The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1874-11-21 00:00:00

TRE STOTTIMRIDGE 011SFRVE11.

FREE AND OPEN CHURCHES.
A public meeting was convened in the Corn
Exchange, on Monday evening last, for the puts
pose of hearing an address from the Rev. J. S.
Jsnes, vicar of Hook, Kingston-on-Thames, on the
" Evils of the Pew System in its exclusion ot the
majority of the people from their Parish and Dis-
trict Churches, and the remedy proposed." The
gentleman who was to have taken the chair, not
having put in an appearance, Major Walker con-
sented to preside; but, in doing so, he stated that
he did not commit himself to espousing any of the
views that were about to be enunciated. At pre-
sent, he was not sufficiently informed upon the
subject to have decided views upon it.
The Rev. J. S. Boldero, vicar of St. Mary's,
A uiblecote, read letters from gentlemen who could
not attend. Amongst these was one from Mr.
Allsop, who was one of the Vice-Presidents of the
•• London Free and Open Church Association," in
which that gentleman stated that he was unable
to be present at the meeting through illness; but
he wished the objects sought every success. Sir
Edmund Lechinere had promised to come, but un-
tortunately he was unable to be present at the
last moment. He had another letter from Mr. W.
King, in which that gentleman stated that he was
seriously unwell, and would have to be in London
to see his physician. He also stated that about 20
years since lie attended a church in London in ,
which the sittings were free. Formerly the pews
were rented by a very respectable class of people,
but as the city had enlarged those who attended
it gradually removed to other districts, and the
church was almost forsaken. In t his dilemma, the
minister threw the church open free, and the re-
sult was crowded congregations. The writer was
opinion that the same result would follow in
nearly every instance where pew rents were abo-
lished. Mr. Boldero also said that Mr. King had
told him that he had some experience of a similar
nature to that which he had just been reading,
with a church in Manchester some years ago. It
was in 0. rather fashionable neighhourhood, and it
was well attended by people who resided in good
houses, and paid considerable pew rents. In the
course of time, however, they withdrew from the
, district, and bye-and-bye people came who could
not pay the rents, and the congregation dwindled
' away. Eventually the church was thrown *open,
and voluntary collections were substituted for the
pew rents. The result was that the church was
well filled, and the receipts were more than they
had been in the days when there were pew rents.
A short time ago he (Mr. Boldero) was reading a
story relating to the early days of the Christian
Church. It stated that the Emperor Valerian
made application to St. Lawrence, who was then
the Patriarch, for the treasures of the church.
The latter showed him the poor, the lame, and the
blind, and told the Emperor those were the only
treasures which the church possessed. Ile was
afraid that if that question was put in the present
day, it would be found that the treasures of the
church would not be the poor. They were, in fact,
driven from the church by this abominable system
of pew runts. Ile was always opposed to the
system, but until lately had never seen his way
clear for doing away with it; but now he had suc-
ceeded in accomplishing it he would state that as
far as lie was concerned he would never touch a
single shilling of pew rents again—(cheers). If
lie was presented to a church where there were pew
rents he would not touch the money derived from
that source. It was opposed to the principles, and
he looked upon it as a matter of conscience to do
away with what he considered a very unseriptural
practice, to give the best seats to those who can
afford to pay for them. There should be no dis-
tinction between the rich and the poor in God's
house, where we were all, as sinners, equal. A
church which he had known as a child, although it
was an inconsiderable one, was well filled, because
the seats were free. But a few years ago people
came and built boxes for themselves, and by that
means they practically shnt out people who had
before been there. The fact was it drove away a
number of people who were before good church
people, and they went to the Baptist Chapel. He
would not detain them any longer, as Mr. Jones
was waiting to address them; but would conclude
by stating that as far as he was concerned that
movement had his most cordial support—(cheers).
The Rev. J. S. Jones then addressed those pre-
sent, and said there were one or two preliminary
remarks which it was his duty to wake before he
undertook the advocacy of the principles of free
and open churches, which the Association, of which
he was a member, hail adopted. One of the first
of these remarks was that they never went to any
parish or town where they were not invited by
clergymen of the neighbourhood. In the present
instance he came here at at the request of Mr.
Boldero. Another thing which he had to mention
was that that Association belonged to no party,
either religious or political. Sometimes an im-
pression seemed to obtain that they were a part of
