNTRY CLERGYMAN.

ON CHURCH SOCIETIES.

SIR,-Permit me to refer a late correspondent of yours to a passage in Pusey's work on Baptism, as being explanatory of the distinct principle of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel from that of other missionary societies. It commences, "Such also, we may see, has been the method of God, for the most part, in extending his church hitherto, since its first planting." It will be found at the distance of about two pages from the end of the third tract.-"Tracts for the Times," vol. ii. p. 207.

I am, Sir, yours respectfully,

A CONSTANT READER.

"WHAT CONSTITUTES A CHURCH SOCIETY?"

SIR,-In the number of your Magazine for the first month of this year there appear, under the head of "Church Matters," certain principles set forward by the committee of the "Windsor and Eton Church Union Society" for the formation of such societies generally. This has called forth two letters, by "S. I. E.," and by "A Country Parson."

As a clergyman of this church of England, anxiously desirous to see any church putting forth her full strength, and shewing to the world a more perfect pattern of catholic discipline, and consequent vigour, than she has hitherto done, I earnestly call the attention of my brethren to this subject; for convinced I am, that, among the many important ecclesiastical matters which now occupy men's attention, the mode of collecting and disposing of funds for church purposes is one of the most important. Little as matters of ecclesiastical discipline are understood among us at the present day, I believe that no point is less understood than the one before us. Men think that so soon as some great want in the church presents itself forcibly to their attention, such, for example, as missions to the heathen, or additional curates at home,-they may without any breach of order associate with a few others, laymen or priests, lay their schemes in the shape of a printed circular before the bishops, and then, after having waited, as an act of courtesy, some little time for answer, they think they may proceed to collect money from all quarters, and, electing a committee and secretary from among themselves, dispose of that money as they think proper; and, thus constituted, they call themselves a church society should they have succeeded in obtaining the name of one or two bishops, it is a great gain; if of six or seven, the secretary then acts with all the confidence which the whole delegated episcopate could give him; and while he with the committee steer the vessel, the approving bishop or bishops are put forward as the figure head, to ornament indeed, but not to direct. But should the society not be so fortunate as to see their list graced by even one episcopal name, still "the work must go on." If the primate and the greater number of the bishops have objections to the scheme, it is thought a grievous pity that the heads of the church should oppose "so good a work," but it never seems to occur to the newly created committee and secretary that they are bound to submit their judgments to that of their superiors in all matters which concern the affairs of the church. All this, as might be supposed, causes great confusion, as could be fully shewn from the proceedings of different societies, which I forbear to particularize. The mistake appears to me to consist entirely in churchmen not making a proper distinction between an object, and the mode of attaining that object. For example, no reasonable man can doubt but that pastoral aid was and is greatly needed in England, it does not however therefore follow, that a mode of supplying that need objected to by the primate, by a great majority of the bishops, and of the clergy of England, ought to be persevered in, especially when those bishops have opened another way of attaining the same end, of

which they and the clergy approve, of which no man could disapprove, and which no man can say is not at least equally efficient towards the end in view. In any regularly organized community, what confusion would not be made by independent machines acting within the one great machine of government! How could the Queen's government be carried on, if all the departments, in all their various ramifications, were not under the direct and positive control of the premier and the cabinet? It is not many years since a certain noble lord offered to build and fit out a frigate, and to present her to the navy service, if he might be given the command of her; but his offer was refused. Why? Because his lordship was not qualified for such a command? Not at all; he was eminently qualified; but because he was not a naval officer; and such a point of discipline and order was of more value than a frigate. But what would be said at the Admiralty, or what would any man of common sense say, if a certain number of half-pay post-captains and landsmen, mourning over the present deficient state of our navy, associated themselves together, and formed a "Naval Aid Society," and, having obtained the approval of some old admirals (a thing not very likely, by the way), proceeded to form a little fleet of coal-brigs, and such like craft, to co-operate with her majesty's fleet in the Mediterranean, or the Baltic, or elsewhere; to be under the command of the admiral of that fleet, if he would comply with their "Rules and Regulations," but not otherwise; if, however, that admiral would not comply with their "Rules and Regulations," and more than this, objected to their presence altogether, it should matter not,—it would be certainly a great pity that he did not better understand the wants of her majesty's service; but the society's missionaries-I beg pardon, officers-must still do their duty. We need not fear the formation of such a society; naval officers have too high a sense of discipline to join it, and Englishmen have too much common sense to give their money for so wild a scheme. Yet this system, absurd as it appears, when applied to a service where necessary discipline is understood, is nevertheless the only one adopted in aid of our church-I say the only one, because the principle of all our societies is fundamentally the same, except perhaps the Curate's Fund. And why should this be? Is not the church an organized body? Has she not commanders-in-chief? Is the discipline of the church militant to be alone disturbed by the irregularities of guerilla troops ? Is it because her overseers are the only governors in the world who can bring documentary evidence each of his own personal right to govern from divine command that their authority is to be disregarded whenever it may chance to thwart men's self-willed fancies?

But I will come at once to the question before us. Your correspondent, "A Country Parson," evidently a man of good sense and feeling, asks two questions, and they go to the very root of the matter: "What constitutes a church society? and which of the societies at present in existence are church societies?" The first question I will attempt to answer; and when I shall have answered it, your correspondent will perceive that I agree with him in thinking that not one of our societies is by its constitution a church society.

