Part 1

Produced by David Widger

CHURCH REFORM:

THE ONLY MEANS TO THAT END, STATED IN A LETTER TO Sir ROBERT PEEL, Bart. FIRST LORD OF THE TREASURY, &c.

By Richard Carlile.

TO WHICH IS PREFACED A CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE BISHOP OF LONDON ON THE SAME SUBJECT.

London:

PRINTED & PUBLISHED. By R. CARLILE, 62 FLEET STREET.

PREFACE.

CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE BISHOP OF LONDON, IN 1833, ON THE SUBJECT OF A REFORM IN THE CHURCH.

"To the Right Reverend Father in God, the Lord Bishop of London.

"62, Fleet Street, November 18,1833.

"My Lord,

"I have long and deliberately thought, that the state of the Country, the state of the Church, and the state of the Public Mind in relation to the Church, calls upon me to offer myself for an interview with your Lordship, as my Diocesan, that your Lordship may hear from me what I have to advance against the present state and condition of the Church, and what I have to propose as an immediately necessary and proper Reform.

"I offer to wait on your Lordship, with your Lordship's consent; and promise, that my conversation shall be altogether courteous and reasonable.

"I am one of your Lordship's scattered sheep, wishing for the fold of a good shepherd,--(which is Christ Jesus),--

"RICHARD CARLILE."

"P. S.--I may add, my Lord Bishop, that I am altogether a Christian; save the mark at which superstition has been planted upon Christianity."

*****

"Fulham, November 20,1833.

"Sir,

"I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter, in which you propose an interview with me, for the purpose of making known to me your opinions respecting the present state of the Church.

"I beg to say, that I shall be ready to receive, and to give all due consideration to any communication which you may think proper to make me in writing; as being, on many accounts, a more convenient method than that of personal conference.

"I remain, Sir,

"Your obedient Servant,

"C. J. LONDON."

*****

"To the Right Reverend Father in God, the Lord Bishop of London.

"62, Fleet Street, November 24,1833.

"My Lord Bishop,

"In answer to my proposal to meet your Lordship in conversation, on the state of the Country, the state of the Church, and the state of the Public Mind with relation to the Church, your Lordship has encouraged me to write what I have to say, and has promised to receive it and to give it due consideration. I write as early as my circumstances have afforded me the necessary leisure and composure of mind.

"The first point to which I beg leave to call your Lordship's attention is--that there is a very numerous degree of dissent from the Established Church among the people of this country.

"The second point is, that this spirit of dissent has led to a very extended opposition to the support of the Church in its fiscal claims.

"The third point is, that there is a preparation of a public mind going forward for the putting of the present Established Church on the same footing as the present Establishments of the Dissenters--the footing of voluntary rather than legal support; and that the preparation of this state of mind is accelerated by the embarrassed state of the country.

"The evidence of these three points in prospect is, that the present state of the Church will be entirely overthrown in the course of two or three Sessions of Parliament.

"On the principle of dissent from the Established Church, I have to observe, that it is desirable there should be no dissent; but then the Church should be invulnerable. There can be no popular dissent from any Institution that can be defended as good and best; and though I am instructed to allow that the general body of dissenters from the Church have dissented on very frivolous, even on indefensible grounds, (inasmuch as the Dissenters have not corrected in themselves the errors of the Church), there still remains the proof that where the Church has been assailed or dissented from, it has not been in a condition to defend and justify itself.

"This incapability of the Church to defend and justify itself, where assailed, must have arisen from a defective state of its doctrine and discipline.

"This doctrine and discipline is founded upon the literal reading of the Sacred Scriptures, or the books of the Old and New Testament.

"I impugn the literal as an erroneous reading: it claims to be local and temporal history, and is not. Not one of its apparent historical subjects can be verified. Every one of them can be falsified, upon the principle that other things were being done at the time, and that other people dwelt in the places; and that nothing of contemporary character, purporting to be history, has corroborated the historical claims of the Old and New Testament.

"It is said of the writings of the Old and New Testament, that they are allegorical, and that they contain the moral of human salvation from evil. Under this view, they may be true, and may be important as a matter of instruction. I so believe them to be true, and to be important as a matter of instruction; but as your Lordship may put me on the task of mentioning some particular facts and grounds on which I impugn the literal reading of the Sacred Scriptures, and may properly suggest that it is necessary this ground should be first cleared before we try them on the other ground, I submit, as two well-weighed and conclusive propositions:--

"1st. That the person of Jesus Christ, or the name, is not in mention by any author of the first century, if the passage in Josephus be excepted as an interpolation; and that this defect in the evidence is fatal to the historical claim.

