Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

Proposal for Abolition of Tythes.

to disclaim and oppose the persecution of Protestants. The state which first, after the reformation, established freedom of conscience, was a Roman Catholic State-that of Maryland, in North America. The only government in modern days that has granted

total and unqualified emancipation to a religion different from its own, is the Roman Catholic Government of Hungary; in which the Protestants were in our own times fully emancipated by their Roman Catholic countrymen.

Let us hope that the day is not distant, when those noble examples of justice and pare religion will be not only admired but imitated by Christians of all denominations. Let us hope that man shall at length be allowed to worship his Creator according to the dictates of his conscience, without the impious interference of penal laws; and that bigotry and persecution may be banished from amongst nations boasting of Christianity and civilization.

I

I have the honour to be,

With sincere respect,
Your very faithful and obedient servant,
DANIEL O'CONNELL.
JOHN HANCOCK, Lisburn.

Southampton, 13th March, 1816.
Sir,

COULD wish to draw the atten tion of your readers to the great question of a religious establishmentis it wise, just, necessary or politic? The Dissenters from the Establishment are now became so numerous and respectable as to challenge and deserve the serious attention of the legislature -let them then unite on the broad ground of dissent, and present a respectful petition to the House of Commons, that they may be no longer subject to the payment of tythes.

To be obliged to support a church whose doctrines we reprobate, as contrary to reason and scripture; and to be punished and disgraced for our dissent, by being excluded from the discharge of civil offices, is no longer to be borne.

Let every congregation then be required only to support its own minister, as is the case in America, and elsewhere-particularly in Prussia; and let not one sect be obliged to support another, by a tax levied upon the community at large.

The beneficial effects of such an arrangement, in whatever light we view them, are greater than many persons are aware of. One in particular would be, the abolition of religious distinetions, and the restoration of Dissenters

207

to their proper rank and station in the community.

The abolition of tythes would be also a national advantage, especially in the present distressed state of agriculture, whose necessities imperiously

demand their remission.

Who are the persons that would consider themselves aggrieved? Those who are not entitled to any favour or consideration from the public,-the indolent and luxurious clergy, the "fruges consumere nati." I compare this class to a large and increasing wen attached to the body politic, which is drawing off its nourishment, and will prevent its restoration to health until it be removed.

The money drawn annually from the industrious part of the community under the head of tythes is enormous, and the shameful manner in which it is distributed renders the burthen more grievous and intolerable.

With civil sinecures let us then get rid of spiritual ones, and it would strengthen us to raise the supplies for the year, and save us from the alarming apprehensions and dreadful consequences which our present distressed cite in the breast of every thinking and oppressed state cannot fail to ex

[blocks in formation]

Legislature of Kentucky, Jan. 10, 1812.

Report of the Committee of Religion. referred the petitions of sundry persons reThe Committee of Religion to whom was specting the people called SHAKERS, have, according to order, had the subjects of the same under consideration, and beg leave to report

Without regard to religious persuasions, sects or faith, of any particular denomination whatever, your committee recommend to the consideration and adoption of the house, the following Resolutions:

1st. Resolved-That an open renunciatotal abstinence from sexual and connubial tion of the marriage vow and contract and intercourse, agreeably to the intentions and objects of matrimony, ought to be provided against by law.

2nd. Resolved-That provision ought to be made by law, for the competent support

208

Report of Kentucky Legislature on Shakers.

of the wife out of the husband's estate, when abandoned by him under such circumstances. 3rd. Resolved-That provision ought to be made by law, for the competent support of children out of their father's estate, where they shall be by such father abandoned under like circumstances.

4th. Resolved-That guardians ought to be appointed to the children of husbands so abandoning their wives, who should have the care of the persons and estates of such children.

5th. Resolved-That when a wife is so abandoned she ought by law to be permitted to acquire and hold property as a femme sole, as well as to have reasonable parental control over her children, by the husband so renouncing the marriage contract; and when prayed for, she should have divorce granted, without its benefits being extended to the husband so abandoning her.

In adopting the foregoing Resolutions, your Committee are not unmindful that religious tenets are not the subject of legisla, tive or judicial interference.

They entertain too high respect for their country, this legislative body, and themselves to recommend any measure contravening those golden provisions of our constitutions, which declare-"That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their own consciences; that no human authority ought in any case whatever, to control or interfere with the right of conscience."

