Morning journal and courier., 1885-10-23

churches should be free and open to all per
 decent and orderly behavior, without the ex-
 action of any rental or entrance fee. There
 can be no doubt that such was originally the
 universal custom throughout christendom.
 Indeed. until the fourteenth century at the
 earliest, there were no fixed or perma-
 nent seats in churches, except occasion
 ally stone benches around the north
 south and west walls, which were almost as
 often outside the church as inside and were
 manifestly intended for resting places fol
 the people before service began. There is
 one church in England where such benches
 were also placed around each pillar. The
 first seats introduced for use in churches were
 in the chancel and for the clergy and choist
 CTS, and at first these were only in the col
 leges and religious seminaries when long and
 frequent services were held. From the
 feudal character of society in those days il
 soon happened that kings and 8 few of the
 greater personages were accommodated with
 seats in the choir. The rule was that stand
 ing room or kneeling room was free to all
 Mats were sometimes provided for sitting or
 kneeling upon and not irfrequently kneeline
 cushions or stools.
 The earlier appropriations of particular
 spaces in church by individuals probably
 occurred in England when it sometimes hap
 pened that the founder of church or one who
 added a chapel or aisle to an old church re-
 tained part of it for the use of himself and
 his family which descended to his heirs, and
 ,;a1, ha t1,axy h17Ti iDd fhnir
 Such cases, however, were very different
 from the sale or letting of pews.
 In concluding the speaker said: The free
 church system has the sanction of divine
 command, principle, antiquity and catholic
 practice, and in fair degree of financial suc-
 cess. The renting of pews has the sanction
 of about two centures of partial use in Great
 Britain and America, and of about the same
 degree of financial success and the justifca-
 tion of supposed, if not actual necessity.
 Whether, therefore, all the churches of our
 communion in this land are ultimately to
 become free or not, it must be conceded that free churches are practicable and advisable,
 that the system is a permanent one in our church and country, and I do not believe it a rash prediction that it is the system of rented and appropriated pews which must make out a reason for existence in the not very distant future.
 The second paper was by R. Fulton Cut ting, Esq.,, of New York. He said: The free church theory has been so long and so thor oughly discussed that I shall merely consider several features of it's relation to society. We have seen the church in the last decade stand where she has not fairly stood for many 8 century among the people. She has taken off her gloves and delved with naked hands where the soil was most unpromising and the labor hardest. The writer then gave very full and well-written argument in behalf of tba fraa oh md Uyaa frnnnonf1v greeted with applause.
 There were only two papers on the subject and both were on the same side of the ques- tion.
 Causten Brown, Esq, of New York, was the first speaker. He also advocated the free church system. He did not believe it best to agitate the question of free pews in churches that had become accustomed to the rental system. If one system was right and the other wrong then they were bound to cling to one and reject the other. Which of the two systems was best calculated to do the greatest amount of work to be done should first be considered. That is which would best serve the cause of religion. With us the progress of religion means the progress of sound morality, and we are bound to see to it that we maintain no sys- tenn that obstructs the progress of religion. Shall we say that we will hinder the progress of religion but littles Whatever flinders man to free access to religion should be condemned We must take pew churches as we find them, big and large. And what do we see? We see the poor practically exclud- ed. Some say we provide seats for the poor. Now the poor will not come to church where seats are assigned to them. Poverty and pride naturally go together. I protest against providing churches for the poor, for they will as a matter of course be poor churches I do not believe in one fo, l,o, oI c., ,;ol think the system of free churches will work practically. The common idea is that a free church means church where offerings of the people are 0 substitute for pew rentals. This is not true. The offerings received in free church are received for public charity which is in tended to give the gospel free to everyone who wants it. Every man who puts in his five cents is contributing to that charity just IS well as he who puts in his live dollars or i've hundred dollars. Some complain about ,he continual begging in free churches; give, give, give. Well, why nota It is g public ,harity as much as is an hospital and why Will it not tend to make the church popular3 believe it will.
 Rev. John Cotton Brooks was the next speaker. In his opening remarks he said: recognize that the church has great work 70 do among the poor of the parish. It has 5he rich to deal with as well, and finally it las to deal with the whole world at large. We cannot consider the work of the parish simply in it's work for the poor. When we outside of the church we are old that it is the exclusive less. I say no. What is it that occupies the attention of the pewed churches this winter if it is not the care for he poor. It is not fair to compare the poor of to-day with those of twenty yerrs ago when the foreign population was less. things to attract the people to. the seaside and other places on Sunday, that the poor are kept away from the churches. No, my brethren, there is something beside the pew sd system that keeps the poor away from the churches to-day. Leave the pews just as they are, but change the minds of the people who occupy them so that they will open their doors to those who desire to enter We believe it the best system that exists to- lay for paying church expenses to rent he pews. The moment you begin to give for which no equivalent is rend- cred, you are appealing to the selfshness of he poor and they are lowered by what they receive.
 Francis Wells of Philadelphia, was the next speaker. He said: Whoever will look oyer the history of the past will find it very 1ard to say.
 We are travelling home to God,
 In the way our fathers trod.
 love to deal with things as they are and ,all things by their right name. I may per lapg say something tonight that will be un- popular; but as sn editor, think I may say hat what I do say will 'bs absolutely true Laughter. I turn and look back over the rack of my own life and I can see the out inc of the saintly Bishop White. A little urther and see Mead with his sterling simplicity. I can also ae6 Rliieto and Hop zins and other noble men These men lived n time of the church when simplicity marked all the proceedings of the church. I will not refer to the strange doctrines that las crept into the pulpit. What wish to emphasize is this. That one type that marks he church to-day, is an intense sentimental sun that distinguishes the church of to-day rom that Of yesterday. ''The mills of the ,ods grind slowly. '''- Fhs movement of this jentimentalism is too rapid to escape the conviction that it is of man more han of God. Men save their souls nowa- lays not so much by repentance and faith in he Lord Jesus Christ as by forms and cere- monies. Our girdles and rosaries; our chan I els and furnishings, our pastuFings and ,asturings and as the honored bishop of New York has said our acrobatic performances which come from sentimentalism, (great aughter). Now here comes the connection. t seems to me that this talk about the free hureh system comes from this same senti- | oantalisra If it did not cripple the work of