being here, in a great measure, voluntary-they are also private; it is not to the interest, and frequently not to the credit of either party, that the exact mode of raising the supplies, and levying the contributions, should be known to those who are without. Yet the system is too extensive a one not to have its regular plans and organization. To say nothing of the numerous meeting-houses of dissenters already established, with priests duly provided for, at the expence of their respective congregations, it should be borne in mind that, in various parts of this kingdom, there are academies-universities they might not improperly be called for the bringing up of young men to what is called "the Christian ministry." These, as they grow up, are regularly drafted off, to supply vacancies in "widowed churches;" or to occupy the pulpit of some one of those newly-opened chapels, which, as regularly as the public house, the reader may observe constantly spring up in every direction immediately that a few new houses are erected, and almost before sufficient time is allowed for those houses to become inhabited. All this implies system and regularity of plan. The thing is, in fact, one of interest only; and it is conducted throughout upon thorough trading principles.

On this subject we may probably feel inclined, occasionally, to lay before our readers, such information as may have reached us; we could, at this time, point out an individual, well known in the city of London for his commercial activity, who is, at the same time, a chief pillar in supporting one of the dissenting universities to which we have alluded; amongst other speculations his capital has been employed, and report says most successfully employed, in the building. of chapels: his plan being to erect a meeting-house in a new or a populous neighbourhood-to supply from the academy with which he is connected a pastor suited-as well as may be-to the class of people which he is called upon to address; and then, when a considerable rental has been raised, in the form of payments for pews, &c., to seize the first opportunity of granting a lease at a considerable premium; or of disposing of the freehold to advantage. We have, not long since, seen a plan of a chapel, upon the erection of which, the individual in question was said to be expending no less a sum than ten thousand pounds.

Thus much with regard to the building of chapels ;-as much, or more, might be said upon the mode of paying the priests who preach in them. On some future occasion we may take an opportunity of detailing the peculiar circum

stances under which one or more of the Unitarian teachers, in or near the metropolis, obtained their places, and receive their support; but our present object is to notice and to supply extracts from a work which affords some curious information on the subject of supporting the dissenting priesthood; the full title of the book, as it now lies before us, is as follows: "The Support of the Christian Ministry.-A Sermon, preached at the Nether Chapel, Sheffield; before the Associated Churches and Ministers "assembled there, April 25, 1821.-By James Bennett. The "Lord hath ordained that they who preach the gospel should "live of the gospel.'-Paul. Published by the Association. Third Edition. London, 1821.*

The "associated churches" before whom this sermon was preached are, we are informed, of the Independent denomination: the preacher dates his dedication (which is to the "associated ministers and churches to whom the sermon "was preached") from "Rotherham college ;" an institution for the education of ministers of that sect, of which Mr. Bennett is tutor. The occasion, no less than the performance, is a remarkable one. Delivered before the "associated ministers," and no doubt before his pupils also-the rising generation, or the embryo brood of preachers-its express object is to support their claims, not only to be paid, but to be handsomely paid-for their labours. There is about the present production no ambiguity on this subject-no reserve no recommendation of half measures: it goes direct to the subject in hand, and unblushingly asserts the righteven the divine right-of the priest to his "hire and salary.' "On the coolest consideration" (says the preacher, p. 7) "I feel myself entitled to all Christian freedom in discussing "this subject." "I request, then, your candid attention "to I. The divine appointment,† that the churches of Christ "should support their ministers. In support of this position he contends that, Firstly, Under the Mosaic "dispensation God enjoined that the ministers of religion "should be supported by the contributions of the people." That, Secondly, The same duty, of supporting the "ministers of religion, is enjoined" (he elsewhere says perpetuated)" under the gospel." And he further contends, Thirdly, that this practice of paying priests "may, in fact,

66

66

* The name of Bennett, in connexion with that of Bogue, is well known as that of a writer some years since, on the subject of dissenters.

+ These words are thus printed in italics in the original.

"be termed a duty of natural religion; or, in other words, that it is but common justice.'

66

With regard to the argument from the Jewish law, the author is particularly anxious that it should be remembered that every thing therein contained is not to be despised or lost sight of. Let no one take alarm" (he says, p. 7) "at "this appeal to the law, as if I wished to bring them under "the Jewish yoke of ceremonies." Far from this, it is only where "legal rites unfolded evangelical truths," that he contends for their being regarded as imperative upon us in the present day. Amongst the "duties" "guides" and consolations" which are not abolished-amongst the things "first announced to the world by Moses and the prophets,' but still "most dear to our hearts as Christians"-amongst "the legal rites which have unfolded evangelical truths"amongst these is, of course, found by the preacher of Rotherham college, the perpetual duty of paying a priesthood; although, when he comes to speak of tithes (of which, as a dissenting priest, he can have no portion) he acutely enough discovers that these were "a part of the Levitical "law of ceremonies which is now abolished," and shrewdly asks (p. 17) "What earthly power is authorized to take this branch of the Jewish religion, and engraft it on the Christian?" A question which has the double advantage of being unanswerable in itself, and of forming a triumphant reply to the previous part of his own performance.