Your Committee can but regret, that in all ages and countries, individuals have been found too ready to condemn all other sects and persuasions, save that adopted by themselves, should they have adopted any.

These unfortunate individuals, wanting the benign influence of Christianity become odious themselves, by that interference which prompts their exertions to bring odium on others. It is the good fortune of the real Christian, that in our enlightened day, this intolerance recoils back on the intolerant; and thus, while working their own destruction, they make the rays of Christianity shine but the brighter.

With these sentiments your Committee leave the Shakers, and all other sects, to

pursue, uninterrupted, the dictates of their own consciences-leaving their religious creed to the approbation or disapprobation

of themselves and their God.

Mr. Worsley on the Marriage Cere

SIR,

mony.

Plymouth, Feb. 16, 1816.

AM so perfectly aware of your wish to promote the investigation of all subjects which are interesting to Dis

senters in general, that I scarcely conceive an apology to be necessary for requesting permission to call their attention through the medium of your pages, to a subject which has remained long enough, secretly wounding our peace, to a rite which has scandalized our profession, or is calculated to rob us of some of our most delicate enjoyments. I refer to the subject and to the rite of marriage, as this rite must of necessity be submitted to by the English Dissenters, if they have not made the bold resolution of not submitting to it at all. It happens to have fallen to my lot to fill the office of Secretary to the Devon and Cornwall Unitarian Association, which was established last mid-ummer twelvemonths. At our last July meeting, which took place at Tavistock, this was one of the subjects which engaged our attention, and it was rendered the more interesting from the circumstance of our having in comp ny a more than usual proportion of those gentlemen who are known by the name of Old Bachelors. It did not appear whether these gentlemen had been influenced by Unitarian scruples, or by scruples of any other character, in determining thus to abandon the first day of an active citizen; but, Sir, we did not quit the room in which this in eresting subject was discussed till I had received a charge in the character of secretary, to correspond with the Associations which meet in other parts of England, and endeavour to unite them all in resolute exertions to seek for relief on this point. It has occurred to me, however, that the better way of bringing this subject before the public, is by means of the Repository. Allow me then to offer some thoughts upon this very interesting subject, in the hope that they will call forth other and more interesting and useful ones, and that they will, ere long, bring about our wished-for end. It is interesting in the highest degree to all classes of released from the necessity of taking Dissenters, who cannot but wish to be their brides to the established church;

but to Unitarian Dissenters it is most of all important, and seems upon the ground of absolute duty to demand their serious consideration and their firm purpose.

This is a subject, Sir, which naturally unites the serious with the gay; and it may be considered on the broad

Mr. Worsley on the Marriage Ceremony.

basis of general expediency and justice, or upon the more limited ground of private feeling.

We ex

We are not permitted to enjoy the privileges of wedded life unless we will go to the priest of a certain religion, which may be the religion we approve or not, as the matter happens to fall out; and without uttering certain words he dictates to us, which may or may not contain sentiments which we conceive to be indecent, absurd, nonsensical or idolatrous. Here then our rights as subjects of a free government, in which the people bear a respectable and powerful part, are certainly broken in upon. pect indeed to give up some of our natural rights and privileges in order to enjoy those of social life; but there is no occasion for us to abandon any in the enjoyments by which we cannot injure the society in which we live; nor have we any occasion to submit to forms and ceremonies which to us appear absurd and mischievous. We shall not object to other men's being as absurd and as foolish as they please to be; but they have no clain upon us to justify their folly by following their example ourselves.

In the earlier periods of society the ceremony of marriage, though ever equally important, assumed a very different character to that which it now bears in our country. It was regarded as nothing more than a social engagement entered into by a man and a woman, to increase the virtuous pleasures of life, and to convey down to other creatures the privileges of human beings. It was then performed, as it generally still is in most parts of the world, by a man going to the house of the woman's parents, and there in the presence of the family and other friends taking her to wife; or by taking her from the house of her father to his own house, where he called in his friends and neighbours to bear witness that he had taken her for his wife. Christian priests appear to have been more skilful in cutting out work for themselves which would be profitable to their fraternity, than even the priests of the ancient Pagan systems or those of Jewish renown, celebrated as they were for gulling the people by an abundance of rites and ceremonies, and fattening upon their The ceremony of marriage spoils. was first converted into a religious

209

rite and made one of the seven sacraments of the Church of Rome by Pope Innocent the third: and the Church of England, which in so many things adopted the plans of that Church, did not think i expedient to give up so profitable a concern, as that of being instrumental in administering to a man's pleasures, at a moment when he is usually most of of all moved to be liberal to his benefactors.