"2nd. That the people called Jews, or Israelites, neither formed colony nor nation in that part of the earth which is now called Judea, or Holy Land, before the time of Alexander of Macedon; consequently all that is said of their dwelling in and going out of Egypt, their sojourn in the Wilderness, their warfare with the Canaanites and Philistines, their occupation of that country, their subsequent conquest, captivity, and restoration, is entirely fiction or allegory.

"I read it as political and moral instruction veiled in allegory \ and as it is to be desired, that, in the removal of a system, all its defects be made apparent, so it becomes a desideratum, that we account for the origin of the sects named Jews and Christians.

"This may be done in two ways---one, that they were public philosophical sects; the other, that they were degrees of order in the ancient mysteries.

"The moral of the allegory belonging to each is throughout the same, and is an encouragement to the resistance and overthrow of the tyranny of man, when it appears in the open authority of a King, or in the covert authority of a Priest; and the preparing of a people to do this, and the doing it, is precisely what is meant by human salvation,--which is a sure and certain salvation from earthly evils.

"The absence of a proof of personal identity in the characters sketched in the Old and New Testament, is the presence of proof (if utility of any kind there be in the form of the allegory), that the persons mentioned are like what all the gods and goddesses of ancient religion were--personifications of principles, either physical or moral, or both.

"In so receiving the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, I find them pregnant with the most important political and moral instruction. In receiving them according to the literal or historical reading, I find difficulties insuperable, and such as justify all that Thomas Paine or any other straightforward critic has advanced on the subject, while the moral and the allegory were concealed from their view.

"The point at which this personification of principles begins, is the point at which superstition begins; for though knowledge may justify the poetic licence taken with language, ignorance mistakes and evil design misrepresents, until the personification is extensively dwelt on as a reality.

"Here I trace the fundamental errors of the present doctrine and discipline of the Established Church; the errors upon which dissent has progressed, upon which an outcry of infidelity has been raised, but upon which the Church could not defend itself and maintain its position.

"My remedy for the present difficulties, and my proposition \ for a Reform in the Church is, that no difficulties, mysteries, or superstition be allowed to remain attached to its doctrines and discipline; that the allegory of the Sacred Scriptures be avowed, the personifications taught upon their principles as known principles of nature, and not as personified incomprehensibilities; that the Church, in short, be made a school for the people, than which, if it originally meant any good thing, could mean no other thing, where from time to time all acquired or acquirable knowledge should be taught. On this ground, the utility of the Institution is evident, the benefit to the people certain, the idea of dissent inadmissible.

"In this first letter, I have thought it necessary only to give your Lordship the leading points of objection to the present doctrine and discipline of the Church. With details in proof, I can proceed to a voluminous length; and I now offer myself to submit to the catechism of your Lordship, or to that of any person whom your Lordship shall appoint to see me, with the distinct promise, that I will not evade the giving of a direct answer to any distinct and intelligible question that can be put to me upon any part of this important subject.

"It may not be improper that I now declare to your Lordship, that, after having worn out the spirit of persecution by a large amount of personal and pecuniary suffering, I have never been acting upon any other motive than a love of truth, and honesty, and public good; that it is under such a motive, and no other mixed motive, that I have now presented myself to your Lordship, viewing your Lordship as a public functionary that has inherited and not created the error of which I complain; and hoping that I shall be met with the disposition of a fair investigation, when so much good is at this moment the promised consequence,

"I am, My Lord,

"Your Lordship's most obedient humble servant,

"RICHARD CARLILE."

LETTER TO SIR ROBERT PEEL

Sir,

I write as a politician to a politician, with oblivion of the past, without any profession of respect for the present, waiting and watching your future.

I am stimulated to address you, and the country through your name, on reading your Address to the Electors of Tamworth, after taking the offices of First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The portion of your Address which I select as my subject, is that relating to the Church--the first of all political subjects. Not to understand how to deal with this, is to be utterly deficient in every other political branch. Not to reform this, is to reform nothing. State ever did, and ever will, depend upon the Church.

As far as your individual promise is sufficient, it is, that Church Rates shall be abolished. This is so far good. It has been a disgrace to all parties concerned, and an injury to every housekeeper, that a Church Rate has existed. Such a rate has existed only because of the dishonest application of that Church Property which was the legitimate supply for all Church Buildings and repairs. And should the rate be continued under any other form of taxation, and not supplied from existing Church Property, an injury and an injustice will still be inflicted upon the people.