some machinery having political objects in view;
but this was not the case. They were simply
churchmen, having broad views, who were anxious
to extend the sphere of the church's usefulness to
the widest possible limit. Broad churchmen did
not do so much as they ought to do considering
what their principles should be. For his own part
he had not known the clergyman long whose re-
marks they had just heard, and did not know what
his views might be on other topics; but he could
assure them that no member of their association
would come to Stourbridge to help any party as •
party. It was only for the church's good,
independent of any party opinions, for which he
(the speaker) would raise a finger. They did not
come in any worldly spirit, still less in any dicta.
tonal spirit of offering instruction to those whodid
not feel inclined to act upon it. The only wished
in a truly christiati spirit to commend to them
what they believed was necessary for the future
good of the church. Having cleared the way, lie
would now lay down the principles which they de-
sired to commend to their brother churchmen.
Their principle was that in a national church—and
especially:in a christian church—under any eircum-
stances that it was in the essence of a fair arrange.
of worship that the churches should be free and
open to all parishioners alike, without any diatine:
tion of rank. They believed it was in accordance
with scripture that the church should be free and
open to all without any distinction as to the posi-
tion or circumstances of those who came to wor-
ship in them They were prepared to prove his-
torically that there were no pews in churches, and
that the evil had gradually extended itself until it
had almost destroyed the spiritual life of the
Church of England; and the only remedy was a
free and open church,and the substitution of free-
will offerings in place of the tax now levied in the
shape of pew rent. The exercise of mutual cour-
tesy and goodwill would then be substituted for
an invidious distinction founded upon rank or
worldly wealth. The whole tenour of scripture
tended to this that as sinners we were all equal,
and that the opportunity of using this means of
salvation should be offered to all, and that ail dis-
tinctions were out of placein the sight of God. Let
them look at the passages in which our Blessed
Lord himself condemns those who occupied the
chief seats in the synagogues, and was it not he
who laid down this doctrine for the people who
assembled in his places of worship, that the dis-
tinctions which prevailed outside should be done
away with within. He asked whether it was not
reasonable to say that any system of worship that
deliberately pandered to that selfish spirit which
would keep all the best places for itself must have
an injurious effect. St. James said distinctly, al-
though in those days there were no pew rents,
there aversser was permitted to show persona into
church, and he said that if there came into the
ten- pie a man with a gold ring and good apparel,
and there also came in a man with common ra intent
the rich man was shown into the best place. And
the pew system was the development of that
psinciple by which the warmest and snuggest
corners werg reserved for the rich, and the bleak,
cold uncoinTortable places for the poor. And,
although it might be said that they did not dis-
tinetly tsk for that, ho (the speaker) asked if it
would be possible, by any ingenuity of arrange-
ment, to contrive a plan which more distinctly said
so in practice than many of our Christian churches
did. That was the spirit of distinction based upon
worldly rank. Ile believed if they were to search
the law of scripture they should find a condemna-
tion of that self-seeking spirit which looks for
warm, comfortable places, to the exclusion of
others. If they had not enough for all, the fair
thing was not to give all to some; but to give to
all as far as it would go. If they had a place
which was a connnon ground, such as a park, or
public property such as a Town Bailor a Museum,
surely it would not be permitted fora moment that
any persons should claim the sole right of driving
down one side of the road, or to have certain
places kept for them. Surely such a proposition
as that would not be listened to fora moment ; and
he believed that if they were to build a church
for the first time in the present day they would
not be allowed to do what was now done in the
Church of England. It was custom which rendered
it tolerable. Seats were not reserved for people at
such meetings as that which he WWI addressing.
People who arrived first took whichever seats they
chose, and places were arranged On the principles
of mutual courtesy and good-will. Where WU the
disadvantage of such an arrangement. The
church was the only place where • monopoly of
that kind was thought of. There was a room in
the British Museum which would accommodate
Stei people, which was generally resorted by
students and men connected with literature, but
if it were ordered that no one but those should be
allowed to use it there would such an outcry raised
as would not allow it to endure for a week. He
believed that the idea of a free church was roma.

