THE TRUE MORAL OF CHURCH STATISTICS. T HE remarkable series of
ecclesiastical statistics which annually appear in the "Official Year-Book of the Church of England" were printed, by a customary anticipation, in the Guardian of Wednesday last. They become more complete as time goes on. The filling up of the tables imposes some labour on the clergy, and it is ttisfactory to learn that out of nearly fourteen thousand incumbents all but two hundred and thirty-seven have sent in returns. In 1891 there were more than twelve hundred defaulters. Although, however, this circum- stance make the return for 1896-97 more comprehensive, it interferes with what would otherwise be a very in- teresting comparison. In drawing conclusions from the difference between the present figures and those of former years, we have always to bear in mind that the later results cover a, larger field. For example, it is natural to turn with interest to the growth or decrease in the incomes of the clergy for the past six years, and at first sight it is satisfactory to note that their net income in 1896 was £3,349,000, while in 1891 it was only £3,165,251. Taking into account the continuous fall in tithe, this would seem to show that there has been a considerable growth in the contributions to Clergy Sustentation Funds. Inasmuch, however, as the number of incumbents who sent in returns in 1896 was thirteen thousand six hundred and thirty eve, and only twelve thousand two hundred and ninety- nine in 1891, we cannot say that the figures show any- thing of the kind. A much safer, though a far less agreeable deduction is yielded by a comparison between 1896 and 1895, when the number of incumbents making returns was nearly identical, and their net income showed a drop of over £13,000. This is, or at all events ought to be, a very salutary reminder that nothing has yet been done in the way of relieving the poverty of the clergy. We have not so much as stopped the leak. Years ago the laity of the Church of England were told that the value of endowments was falling, that under the influence of agricultural depression tithe rent-charge and the rental of glebe were alike growing less, that unless some great and united effort were made a married clergy and an educated clergy must in time cease to exist. Down to the Easter of last year, at all events, these warnings seem to have had no effect whatever. We are still con- fronted by a declining instead of an increasing aggregate of clerical incomes. The poverty of the clergy, so far from being appreciably less than it was, is appreciably greater. No doubt it is possible that the figures for 1897, when they come in, will tell a different story, since in that year some effort was made to associate the Jubilee in the minds of Churchmen with the creation of a Clergy Sustentation Fund. We shall be surprised, however, if that Fund proves to be largely indebted to Jubilee enthusiasms. They belonged, we are inclined to think, to a class of emotions which found appropriate expres- sion in the "Be ye warmed and filled !" of St. James. Indeed, so far as experience is any guide, we see little hope of any adequate measure of clergy sustentation except at the cost of other objects. The amount of voluntary contributions given in these statistics is very uniform, and what change there is seems to be in the wrong direction. It was £5,851,000 in 1894, £5,745,000 in 1895, and £5,682,000 in 1896. There may be ways of accounting for this decline which we do not know of ; but at all events there is but too good reason to say that no increase is to be looked for. Those who are disposed to give, give already. Those who are not dis- posed to give show no signs of coming to a better mind. It is true that the grand total of contributions for 1896 shows an apparent advance upon all previous years, but this is only a matter of book-keeping. It now includes donations and subscriptions made through Societies such as the Church Missionary Society and the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, and in this way the amount of money voluntarily given to purely Church objects is raised to seven millions. That is a very respectable total, but the prospect is less encouraging in view of the growth of clerical destitution, and the apparent impossibility of raising any new fund with which to meet it.
To speak quite plainly, we are inclined to think that if the clergy are to be once more furnished with an in- come on which it is possible for them to live and thrive —in other words, with an income which shall enable them to do their work properly—there must be a revision of the objects on which these voluntary contributions are spent. Probably a million annually would put all the beneficed clergy above the reach of want, and if the voluntary contributions of each year cannot be raised from £7,000,000 to £8,000,000, which would be the best way out of the difficulty, it is the imperative duty of those who supply the .R7,000,000 to see whether there is any way in which the million wanted for clergy sus- tentation can be extracted from it. There will naturally be great unwillingness to take such a step. If it is unpleasant to refuse to give when you are asked, it is still more unpleasant to take away what you already give. But if the need is urgent enough unpleasantness of this sort must be faced and borne. The support of a living ministry is the first of all ecclesiastical needs. There is no question as to the existence of the need in the Church of England at this moment, and. where this is admitted it follows inevitably that if there is no money to be had from outside, what is wanted must be had from inside. Or, to say the same thing in other words, if the Church is living up to her income while many of her clergy are all but starving, she must see in what directions it is possible for her to retrench.
We have looked over the list of objects given in these tables to see if there are any more capable than others of lending themselves to this process. There are only two, we are sorry to say, in which any such opportunity presents itself, and we doubt not that the mere mention of these will excite surprise in the minds of some readers. "Church Ex- penses," including "Salaries of Lay Helpers," stand for £1,193,000. Elementary Schools, including new or enlarged school buildings, stand for £1,048,000. But how, it will at once be said, can any reduction be made in these items ? Church expenses mean the necessary cost of carrying on the services ; lay helpers give the parson the only chance he has of getting through his work ; voluntary schools are indispensable to the religious education of our children. That "church expenses" mean the cost of carrying on the services is undeniable ; what we demur to is the introduction of the word "necessary." Doubt- less a good deal of this million and over could not well be otherwise applied. Frequent services necessitate lighting when the days are short, warming when the days are cold, and some amount of cleaning in all seasons and in all weathers. It may, of course, in the absence of further subdivision of the total, be contended that the larger part of it goes on this admittedly necessary expenditure. But until we are confuted by the figures we refuse to believe this. Our present conviction is that the lion's share is appropriated by music, and goes to pay organists and choirmen. If we are right in thus thinking, will any one deny that much of this outlay is not necessary at all ? The money is spent on a luxury—a very proper luxury, no doubt, a luxury that adds dignity and attractiveness to public worship—but still a luxury, not a necessity. Of course, if any one does deny this, we have no more to say. Those who think, that an organist, with a proper complement of basses and tenors, is of more importance than an adequately paid clergy, must continue to think
so. But we cannot believe that they will find many to agree with them or to deny that if the money wanted to supplement the incomes of the clergy must be taken from some object at present in possession of it, it is to musical services that the pruning-knife must first be applied. But what about lay helpers, are not they a necessity ? Not, we reply, until the clergy have first been provided for. What is the gain of paying a layman to help the parson when we leave the parson himself without food, or clothes, or books, or the means of supporting his family ? Paid lay help can never do more than supplement the labour of the clergy. Let us place the clergy in a position to get through that labour well before taking the money which might make this sure in order to give it to lay helpers. We come upon more delicate ground when we touch upon elementary schools. We do not wish for a moment to underrate religious education. We should be very sorry to see the children in Church schools receiving anything less or worse in this way than they are receiving now. All we wish to suggest is that, while it is the bounden duty of the clergy to teach Church children religion, it is not their bounden duty—at least not in anything like the same degree—to teach Church children the three "R's." The religious instruction of the children in Church schools costs about three-quarters of a million yearly, besides occasional efforts to provide additional school buildings. It ought not to be beyond the wit of man to devise a system under which three-quarters of a million might be made to furnish more thorough religious teaching to a larger number of children. If half of the two millions or so annually spent on these objects could be diverted to the sustenance of the clergy, might not the work of the Church be better done even in the very departments from which the money would have been taken away ?
Previous page