You seem willing to abate the religious ceremony of marriage, so far as to allow each couple to let it be to its liking. Pray go a step farther, and let the law cease to trammel that civil contract with religious ceremony, while each couple will be at liberty of its own accord to go through whatever religious ceremony it may think proper. And while on this subject, I pray you to give, or seek for the poor, justice in facile divorce. The mystery of marriage is too sacred for constraint. It should never be other than a spirit of pure and mutual liberty and consent, subject to some legal recognition for the care of offspring. Much of the morals of society must depend on the freedom of marriage and facility of divorce. We have not hitherto been right on this subject. That can be no good tie which opposes the will of an individual in so sacred and delicate an affair as that of marriage. The beginning, middle, and end of marriage should be the love of affection and friendship. Marriage should cease when affection between the parties has ceased. It may be truly added, that marriage has morally ceased, when affection has ceased. Then the legal tie becomes an abomination, a source of vice and wrong; and, in nine cases out of ten, the religious ceremony is treated as a burlesque, save the idea, that it is a fashionable distinction to have observed it as the chief criterion of legal marriage.

I entirely agree with you, that Church Property should not be alienated from strictly ecclesiastical purposes. I have changed my view, and see more than formerly on this head.

For the same reason, I entirely disagree with you on any commutation of tithes. Let the original application be restored, and no one will find fault but he who loses by that just principle, that first and best of Church Property and most important of popular rights.

The point, in your address, on which my letter is to be based, is the following paragraph:--

"With regard to alterations in the laws which govern our ecclesiastical establishment, I have had no recent opportunity of giving that grave consideration to a subject of the deepest interest, which could alone justify me in making any public declaration of opinion. It is a subject which must undergo the fullest deliberation, and into that deliberation the Government will enter with the sincerest desire to remove every abuse that can impair the efficiency of the Establishment, extend the sphere of its usefulness, and to strengthen and confirm its just claims upon the respect and affections of the people."

This is just what I wanted you to say. It is honest, if you will but act up to it. This is the sort of Church Reform that I propose. Here we have from you, as the Chief Minister, a promise that your Administration will enter into the fullest deliberation, with the sincerest desire to remove every abuse that can impair the efficiency of the Church Establishment, extend the sphere of its usefulness, and strengthen and confirm its just claims upon the respect and affections of the people. Had I been called to your situation, I could not have promised more; but I should have acted up to that promise, and I hope you will so act. In the performance of that promise, everlasting fame will be yours. So act--and greater than the name of Lycurgus or Solon--greater than that of Cicero, Constantine, or Napoleon--greater than the name of any past man will be that of Robert Peel. If the Duke of Wellington join you in this sentiment, and goes manly and honestly forward to its accomplishment, his, too, will be an imperishable name. This would wreathe him an evergreen chaplet, that would survive the memory of all his physical victories! This is the great moral victory to be obtained before any society can settle down into peace, welfare, and happiness:--_the best use that can be made of the Church_. It is a subject of the deepest interest; it requires grave consideration; I pray that it may have that consideration. I pray that I may be heard by a Commission, in grave consideration of that subject of the deepest interest, before any legislative change be entered upon. I put myself forward in this letter. Many will be the schemes proposed to your consideration: let mine be one, and then select and improve the best.

The first consideration is--What is now the Church? What are its defects? What the cause of that dissent, which has made a revision necessary?

The second consideration will be--What ought the Church to be, so as to leave no ground and reason of dissent? To some minds, the fickleness and fallibility of human nature will appear as an insurmountable obstacle to the construction of such a Church. I see farther and will propose in order.

I flatter myself that I am writing this letter with very proper feelings toward all institutions and all persons. I suspend, _pro tem_., all quarrels that I have with all men, to assist you in this common good, in which you deserve and will have, in the ratio of their goodness, the assistance of all good men. If I can sink the past in oblivion for common good, who should say he cannot? To the altar and shrine of that Reformed Church, which you contemplate, I have sacrificed property much--all I had, and years of liberty many. I am still worshipping, still so sacrificing, both property and personal liberty, and will so continue to the end. I say it not boastfully; but in comparative claim to attention, and in encouragement and example of union to assist you in the performance of your present promise.

Let me be permitted to say, too, that the Church is a subject which I have studied in its origin, its history, its first principle, all its dissent or variation from that first principle, down to its present standing. I have so studied it, that I cannot now find author or preacher who can present me any thing new as to its general merits, past or present. This is the chief ground on which I solicit your and the public attention to my view of this subject of Church Reform. I presume to know what the Church is, and what it ought to be.