able as well as scriptural. Those who had had
experience of a free church found the closed pews
an abominable nuisance. He knew .the case of a
little girl who had never been in any but a free
church, until she went to visit some friends in the
country, who took her to a church in which were
the old-fashioned pews. When she returned home
she complained of the strange ways they had in
that church. She said "They took nie into a cup-
board and put use on a shelf"—laughter). Pie
submitted that besides being reasonable, it was
practicable and necessary. People said it was all
very well in theory, but it was not worth making
' a fuss about. The Duke of Wellington used to
say that England could not have a little war; and
he (the speaker) contended that the church could
not have a little question, becluise every question
affecting it becomes important. Everything that
helped or hindered it was a question affecting the
nation, as the church was a national institution.
This reform was necessary because of the times in
which we live; times which would not tolerate the
unlimited progress of monopoly; times in which
the claims of all were being more generally recog-
nized. There was little distinction between classes
at the present day, and it was almost a hopeless
task to make distinctions between them as they were
so multiplied and diverse. It was not only the
poor that were injured by the existing system.
Besides that large class which could not be called
poor and yet could not be called rich there were
large numbers of people whose whose avocations
did not enable them to live always in the same I
place. In this class he would particularise corn. ,
mercial travellers, from many of whom he had heard
great complaints. There was also another sort of
people. At the present day there was a great
deal of speculation, and a great deal of thought on
on religious subjects, Which did not always find
itself landed in orthodox belief. How could it be
thought to ask these people, however much their
views might be regretted, to adopt themselves to
one opinion by fixing them to one place by paying
for seats. It was necessary for the times because
of the functions of the Church. The National
Church of any country was a national institution
for religious instruction for the whole of the com-
munity. The Church could only stand at a na-
tional institution by doing national work. There
had been in that neighbourhood what was called a
mission. By universal consent all churches so far
as he knew were free and open during the mission
week, because it was felt to be absurd to do the
work in any other way. He regarded this as a
confirmation that the whole thing waswrong. He
believed that the only remedy against the evils
that were growing up and against which the Church
had to contend was the thorough openness and
heartiness preserved in the Church itself.
The Rev. H. Sherrard moved that a vote of cor-
dial thanks be accorded to the Rev. J. S. Jones,
for his very clear, instructive, and chrietian-like
address upon the subject of "free and open
Churches." In a meeting like that each speaker
was only responsible for what he might say him-
self. The question which had been broached for-
ward that evening was a great question, and one
that ought to be ventilated, and he was glad it had
been so well and temperately introduced to them
as it had by Mr. Jones. There were two points of
view in which they might regard that great ques-
tion---one was the religious point of view and the
other the national, and if they took the religious
point of view there could beim question whatever
that all distinctions which were used outside ought
tobe dropped when they entered the House of God
where all must meet as subjects of the Great Crea-
tor on the common ground of being sinners in the
sight of God whose mercy they came to suppli-
cate ; and he could assure them that anyone who
did any thing to keep up distinctions in the House
of God was acting contrary to the spirit of that
gospel in which we all believed. It not only had
an influence upon persons who by such arrange-
ments felt themselves aggrieved through being
placed in an inferior position in the House of God
but even for those who held the privileged positions
it had a hurtful influence upon them. In the case
of many of the pew-holders, however, there was
so much christian spirit that it preserved them
from being injured through it ; but in many cases
it tended to foster a spirit of pride and exclusive-
ness. Regarding it as a religious question simply,
there should be no distinction kept up in the
House of God between one class and another. He
though it possible that many an earnest person
might be kept from the House of God by those
distinctions. And let them suppose such an one
going into a church where the best places were
kept for a certain class to the exclusion of others,
would he not be likely to go away with a very poor
opinion of religion. Those things ought to lead
all of them to look more upon that question. He
had witnessed with pain at times some stranger
coining into church, and some of the pew-holds rs
looking askance at him, and treating him with
perfect indifference, although the pews were not
full. There was then the national aspect of the
question- . Pew rents were entirely a modern in.
in the Church of Christ. For centuries such a
thing as a pew rented in a church was unknown.
But, in considering this question he must ask them
to look at two different classes of churches. The
first of these were our old parish churches; and he
considered that the very first timeone of the pews