What, then, constitutes a church society? The example of the church in Scotland shall answer. It so happens that in the very same number of your Magazine the example is given under the head of "Events of the Month in Scotland"--but this will only be understood by a reference to the "Ecclesiastical Intelligence" in the December number: I entreat your readers attentively to consider what is there said of the "Scottish Episcopal Church :".

"A General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church was held in St. Paul's Chapel, Edinburgh, on the 29th of August 1838.... The synod consisted of two chambers-the first of the bishops only; the second of the deans, and a representative of the clergy elected by each diocese.... Morning prayer was read,...........and an address delivered by the Right Reverend the Primus; all the clergy present then joined in the holy communion; after which the Primus constituted the synod, saying, In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. By the authority and in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, the divine Head of the catholic church, of which we form a part, I hereby constitute this assembly, and declare it to be a general synod of this church, and therefore competent to consider, deliberate upon, and to determine, all questions connected with the discipline and government of the church, which may be regularly and canonically submitted to our judgment in our legislative and judicial capacities.' The synod having been summoned by the Episcopal College in October, 1837, in the course of the past year the clergy of each diocese were assembled by their respective bishops, and agreed upon various alterations in the canons of the church, which were submitted to both chambers of the general synod. Various amendments were made in the existing canons, and several new canons enacted:"

It is the fortieth of these canons to which I wish to direct attention.

"Canon 40. For establishing and maintaining a Society in aid of the Church. 'Whereas in the primitive church and by apostolic order, collections were made for the poorer brethren, and for the propagation of the gospel, it is hereby decreed that a similar practice shall be observed in the Scottish Episcopal church. Nor ought the poverty of the church, nor of any portion of it, be pleaded as an objection, seeing that the divine commendation is given equally to those who from their poverty give a little with cheerfulness and to those who give largely of their abundance. For this purpose, a society called The Scottish Episcopal Church Society' shall be formed, the objects of which shall be, 1st, to provide a fund for aged or infirm clergymen, or salaries for their assistants, and general aid for congregations struggling with pecuniary difficulties; 2ndly, to assist candidates for the ministry in completing their theological studies; 3rdly, to provide episcopal schoolmasters, books and tracts for the poor; 4thly, to assist in the formation or enlargement of diocesan libraries. To promote these important purposes, a certain day shall be fixed upon, annually, by every diocesan synod, when a collection shall be made in every chapel throughout the diocese, and the nature and object of the society, in reference to the existing wants of the church, shall be explained to the people.”

Here then we see the formation of a church society, properly so called; we will now look at it in action, and we shall see the same ecclesiastical order and dignity throughout. The account will be found in your January number, at the end of " Events of the Month." From that account, which is well worth perusing, it appears that the first public meeting of the society was one of the most numerously and VOL. XV.-March, 1839. 2 Q

respectably attended ever remembered in Edinburgh. The Right Reverend the Primus was in the chair, and he was surrounded by other bishops and clergymen, together with some distinguished laymen of the church. The Primus opened the meeting by stating that its object" was to establish the Scottish Episcopal Church Society, as provided for in the 40th canon of the episcopal church." The right reverend prelate then detailed the objects for which the church thus claimed the contributions of her faithful sons. Other bishops followed, whose speeches, together with a very few others, was all that was said; a large collection, however, was made on the spot," and when the apostolic benediction had been given from the chair, the meeting separated." How wonderfully different all this from the tumult of Exeter Hall! The society will now proceed according to the canon, " a certain day" will " be fixed upon annually by every diocesan synod, when a collection" will be made in every chapel throughout the diocese, and the nature and objects of the society in reference to the existing wants of the church" will "be explained to the people."

Here then is my answer to your correspondent's question-"What constitutes a church society?" A general synod of the church alone can constitute such a society for a whole national church; a provincial council alone can constitute it for a province, or a diocesan synod for a diocese. Such is the view practically taken by the church in America, as well as in Scotland, and such has ever been the view taken by the catholic church, in every branch of it, except in modern England and Ireland; and what is the consequence of our acting upon this principle, or rather this absence of principle? we must not refuse to make the humiliating avowal. With us, all is confusion, while in every other Christian community apostolically governed by bishops all is order, unity, and strength. Of us it may be said, (at least so far as regards that most fruitful cause of dispute, the disposal of charitable funds,) in these days there is "no king in Israel, but every man" does that which is "right in his own eyes." It is this unauthorized system of universal suffrage in our (miscalled) church societies; it is the one-guinea voters; the making the vote of a simple priest or layman equal to that of the Archbishop of Canterbury; it is this democratic system having been allowed to take the place of the divinely appointed oligarchical or aristocratical system in the church; it is the licence given to the inferior clergy and laity in these matters, raising them to a level with their spiritual overseers, which is the cause of all our trouble and of all our weakness. Hence arise those miserable quarrels in the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, from whose meetings the bishops have been forced to retire-while nothing but a royal charter preserves the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel from like troubles. The fact of the primate and all the bishops belonging to these two societies is the only point in which they differ in authority from the Missionary Society, and many others of that class; but this fact is only an accident, not a necessary part of their constitution; your correspondent "A Country Parson" has put this so well and clearly that