But the Church of England did not at first take to itself the exclusive power of performing the ceremony of marriage. For when the principles of the reformation had spread in this country and different classes of Protestants sprang up, they all performed this rite for themselves; the Dissenters marrying in their respective places of worship. This general practice prevailed in this country till the year 1753, in the reign of George II., when the celebrated Marriage Act was passed; the object of which too plainly is to turn the attention from the purc act of marriage, to the ceremony which the priest performs, and which gives occasion to much deceit and wickedness.

By the English law, marriage is regarded as of divine institution. Now if the reader would know what is the ceremony of marriage as it has been ordained of God, and was recognised by the Levitical law, let him look into the 22d Chapter of Exodus, ver. 16, 17, and into Deut. xxii. 28, wherein the case is clearly and fully described; and then let him examine the laws of England, and refer to the various decisions of our Ecclesiastical Courts, he will find they are of a contrary character, and militate directly against the clear object of that law.

The marriage act declares, that, "if a person shall solemnize marriage, except it be in Scotland, or except he be a Jew, or a Quaker, in any other place than in a Church or public Chapel after the publication of bans as therein directed, or by special licence from the archbishop's court, such marriage shall be null and void;" hereby completely taking away from all other Dissenters the privilege they had previously enjoyed, and giving all the power and benefits of the marriage ceremony to the Clergy of the Church of England.

But exceptions are made in favour of the Jews and the Quakers. It may

210

Mr. Worsley on the Marriage Ceremony.

be asked, how happens it that these two classes enjoy this high privilege, while other classes equally respectable do not? And is there any justice in granting so partial a favor? To the first question it can only be replied, it has happened, because these two large bodies of men have stood up firmly for their rights, and would not submit to any of the ceremonies of the established church; and because government men were aware that if these people were to be compelled to violate their consciences, in order to legalize their marriages, they must inevitably lose the whole body of then, and all the advantages of a political and social nature which are derived to this country by their residing within it. It is much to be regretted that this act was suffered to pass with so courteous a silence on the part of the other Dissenters, in which no provision was made for them.

For what possible reason can be assigned, why two classes of dissentients from the established church should follow the dictates of conscience in so high a civil concern, however respectable we must acknowledge them to be, while to us it is forbidden? What possible reason, except on the ground of a religious scruple? and that religious scruples equally strong do exist in the minds of other Dissenters will appear in our subsequent remarks; while if the Quakers and the Jews are competent to make registers of their marriage contracts, and in case of need to prove the validity of such engagements, the other dissenters are equally qualified, and may do it with as much safety to the state and to the public at large.

When the District Meetings of the united Dissenters took place in the year 1789 in all parts of England, there were three objects in their view To obtain the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, which was their principal object; to obtain the repeal of the penal laws relative to religious professions, and to get an emendation of the Marriage Act. It was thought expedient, in consequence of circumstances which then occurred, to drop the design of those meetings. But, so much is the spirit of the times improved, and so much are the minds of the men of talent and authority in our country enlightened since that period, that the second of these objects

has been obtained in the most gentle and gratifying manner, in a manner highly honourable to the feelings and the liberality of our houses of parlia ment. The penal laws against certain religious opinions and professions are no longer a disgrace to our Statute Book: that which was an offence to a respectable and valuable body of the subjects of these realms has been removed, without the safety of the State being even supposed to be endangered. Now, whatever opinion may be entertained of the Test and Corporation Acts, of the merit of which I am not now going to inquire; the question of the Marriage Ceremony stands exactly on the same ground as that of the penal laws. To the Government of this country it cannot be a matter of the smallest consequence in what way Dissenters form their marriage contract; nor can they wish the established clergy to be engaged in the celebration of that rite which unites a man to a woman until death, any more than in that which unites an infant to the Christian Church, or which consigns a human being to the land of forgetfulness. We are allowed to bury our dead and to baptise our children, and our registers of such acts are received as legal documents, why may we not also marry our young people by such rite as we shall approve, and give our legal certificate of such a marriage?