It may be taken as a point to be yielded by all parties, that the desire with regard to the Law Established Church is, the removal of all ground of dissent, so as not to leave it a mere sectarian Church, which any mere abatement of existing dissenting objections will do. No Dissenter can complain, if the ground of his dissent be removed from the Church. And if there be no ground of future dissent left, there can be no future complaint, no new dissension arising. Without the absence of the possibility of dissent, there can be no just holding and application of a public and common property for the business of the Church. With that absence, the property is justly held and applied. Any law that recognizes and tolerates the Dissenter, recognizes and tolerates the justness of his dissent, and calls for the primary justice of removing the ground of dissent. No man can reasonably say, _let us not be of one Church_; but every man can reasonably say, _let the Church be purified of its errors_; and while any man can show an error, it is his duty to call for the purification, and the duty of authorities to attend to his call and to purify. A permanent Church then must be an improving, self-purifying Church, and continue a true picture of the best state of the human mind, meeting every well-founded and majority-decided call upon its utility.

Any idea of keeping up a Law Established Church with public property, surrounded by Dissenting Churches, without a public property, can enter the head of no man who understands the subject. There can be no peace or final settlement under such an arrangement. The effect to be accomplished is, not to break up the Church Property; but to break up the Dissenters from the Church. This will startle the present state of mind and feeling. I propose no abridgement of equal liberty. Is not this the grand _desideratum?_ Can it be accomplished?--I think it can, and so proceed to unfold the two-fold consideration.

First.--What is now the Church? What are its defects? What the cause of that dissent which has made a revision necessary?

This, in reality, is but one question, with a three-fold expression.

The Church is now the Theatre of the Drama of the Books of Common Prayer, the Thirty-nine Articles, and the Old and New Testament; to which is generally added a sermonic epilogue or exhortation, commonly called a Sermon.

Be not offended at my use of the word _Theatre_ here: no other would substitute. Its root is the Greek [------], God, and signified originally, the house, place or stage, where the Drama of Theism or attributes of Deity were exhibited. The word is now much distorted from its root, in being made to describe the place of modern dramatic performances.

Nor must the word _Drama_ be objected to; because the ceremony of the Church was originally so constructed, so meant, and so practised, as I will prove in the course of this letter.

Even the word _Tragedy_ has its root in the Greek word [------], a goat, and signifies, in the dramatic exhibition of Theism, the death of the year, under the form of a personification, in the twelfth or zodiacal month of the goat. So that the death sorrowed for and lamented, was, dramatically, the apparent death of the sun, the death of the year, in the sign or month of the goat; and on St. Thomas's day, as we read in the Prophet Ezekiel, chap. viii. v. 14--"_and behold there sat women weeping for Tammuz;_" and v. 16--"_about five and twenty men, with their backs toward the temple of the Lord, and their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun toward the east_," which is no other than a representation of the performance of the tragedy, in which the performers had lost the moral of the Lord's Temple: precisely the present state and condition of the Church. All ancient mythology is in harmony with this conclusion; and the Christian tragedy is only a continued version, uniting the general drama of human morals with the annual tragedy of solar physics, and forming a two-fold or two-keyed allegory or mystery, physical and moral, as it was known even in the Celtic or Druid Church. Christianity was never new, or young, in this country, by existing records.

There are not many persons in this secret, perhaps, not even you, the first Minister of the country; so it will be deemed too abstruse and mystical on which to find a warrant for legislation or change of law: but I strenuously maintain, that such was the origin of the Christian Church, and such is now its generally lost meaning. The proof of the solar part of the allegory is not so much to my present purpose as the proof of the general drama of human morals being the basis of the present mystery of the Christian Church.

To stay a growing difficulty, we must go to the root:--it will grow again, if we do not go to the root. It will be so with the present Church, and all attempts to reform it.

In plainer language, then, I will describe the existing Church, as having, in its ceremonies and business, the mystery of the Christian Religion, without its revelation; that all the defects and all the grounds of dissent from it are the absence of the revelation, or want of knowing the meaning of the mystery. Whatever are called its doctrines, are all mysterious; its discipline is equally mysterious, and by its present ministers, unaccountable. Dissenters have dissented without being able to assign a reason for their dissent, and have set up for themselves something equally mysterious and unaccountable; and so the whole principle and practice of Religion in the country is in confusion and conflict; and no measure can reconcile the dissentients, short of developing the first principles of the Church and the Christian Religion, the one language, the one course of reason, the one ground of human welfare, the one system of morals, which is now buried in a Babel of confused tongues, doctrines, idol-houses, and superstitious ceremonies.

The ground, then, on which I proceed, is, that TO REFORM THE CHURCH, THE DISSENTERS MUST BE ANNIHILATED.