The claim of "the Christian ministry," not merely to support, but affluence, is then argued at length from the New Testament. It is not, at this time, our intention to enter into the controversial part of this subject; we shall only, therefore, say that the arguments are all founded upon the assumption that "the Christian ministry" (that is, that Messrs. Thomas Raffles, Bengo Collier, Rowland Hill, Alexander Fletcher, Robert Aspland, Penzance Smith, William Tozer, James Bennett, and an endless et cetera of teachers, and that too of opposite doctrines) are the authorized successors of the apostles; an assumption which, if made seriously, shews gross ignorance; and if hazarded without conviction, would argue no great degree of honesty. This question lies in a small compass. The apostles were authorized by Deity to proclaim amongst strangers the good news of revelation; they made this proclamation at the expence of every worldly comfort, and at the sacrifice of the usual means of support. They had a natural right, therefore-not to pay-not to hire-not to

affluence;-but, strictly speaking, to support;-that is, to their daily bread-to the means of actual existence: but even this right it was the glory of a chief apostle that he had not availed himself of. The apostles too were not stationary officers of Christian churches, but messengers sent out to form and organize Christian churches. James Bennett, and the other reverends of our days, cannot, therefore, be the successors of the apostles; for these men are not authorized-these men do not go forth as messengers sent amongst strangers, to the sacrifice of every previous possession; and further, these men do not humbly and modestly ask for the common means of support, but impudently and selfishly lay claim to regular salaries; and, if possible of attainment, to splendid stipends.

Some curious concessions are made on the subject, by Mr. Bennett; he allows (p. 16) that "while the duty of supporting ministers is most unequivocally enjoined," (in the New Testament) "no exact mode is prescribed; a deficiency which he accounts for by stating it as "a striking "characteristic of the Christian religion-that it rules by "grand general principles." In the liberal "support of the "Christian ministry" we are, therefore, left "as men en"dowed with spiritual wisdom, delicate consciences, and generous affections, to follow out the general principles "which the gospel furnishes to all their legitimate extent." Thus the payment of priests is assumed as "a grand general "principle" of Christianity; and the hearers of our dissenting clergy are modestly exhorted generously to push that principle" to all its legitimate extent!"

66

"As that paramount authority" (continues Mr. Bennett, p. 22) "which prescribed exactly what should be given to 'the ancient religion, has not said one word of the precise sum, or peculiar mode by which ministers are to be sup"ported in the churches of Christ, it is manifest"-(What? That they should not be supported at all? No! but)" that "we are left to free-will offerings-the sacrifice of the heart. 'Well, indeed," (adds the preacher) "this becomes a "religion which touches the heart" (the pocket rather he should have said) "in the tenderest place, by saying Ye "know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, though he was rich for our sakes, became poor, that we'" (the priests?) "through his poverty might be made rich!""

66 6

Mr. B., for reasons which will afterwards appear, contends warmly (p. 24) that the support of the ministry should be strictly voluntary.

"I cannot but deeply lament, and seriously protest against the mode of supporting ministers by a seat-rent. I readily admit, for it is, indeed, incontrovertible, that, as long as men are at liberty to take a seat, or entirely abstain even from entering our doors, this cannot be called a tax. Yet it has so much of the appearance of a rate imposed, and is so unequal in its operation, that I most earnestly entreat you to supercede this, as far as poss.ble, by providing for the support of your ministers, chiefly by voluntary subscriptions, in which, every one may give, according as God has blessed him with property and religion. For your sakes as well as your ministers I urge this change; for it is only in proportion as the support of your pastor is the spontaneous effusion of a grateful heart, anxious to render some kind return for spiritual blessings received, that it secures the approbation and blessing of the Saviour which is better than life.”

A chief argument in support of voluntary contributions is, that they are likely to be more productive.

"All I ask is, that every one should discharge this duty according to the ability which God has given. This, which is so obviously right that it cannot need proof, is too general to be of much use. Accuracy in doctrine, and piety in duty, require that we should descend to particulars. Be not satisfied then, with paying a mere seat-rent. Satan himself could not devise a more effectual way to introduce injustice, and expel from our churches, generosity to ministers, and faithfulness to God. When three persons, of vastly different circumstances, sit in seats of the same rent, one perhaps pays rather more than he can afford, another almost as much, and the third far less. This will always be the case, in a certain degree; but then, it should be owing to their own disposition, not to the arrangements of the church. Every person should be informed, that what is given for their sitting is but a small part of the minister's income; for this arises chiefly, if not entirely, from the voluntary subscriptions of those, who give according to their varied means, and the different degrees in which they love the cause of religion.

"If this is the scriptural rule, how completely have many rich persons mistaken their duty! Their expenditure is, perhaps, twenty times that of a person who gives a guinea a year, and yet, they would think it wonderful if they should give twenty guineas a year. I have known, however, more than one person in the same congregatum, living in humble style, who were in the habit of giving between twenty and thirty pounds a year. Some splendid exceptions, also, I have known, who contributed fifty, and even a hundred pounds per аппит. But I have known several who give ten guineas; and have seen a whole range of seats occupied by plain persons who were subscribing five guineas annually."

Various arguments, at considerable length, are adduced to prove that the contributions in support of these men should be liberal-we may indeed say profuse. A comparison is drawn between their labours and those of the physician and the lawyer; but these last avowedly follow a worldly profession, and they earn-and are content witha worldly reward; whereas this "Christian ministry" represent themselves as the teachers of a religion which inculcates pure benevolence and disinterestedness;-as the followers of a lowly master, who "had not where to lay his head;”—as