DR. ILOMFIELD'S PLAN FOR BUILDING NEW CHURCHES.
THE Bishop of LONDON labours under the delusion that multi- hides ale eXe uded by want of room from the Metropolitan churches. He has Lublished " Proposals for the creation of a Fund to be applied to the Building of Additional Churches in the Metropulis;" and states, in support of his plan, that " At this moment there is in the Metropolis and its suburbs, omitting all notice of those pal ishes s hiell contain less than 7000 inhabitants, a population of not less than 1.380,000, with church-room for only 140,000, or little more that one-tenth 01 the whole."
The Bishop does not say how much Dissenting church-room is to be found in the churchless part of his diocese. Probably it is not far short of that supplied by the Establishment; and sup- posing it to be sufficient for the accommodation of 110,000 persons, we should have 250,000 seats in churches and chapels for London and the suburbs. This is, we suspeci, pretty nearly enough for the demand,—especially win n it is considered, that of regular church and chapel-goers few attend more than one service on a Sunday. Were that universally the case, of coulee 250,000 teats won d be
sufficient for half a million of persons. But nobody will pretend that 500,000, or more than one-third of the whole population-- including infants—can possibly attend divine service even once in a week ; and we may therefore safely conclude, that 250,000 seats are sufficient for all who can and will go to church or chapel. It will be said that we are arguing on loose data ; that we have no evidence of there being as many as 110,000 seats in the Dissent- ing chapels. But this is not our only argument. It is notorious that, in the afternoon, the churches in London are generally almost empty. Mechanics and servants walk into the country, pay visits, and amuse themselves in a variety of ways, in preference to listen- ing to the harangues of the soundest divines; and if there were a church in every street and alley, they would do the same. Yet it is for these persons, and such as these, that the Bishop would provide new churches : for be will not pretend that the higher and middle classes find difficulty in any part of London in procuring church-room.
But supposing that Bishop BLOMF1ELD made out his case as to the deficiency of accommodation, how does he propose to supply it ? By a more equitable disposition of the revenues of the wealthiest Church in Christendom ? By a curtailment of hierar- chical splendour and luxury ? By relinquishing a portion of the 13,000/. a year, the receipt of which he himself acknowledges?— Nothing of the sort. Perhaps, then, he recommends application to Parliament for another million ? He has some such notion ; but be evidently fears that Parliament may be of opinion that four millions per annum (the Church Commissioners in 1831 owned to 3,800,000/.) is enough for the support of an Establishment whose ministers ought to practise as well as preach self-denial. Dr. BLOMF1ELD therefore, in the first place, means to resort to the Nonconformist principle. He is eloquent on the subject of volun- tary contributions for the support of the Church ! He will take all that the law allows, and as much more as he can extract out of the pockets of the faithful by pious exhortations. He says-
" My desire and hope is, that by means of donations much higher in amount than those which are usually given as annual subscriptions, or for temporary objects, a very large fund may forthwith be raised, for the purpose of building or purchasing, and partly endowing, at least fifty new churches or chapels, in the most populous parts of the Metropolis and its suburbs. lit many cases, opportunities will present themselves of purchasing buildings, which may be fitted at a moderate cost for the purpose of divine worship, according to the rites and usages of the Established Church."
But if the laity should not bleed with sufficient freedom, the Bishop then proposes that Parliament should lay an additional tax of twopence upon every ton of coals imported into London. As coals vary in price from 25s. to 35s, a ton, he cannot conceive any objection to an imposition so light that it would scarcely be felt, while it would produce 18,000/. per annum to the Church. Yet Dr. BLOMF1ELD might have learned by this time, that no small or uninfluential portion of the community are resolved to get rid of a State Church altogether, with as little delay as possible; that the conscientious feeling of multitudes is opposed to the compulsory support of religion; that the principle, not the cost of an Establishment, is what millions of his countrymen more parti- cularly repudiate and dislike; that it will try the Church's strength to the utmost to keep what she has got, and that no Minister would be such an idiot as to propose an additional tax for her aggran- dizement. This suggestion of Ds. BLOMFIELD proves how com- pletely ignorant he is of public feeling in this country in regard to the State religion. It excites disgust to bear a man of" purple, palaces, and preferment," propose a tax, however small, on the necessaries of life for the support of an Establishment whose Bishops receive (in round numbers) 150,000/. a year; whose Deans and Chapters, Prebendaries, Canons, Sze. have 350,0001. per annum to dispose of; and whose beneficed clergymen pocket three millions and a quarter sterling, or thereabouts. But so it is- " money, money ! " is the constant cry of the Church.
The Bishop had better stick to the Voluntary principle. If new churches are wanted, let Churchmen give the means out of their own purses, after the Nonconformist fashion. Until the churches, now empty in every part of the Metropolis, are filled, we think that they might find a more discreet and useful mode of disposing of their surplus funds : on this point, however, every man must judge for himself. But, on behalf of the public, we protest against the imposition of any new tax whatever for the purpose of swell- \\ ing the vast revenue of the Church of England.
Previous page