in those was appropriated it was a great and
grievous wrong done to the people of this country
—(applause). And he had not the slightest hesi-
tation in saying that the people ought to come
forward and claim that a common right should be
given to every parishioner. It was plain to his
mind that all the parish churches of this land
should be claimed by the people of this country.
There was another class of churches which had
grown up in modern times. There had been a
great deal of religious earnestness about the coun-
try, and this had led to the building of a great
number of new churches, which were called dis-
trict churches. He must say that when they
came to the question of pew rents as affecting
them he did not feel quite prepared to go with
Mr. Boldero, and say the " abominable system of
pew rents," or he should have to say with him that
he would never touch a farthing of it. But those
pew rents had multiplied those churches, and had
done good service to the church at large; though
when the time came that they could see their way
clear to supporting the ministers without pew
rents he should be very glad to dispense with them.
They did not totally condemn them, but if they
could get abetter system it would be (heeirable. There
were evils connected with pew rents. He (the
speaker) had suffered from pew rents, and in some
instances a threat had been held over his head by
the all powerful pew-holder. But they hail done
good in times past, and many of the pew-holders
were better than the system. Perhaps some one
would ask why he did not give up pew-rents- A
great preacher had once contracted the habit of
smoking through onstantly visiting a literary
friend of his who was strongly addicted to the
habit. A gentleman of his acquaintance wrote a
pamphlet against smoking, and then took him to !
disk as to why he did not give up the habit. After
listening to him for some time the preacher said
I cannot answer your arguments; and I cannot
give up smoking." He (Mr.lSherrard) was in that
predicament, Ile could not answer their argu-
ments, and he did not feel that he could give up
the pew-rents. He was glad to hear Mr. Jones
say that it should be done with the good-will of the
minister and the people, and he hoped the day was
coming when in this church of ours which claimed
to be the national church there would be free sit-
tings for all parishioners and for all who came to
worship, without distinction.
Major Walker seconded the proposition, and said
he did it most heartily, for he had listened with
very great pleasure to the excellent address deli-
vered:by Mr. Jones. Ile was perfectly clear that
the only proper course to be pursued would be to
declare all the churches free and open, but there
were the difficulties in the way of doing this
which had been spoken- of by Mr. Sheimrd. The
old parish churches ought to be declared open at
once. He should be very glad to see that come to
pass. Bust it would be a very hard case for the
clergymen in some districts for their churches to
be declared free aud open. In large towns there
would be a !greater number of people who would
give so liberally that it would compensate the
minister for the loss he might have sustained. He
spoke with the experience of a churchwarden of
many years' standing that if tiny were to doaway
with them'at present at St. Thomas's, the amount
of the collections would not, to use a homely
phrase, be sufficient to keep body and soul together.
The system had been partially tried in St.
Thomas's Church, in this town. One half of that
church was declared free, He had been one of the
collectors in all parts of the church. and he was
sorry to see how very little—and he slid not make
this remark in any invidious spirit—had been con-
tributed by those who frequented the free seats.
Be conaidered that Mr. Sherrard had a great deal
on his side in the argument which he used. It
would be perfectly impossible for him to go on
without pew rents, unless the persons who used the
church were liberal in their contributions—(ap-
planae).

The'proposition was then put to the meeting
and carried, amid applause.
The Rev. J. S. Jones havist signified his willing-
ness to answer any question that might be put to
him,

Mx. J. Cooper, draper, of this town, asked if it
would be competent for a minister to abolish pew
rents in his church, without having first obtained
the consent of the patron and the bishop of the
diocese?

The rev. gentleman replied, that although he
never heard of a legal decision having been given
in such a matter, still he thought he was justified
from what he knew in giving an answer in the

affirmative. Inasmuch as they would often find
that a lawyer who studied theology would often be
able to speak on a point affecting a relig,ions dogma
with as much perspicuity and certainty as a elm gy-
man, so it often happened that when one of the
latter had studied the law he was able to give as
good an opinion upon a legal point as a lawyer.
He had very carefully studied the law bearing
upon this question. The acts which sanctioned
pew rents, were known amongst the legal profes-
sion as "enabling acts," that was arts which en-
abled ministers to levy pew rents, but did not com-
pel them to do so. He, therefore, was of opinion
, that a minister could drop the pew rents, without
having first &damned the consent of the bishop and
patron, and then if he wished to return to the old
practice, these acts would enable him to do so.
That was the law upon the point as he understood
it.
A vote of thanks to Major Walker, terminated
the proceedings.