But we cannot close our own remarks without observing, that in the case of some churches there are peculiar circumstances which seem to plead for their better treatment, and which certainly increase the moral obligation to sustain them in their integrity and beauty. For instance, the village church of Y-- is remarkable on many accounts; not the least for having on its sedilia the marks of the swords of the Roundheads, who desecrated it with their beastly profaneness before the wicked field of Naseby: but, for our present purpose, it is yet more remarkable for the monument of a former rector of the place, richly decorated with panelling without, and with a canopy and other ornaments within; for the whole of a compartment of the north chancel wall was taken down, and rebuilt in a far more elaborate way to receive the tomb.* But this good man had not devoted all his wealth to his own silent tomb. He left the means of repairing, beautifying, and sustaining the church; and to this day (for we believe they are not yet destroyed) the open benches have some of them panels identical in design with those at the back of his tomb; and are thus marked, as certainly as by dates and inscriptions, as the posthumous gift of the recumbent priest. The funds thus piously devoted have been diverted from their purpose; and the church is, in consequence, even in a technical sense, dilapidated." But a more active destruction is impending. Will not the very stones cry out from the wall, when the open benches are removed to make way for closed deal boxes? 66 The progress of mere decay is not very rapid; there will therefore be for some time longer, in the church of S——, near that last mentioned, a series of painted windows such as few village churches, or even town minsters, can boast. The servants in the adjoining mansion, collecting such weapons as they could, drove off the herd of swine (the same, probably, who had whetted their swords in the chancel at Y-) who would have destroyed the gorgeous imagery. Did not these true-hearted men add to the moral obligation resting on the lords of that mansion for ever, to maintain the church which they had guarded from spoliation? Is not the memory of a warm-hearted and noble deed slighted, when that which was once defended with such zeal is not now guarded from the gentle assaults of time and accident? Is not the past defrauded of a portion of its honour, while the present is stripped of its seemly adornment, inherited with such reminiscences attached? We shall henceforth take the moral obligation to maintain churches in their original beauty, and to restore them appropriately as well as substantially, as proved. Still there may be How different the way, since so common, of blocking up a window, and disfiguring instead of enriching a whole bay of an aisle or chancel with some huge mantel-piece or mass of heathen mummery! 148 The Moral Obligation to Restore Churches appropriately. practical difficulties which it would be unwise and unjust to overlook. There is, first, the want of knowledge, in which, indeed, we may all sympathize with one another. Many, with the best intentions, have done ill. Many have been more ingenious to destroy, than they need have been to restore ecclesiastical effect. Many a one has laid out more in converting a church into a lecture-room or a meeting-house, as far as visible forms and symbolism are concerned, than would have restored it to its pristine beauty. Now, when we admit the reality of self-sacrifice, we can only regret the unintentional fault. Still more, when the best architects of the day have advised, they must relieve the shoulders of their employers of the weight of obloquy. If Inigo Jones and Wyattt have perpetrated the blunders, their patrons must needs be acquitted. Still, even ignorance may be criminal in those who set their hands to a sacred work; and, at all events, precipitateness is unwise. Architectural societies will do much here,-not directly, but indirectly. We cannot well undervalue their direct efforts, nor overstate their indirect influence; and the more they are themselves aware that they must work mediately, the more useful will they be. There is, secondly, want of means. Many a rector or owner of an aisle can truly say, "I inherited this building in such a state that no reasonable outlay on my part will restore it. Am I answerable for the delicts of my predecessors? That glorious east window has been blocked up to save the expense of reglazing, and the chancel-gable is covered with ivy, whose thick branches climb where the mullions and interlacing tracery ought to be, and declare that many years-whole generations-have passed since the offence was committed. That one window would cost 500l. to restore; and the rest of the chancel is in the like unhappy state. What can I do? I wish to restore it: I feel that there is a prima facie claim upon me to do so; but I cannot." For one who has honestly arrived at this conclusion we have sympathy enough; yet we may hint that, as a general rule, the feeling of responsibility should, in strictness, have come before. When a clerk is presented to a rectory, he goes down and visits the parish. At the house he looks with a practical eye, and asks whether the repairs will be so costly as to reduce the living below what he would accept. Here he feels the responsibility, because he is himself the first claimant for a better house. Why does he not also inspect the chancel, and see whether the cost of its restoration will exceed what he would willingly devote to it out of the proceeds of the rectory? It is the same in the purchase of an estate with like liabilities attached. * Who erected an incongruous portico to old St. Paul's. The wood, the fences, the house, are all examined, and a balance of cost and profit is struck; but the aisle that passes with the estate is forgotten. Here is our very quarrel. This kind of responsibility has been so long utterly neglected, that it has ceased to furnish an item of calculation. If we were disposed to lengthen this article, we might do so by adding indefinitely to the difficulties in the way of successful restoration-difficulties arising from a thousand combinations of adverse circumstances, with a thousand varieties of character and disposition in those more or less directly concerned; and which are, in fact, as truly as wood and stone, though in a different sense, the materials on which and with which we have to work. But it was our main object to prove the moral responsibility attached to the possession or guardianship of ecclesiastical buildings; and if we have done this satisfactorily, our task is accomplished. When this point is gained, we may be sure that the conquest of difficulties will follow, though it may be in some cases slowly, and with many depressing circumstances. We know an instance in which a rector refuses to restore his chancel, or even to put it in decent repair, "because," quoth he, “I would shame the parishioners into restoring the nave, which is nearly as bad."