r
 
 L I E> RARY 
 
 OF THL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 or ILLINOIS 
 
 ^
 
 PRIZE ESSAY 
 
 #f t\it Rational gissotiatbit for promoting cfmbom of 
 
 THE OFFERTORY: 
 
 DEMONSTEATma THE SUPERIOKITY OF 
 
 WEEKLY OFFERINGS AT EVERY SERVICE 
 TO PEW RENTS 
 
 AS A SYSTEM OF CHUECH FINANCE. 
 
 " Crescit sub pondere Virtus." 
 
 By Eev. W. p. S. BINGHAM, M.A., 
 
 Christ Church, Oxford. 
 CURATE OF DERRY HILL, WILTS. 
 
 EIVINGTONS, 
 
 3, WATEELOO PLACE, LONDON ; 
 
 41, HIGH STREET, OXFORD; 19, TRINITY STREET, CAMBRIDGE. 
 
 1865.
 
 LONDON; raiKTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, STAMFORD STREET 
 AND CHAKIKG CROSS.
 
 THE OFFERTORY, 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 " They shall not appear empty before the Lord." — Leut. xvi. 15. 
 
 In the endeavour, which is here attempted, to demon- 
 strate the practical utility of the Offertory, it is a satisfac- 
 tion to feel assured that this is no longer a party question, 
 calculated to awaken heartburnings and animosity, but one 
 in the general principle of which earnest men of all shades 
 of opinion are agreed. With respect to the offertory, the 
 practical good sense of Englishmen has counterbalanced 
 the weight of prejudice with which they shrunk at first 
 from the revival of that which has been so long disused. 
 When the Bishop of Exeter issued his " Pastoral Letter," 
 twenty years ago, recommending amongst other things the 
 revival of the offertory, it seemed an innovation which the 
 laity were jealous of receiving; but twenty years have 
 passed away since then, and there has been time in 
 the interim for thoughtful reflection on the comparative 
 advantages and disadvantages of the proposal. 
 
 To be jealous of changes is the part of prudence, but to 
 refuse to adopt them, when their advantage is demonstrated, 
 is the result of ignorance and prejudice. This jealousy of 
 innovation has proved the safeguard of England, whilst 
 surrounding countries have been revolutionized, and the 
 crowns of neighbouring kings have been tumbled in the 
 dust ; but it has always been an enlightened, and not that 
 4. B 2
 
 4 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 blind and morbid conversatism which rejects all improve- 
 ments, else we should not have seen the advance in our 
 social institutions and political freedom, which has given 
 England the greatest name among the nations of the 
 earth. And yet it has been the fate of all improvements 
 that they have aroused suspicion at their first proposal. 
 It was so with the Eeformation itself, as the " Pilgrimage 
 of Grace," in the reign of Henry VIII., and the disturb- 
 ances in Devonshire and Cornwall in that of Edward VI., 
 made manifest ; but yet the Eeformation was received by 
 the people of England as soon as it was tried and approved, 
 and it took far deeper root within their minds than if it 
 had been adopted without hesitation or delay. So now 
 the recommendations of Bishop Blomfield and Bishop 
 Philpotts, respecting the ofiertory, are regarded with ap- 
 proval by many who were loudest in its denunciation 
 twenty years ago. They need not be ashamed to own it, 
 for it is only an acknowledgment of what might reasonably 
 be expected, that their judgment is riper now and more 
 mature than in their younger days. Bishop Blomfield 
 has gone to his rest, but the venerable Bishop of Exeter 
 has been spared to see suggestions which were made — as 
 all suggestions of good must be — before the day of their 
 adoption, not only finding favour within his own diocese, 
 but through the length and the breadth of the land. The 
 victory was gained by means of an apparent defeat ; and 
 now to see the fruits of his travail is one of the consolations 
 which God has given him amidst the weakness of old age 
 and the hallowed sorrows of domestic bereavement. 
 
 In an essay like the present it would be passing over 
 important ground, if the offertory were treated simply as a 
 fiscal question, although its advantages in this respect is the 
 principal object for which a prize has been offered. The 
 superiority of weekly offerings at every service to pew 
 rents, in respect of (I.) the amount, (II.) the certainty of 
 revenue, (HI.) the real independence of the minister, and 
 (IV.) the spiritual benefit of the people, will be shown in
 
 THE OFFERTORY. O 
 
 order ; but its principle rests on a deeper and more solid 
 basis, the duty of serving God with our substance, which 
 has ever been a part of all true religious worship. 
 
