THE town livings in England ere usually the poorest, so that where several clergymen are needed, there is often barely enough to maintain one. Naturally enough then they have often sought lay help to assist them in becoming acquainted with the wants of their poor parishioners: and on this there rises a question, is such a method of assistance consistent with ancient catholic custom, and the principles of the church of England? Now as to the mere question of lay help, we will first look to the usage of the church abroad, where it is duly sanctioned by episcopal authority; and in the Reports of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, we meet with continual mention made by the Bishops, of their catechists as well as clergy. It would be needless labour were I to transcribe passages in proof of a thing so notorious; our missionary churches have usually a considerable number of lay teachers, and our bishops speak of them with deserved approbation; so that to object to lay help in England, is as much as saying, that what is good and catholic on one side the water, becomes irregular and wrong on the other. Neither need we go very deep in ecclesiastical learning to find that this was the custom of the church in her best and purest ages; and if it be apparent (as it is) to all candid readers, that there has always been a triple order

C

of ministers, bishops, presbyters, and deacons, it is quite as clear that these had assistants, such as catechists, readers, and the like, who were usually probationers for holy orders.

It has often struck me as a remarkable thing, that our bishops have not revived this valuable assistance in the English dioceses; for in large towns it becomes absolutely impossible that a clergyman should personally know all his parishioners, and the consequence has been a loss to the church of many who would have been her valuable and useful members. That difficulties might now arise in such an organization, is extremely probable; but what good thing long disused, can be expected to find its restoration without difficulty? Nay, this seems a necessary penalty upon us for having neglected it.

The spiritual labour in a parish is not wholly confined to the province of a clergyman: the public prayers and preaching, and the ministration of the sacraments, appertain only to such as the bishop ordains for this service; but private reading of scripture, specially to those who cannot read, and exhortation and enquiry into the soul's wants (and the body's, among the poorer classes), this is lawfully a work permitted and enjoined to all Christians, as appears by the New Testament and ancient Church History. I am aware that no commission or authority can come from any source except the bishop : if he licences a man as reader or catechist, that man's authority for the work, as far as it is extended, is as good as the clergyman's, being derived from precisely the same source, and the only visible source of spiritual appointment in the church below.

The disjointed and unauthorized labours of district visitors, though good and commendable, can never be expected to work as well as a system which connected the visitor with his bishop. A clergyman may procure such help, but he cannot invest his assistants with a

valid commission for it; the body is in this case not fitly framed together, and compacted by that which every joint supplieth," and the inefficiency is accordingly.

If a captain and a couple of lieutenants went on board a ship alone to manage her, it would be as wise and reasonable (and as just to the passengers,) as when a large town population (many thousands often) is served by one or two clergymen. The officers might work very hard, and commend their zeal to all that saw them, but it had been better to take a complement of stout men for their helpers, and their zeal might, likely enough, flag by the hopelessness of the case. But the children of this world are in their generation wiser than the children of light; we do not so in temporal things, nor in our churches abroad: it is thickly populated England that suffers by this unnecessary deficiency. We can settle then, that lay help is a primitive and scriptural custom; that it is actually used and sanctioned by our bishops abroad; that all theory is in its favour; but let us look a little at its obvious advantages. And 1st. It would connect all the members of the church with one another, from the highest to the lowest, by the beautiful bond of actual contact and association. We may say that the Vicar of Plymouth, or any other large town, is the pastor over his people, watching over them, knowing their peculiar wants, and suiting his instructions or consolations accordingly. But this is a pleasing fiction, a theory on paper, for no human exertions would enable him to be such in reality, and our heavenly master asks for no impossibilities, the fault is in ourselves, who neglect a help and provision which he has allowed us. It is like the captain and his two or three lieutenants attempting to manage the whole vessel, and discarding all the inferior officers. But if the gap were filled up, there would be in every case a link between the minister

and all his people; he would, through his readers or catechists, know actually the state of his parishioners, and the bond which unites men to their bishop would be proportionably stronger.

Again. It should not be forgotten, that pious and intelligent men of less education than the clergyman, are oftentimes even more fitted than he, to get at the understandings of the poorer classes; they could address them in language and appeal to them in a way, which the clergy sometimes would fail in; for since God has thus fitted together the body of his church, it is a result, reasonable as well as experimental, that this should be the case. We think perhaps that the clergyman could do every thing of a religious nature, better than any other person, but there are parts of usefulness which God has provided other helps for, and we cannot better the machinery by striking away some of the smaller wheels. By cast of mind, education, and habits of life, the clergyman can not always get so close a contact with the poorer classes of his people, by himself alone, as he would with intermediate assistance, and this not by any pride, or reserve, or fault on his part, but by the nature of the case, and the present position of society. The custom of our times, puts every clergyman into a certain rank; though poorer than many, he is deemed a gentleman, but he knows, by his office he is not placed above the meanest of his parishioners, as though he should keep aloof from them, being in duty bound the servant of all for Christ's sake. But still let him strive as he may, there wants an intermediate order of helpers, and the uneducated must lose much, which the ancient method would bring to them.

Again, the church has been much weakened, by having no employment for zeal and piety, and authorized exertion, except in holy orders. God has given many a man gifts and power of speaking; a sound understand

ing, a clear strong way of expressing himself, and rough powerful eloquence, and this among men whom he does not call into his sacred ministry. Such could strengthen the church; they would gladly labour for her; and they often turn to schism, simply because there they can find occupation. I grant they have erred; the stream has overflowed its rightful banks; but then we ought to have cut the good channel. Such men have their honest calling; they ask not endowment or gift; they would make leisure, and rejoice in such labour: they need not abandon their ordinary livelihood, and they would strengthen those whom they now (unwittingly) seduce, and bind up the garment which now they rend. Were such, on due examination, licensed by the bishop, they would feel new strength in such authority; their province would be precisely defined by him who commissioned them; they would be bound by previous promise to the doctrines they taught, and the obedience they would yield to the bishop and the parochial minister and does any one say they would create sects? Nay, they can do that without a bishop's commission; they would be less likely to act so, when they possessed under him a really valid authority. They create no divisions in India, or Africa, why then in England? The Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts, under the direction of our bishops, has no dread of them, why should we? But they would lessen the authority of the parochial clergyman. How? We have no authority but what Christ's word gives us, and in reality we have very little. The spirit of the times is against us; the cry of priestcraft will be raised when we say, "Obey them that are over you in the Lord, and submit yourselves ;" and except on the consciences of the truly religious and intelligent, we have no authority to be jealous of. Nor can I see how lay help could lessen this or destroy it. Every