* Let us see the moral question in such cases entertained differently by all parties, and the results will not be far behind. The Church in Canada, No. I. A Journal of Visitation of the Western Portion of his Diocese, by the LORD BISHOP of TORONTO, in the Autumn of 1842. London. 1844. The Church in Canada, No. II. A Journal of Visitation to a part of the Diocese of Quebec, by the LORD BISHOP of MONTREAL, in the Spring of 1843. London. 1844. The Church in the Colonies, No. III. A Journal of Visitation in Nova Scotia, Cape Breton, and along the Eastern Shore of New Brunswick, by the LORD BISHOP of NOVA SCOTIA. London: Rivingtons, Hatchards, Burns. 1844. To all who remember the manner in which our colonies were first founded, or our dependencies governed,-who recall the eager pursuit of wealth-the careful maintenance of political power as against our enemies-the utter absence of any attempt at establishing Christianity in these new lands-the vague and ill-regulated efforts of individuals and unauthorized societies to * Would the worthy rector allow a clerical delinquent to plead that he lived in habitual breach of the seventh commandment, to shame his parishioners into temperance, soberness, and chastity? supply that want of Christian consolations which the Government and the Church, as a body, refused or neglected-it cannot fail to afford some consolation that our official lists now show a considerable number of Colonial Bishops. But are we to applaud these our efforts, and sit down self-contented with our fifteen heads of our Colonial Church? Are we to centre all our energies on rescuing an ancient Bishopric from destruction, and obtaining for a densely-peopled manufacturing hive an Episcopal ruler? Great and good as both these works are, and successful as they must be in the end, despite the cold calculating economy of the Leader of the Commons, or the military doggedness of the Duke; we must not let our home conflicts so occupy our minds as to render them negligent to the wants of our fellow-creatures abroad. It cannot but be regretted that the customs of society should place so great a distance between the English Clergyman and his Episcopal ruler. However much an alteration in the present practice, a return to Catholic manners in this respect would be not only desirable, but, in very truth, the greatest aid and blessing to our Church; still not even the most sanguine can hope for it. The sacred tie of father and son is all but forgotten among us. In the colonies it is not so. The Bishop and his Clergy form one great ecclesiastical family, and to him, as to their father, they look; with him they take counsel. Nor is that feeling of unity confined to the Clergy alone, it extends far among the laity. No one can read these little works which we have placed at the head of this notice without being assured of this. We have several reasons for calling the attention of our readers to these Journals of Visitations. Few among us are without friends or relatives in our colonies; can the state of religion in the home of their adoption be other than interesting, most interesting to us? Do we feel our hearts yearning to do somewhat of good, when the case of the benighted savage, ignorant of a God and a Saviour, is placed before us? and shall we not consider the case of many, who have in this country known and felt the blessings, the consolations of the Church, and when misfortune and hard cold poverty forced them from among us, and they sought in the dense forests of the West wherewithal to subsist on, have found food for the body, but starvation for the soul? We know not the value of water, until we sink exhausted in the desert. We fail to realize the consolations of religion until disease brings near us the prospect of death, or exile separates us for months, for years, nay, perhaps for life, from its benefits. How often do we excuse ourselves for trivial causes from attending the Church's ordinances-we are not quite well-the weather is bad-we are fatigued. Miles and miles, through snow and rain, and every other impediment, the colonist hastens to his church. He knows the want of her ordinances, he appreciates their value. We may indeed learn a good lesson from these notes of the Canadian dioceses, a lesson that will kindle many a good feeling now torpid, repress many a proud self-sufficient thought; and, if rightly read, lead us to value our blessings at home, and to extend the resources to those abroad who so well estimate the consolations already so scantily afforded them. With these feelings, we shall proceed to make such extracts from the Bishops' Journals as best illustrate the state of the Canadian Church and the feelings of the colonists towards it, connecting them together by such a slight narrative as may illustrate the characters and duties of these Missionary Bishops. Until the year 1787 the British North American provinces were without any Episcopal superintendence; in that year Dr. Inglis was created their first Bishop, under the title of Nova Scotia, and having under his jurisdiction the whole of our settlements in that quarter of the world. In those days Canada had one clergyman, who resided at Kingston, amongst the suffering loyalists. One year before the erection of the bishopric of Nova Scotia he came into the district of Canada, and for five years this priest, the father of the Canadian Church, seems to have been the only resident Clergyman in that part of the diocese. In 1792 two other clergymen arrived from England. The next year saw the separation of Canada from the diocese of Nova Scotia, and the appointment of Dr. Mountain as its first Bishop. How fearfully was this portion of our dominions. neglected, when, even as late as 1803, the enormous diocese of Quebec contained but five clergymen for its vast and scattered population! For six-and-forty years two Bishops alone regulated the British American provinces. In 1839 Newfoundland and the Bermudas were placed under an independent Bishop, and Western Canada was raised into a separate see, under the superintendence of Archdeacon Strachan, as Bishop of Toronto. From this short sketch of the progress of the Episcopate in our North American colonies, we will proceed to sketch the condition of the present dioceses, commencing with the oldest, that of Nova Scotia, to which Dr. John Inglis was consecrated Bishop in 1825. Besides the islands of Breton and Prince Edward, with their population of more than eighty thousand, and the all but island of Nova Scotia, with a population of nearly one hundred and seventy thousand persons, this diocese still contains the province of New Brunswick, thus raising its population to rather more than three hundred thousand: a population quite enough for one Bishop, if located near to one another, and in a closely-peopled land, but overpowering when placed far, far apart from each other, and in townships and stations separated by bays and rivers, mountains and lakes, and every other impediment to internal communication.. Nova Scotia has the benefit |