Great objections are made against the marriage ceremony itself as it is performed in our churches, because, although in point of fact it is a civil contract, it has been made by the laws of our land a religious rite,-thus completely changing its character and design, for no other purpose than to make it a source of wealth to the established clergy; for admitting that there is a propriety in a public avowal of a marriage contract in the society of religious professors to which the parties belong, according to the practice of both Jews and Quakers in this country, yet we have the greatest ground of complaint to our legislature of the service itself we are compelled to go through when entering into wedded life.

In the very exordium of that service we are struck with the following absurdity-"that matrimony is a honourable state, instituted by God in the time of man's innocency, signifying unto us the mystical union that is be

Mr. Worsley on the Marriage Ceremony.

twixt Christ and his Church." This, to say the least of it, is a most delicate refinement upon the other mysteries with which Christianity has been loaded, and by which it has been well ' nigh borne down; and truly nothing but the very love of mystery could have led the compilers of our Liturgy to compare the union of the person of a man and that of a woman with the union of Christ and his Church. Here one cannot say what one would, to expose the absurdity of such a comparison. We must be content with renarking, that mystery has been the great source of wealth to the priesthood of old times and all times, and that a more profitable mystery has not been devised than that which mixed up the purest pleasures of life with the interests of the Christian priesthood.

Next follow the three causes for which matrimony is said to have been ordained.

There is a manifest indecency in the first cause, which certainly need not be stated in the Christian assembly supposed to be present, and which, especially when the couple appear at the altar with their hoary locks, can excite no other than a smile.

The second appears to cast a slur upon the very "honourable state" itself as though it had been ordained, not as an act of pure benignity to the virtuous man, and good inember of society, but as a covert into which the rogue may fly to escape an unavoidable

crime.

The third is the only cause which can with propriety be assigned in a public company for entering the married state, and if it be necessary to offer any apology at all for the act, of which there may be a doubt, this is a sufficient one.

Although the solemn charge which follows these causes of matrimony, cannot on its own account be objected against, yet to the virtuous couple it is perfectly needless, while the violators of decency and of rectitude will disregard it.

I know not whether I may venture to object against the queries which follow wilt thou have this woman, &c."" wilt thou have this man, &c." which are addressed by the priest, first to the man and then to the woman, on the ground that, as they meet on equal terms, the same solemn engagement should be entered into by both

211

of them. Yet in our service, while the man covenants "to love, comfort, honour and keep" the woman, she, is required to do more, "to obey and to serve the man." Is there any marked difference in the original formation of the two classes of the human species to justify a partiality of this kind? Or has it not happened that the law owes its birth to this circumstance, that the male part of the species have been, viva voce, the framers of human laws? Some years ago a Liturgy was used in an English Church on the Continent in which many marriages were celebrated; in that Church the man and the woman were required to enter into the same solemn promise and engagement with respect to each other, "to love, comfort, honour and keep in sickness and in health, and forsaking all other," &c. Your readers will judge, both male and female, whether that Church or the Church of England was the more just in its requirements. If, however, for a moment we wave the consideration of right to make such a statute, it may be allowed to the sceptical by-stander to ask, what is the good of it? is it not in most cases obliging an intelligent creature of God to make a solemn vow which she does not mean to fulfil? Let the Dunmow flitch of bacon maintain the argument.

The charth which follows in the marriage service is one of the most entertaining things one can well conceive of; for as we are not on these occasions in a humour to be horrified at any thing, we can scarcely keep our lips in a posture sufficiently steady to articulate the magical words “With this ring I thee wed, with my body I thee worship, and with all my worldly goods I thee endow." I must suppose that with most people these words are a mere abracadabra. They have always reminded me of the jan-vantin-tan-tire-rare-litter-air-van

fain-well, of which, when I was a boy, I remember to have heard that these sounds were, under certain circumstances, calculated to produce a most surprising effect. A venerable Divine of the last age was accustomed to say of the words of this charm, that the man who repeats them is guilty of three of the greatest crimes which the Bible knows--"with this ring I thee wed," that is witchcraft-with my

« AnteriorContinua »