 We must go back even to the day when the first sacri- 
 fice was offered to God. It was not an offering which 
 cost the worshipper nothing that was accepted in God's 
 sight. It was not the flesh of any animal, which he might 
 have found by chance, that Abel offered unto God, but it 
 was of the firstlings of his own flock. Some self-denial 
 thus formed a part of the act of worship, for the firstlings 
 of the flock were valuable. It was thus early in the world's 
 history a testimony that God was to be worshipped with 
 the substance as well as with the soul and with the body. 
 This idea pervaded all sacrificial worship. The animal sacri- 
 ficed must be of the flocks and the herds of the worshipper, 
 or else must be made his own by purchase. If the acknow- 
 ledgement, that without shedding of blood there was no 
 remission of sin, had been all, there would have been no 
 need of this provision. David might have accepted the 
 gift of Araunah, and private sacrifices might have been 
 provided at the general expense of the state ; but this was 
 not the case, and the abuse, which turned the temple into 
 a house of traffic, in which the animals about to be 
 sacrificed were sold, was an evidence of this law. Where- 
 ever, therefore, it is not expressly declared that the 
 offering must be made from the property of the wor- 
 shipper, this must alwaj^s be understood. Two things 
 may therefore be deduced from this principle: I., that 
 offerings were presented unto God; and II., that the 
 presentation of these offerings constituted a part of the 
 public service. 
 
 When the tabernacle was about to be erected, Moses was 
 commanded to speak unto the children of Israel, " that they 
 bring me an offering : of every man that giveth it willingly 
 with his heart ye shall take my offering" (Exodus xxv. 2). 
 These offerings were to be gold, silver, and brass, as well as 
 the other materials, which were used in the erection of the
 
 6 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 tabernacle, and each one was to contribute according as be 
 was able. Again, we find tbat when tbe people were num- 
 bered, the offering of half a shekel was to be received from 
 each one of the children of Israel. It is called not a tax, 
 but an offering unto the Lord ; and it was to be used for 
 the service of the tabernacle of the congregation. The 
 sum was to be equal for rich and poor, denoting that 
 all souls were equal in God's sight ; and it was called a 
 ransom for his soul, indicating that the souls of all, as well 
 as their wealth, were the property of God. The neglect to 
 exact this offering was probably a part of the sin which 
 David committed when he numbered the people without 
 God's authority. 
 
 • Furthermore, it was appointed "tliat every male should 
 appear before the Lord three times in the year, in the place 
 which He shall choose, in the feast of unleavened bread, 
 and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles ; 
 and they shall not appear before the Lord empty. Every 
 one shall give as he is able, according to the blessing of 
 the Lord tli}^ God which He hath given thee " (Deut. xvi. 
 15, 16). The wave-ofierings and first-fruits and tithes and 
 free-will offerings were to be presented at these solemn 
 seasons. At the feast of the passover, besides the handful 
 of barley, the first-fruits and tithes of the cattle were pre- 
 sented. At pentecost, besides the two loaves, the Jews 
 were accustomed to bring the tenths of the corn which 
 they had threshed, and a free-will offering, whilst at the 
 feast of tabernacles, the first-fruits and tenths of wine and 
 oil, and the rest of their tithes, were presented. Every- 
 thing was, therefore, hallowed by the offering of a portion 
 unto God, and provision was thus made that the people 
 should never forget that " the earth is the Lord's, and the 
 fulness thereof," when they brought Him of His own, and 
 acknowledged that His blessing only had made the seasons 
 fruitfuL It must also be remembered that the offerings 
 were accompanied by forms of thanksgiving, which marked 
 out the act as a solemn portion of that service which was
 
 THE OFFERTORY. T 
 
 enjoined upon the Jews. The beautiful confession of him 
 that offereth the basket of first-fruits, and the prayer of 
 him that offereth his third year's tithes, which are to be 
 found in the 26th chapter of Deuteronomy, may be 
 taken as specimens of the form with which all offer- 
 ings to God were made. We cannot otherwise discover 
 a reason why forms of thanksgiving should be provided 
 for these occasions, and not for others which were of a 
 similar nature. 
 
 It will be said, perhaps, that all these observances were 
 portions of the ceremonial law, which passed away when 
 the dispensation of the Gospel succeeded to that of Moses ; 
 but they who say so forget how closely the moral and cere- 
 monial law were interwoven. Christ came not to destroy 
 but to fulfil the law. The types which were fulfilled have 
 passed away, but that which is not fulfilled must still re- 
 main. The sacrifices of blood were fulfilled in the one 
 great offering on Calvary ; but the principle on which other 
 portions of the ceremonial law rested still remains. They 
 may be changed in form, but their substance is the same. 
 The offerings of prayer and praise are still required of 
 God's people ; and why should we suppose that the first- 
 fruits of our substance ought not to be devoted to God's 
 service? We know that at the day of Pentecost S. Peter 
 and S. John went up into the temple at the hour of prayer. 
 The service which had been offered by them, and their 
 fathers before them, was still the service of their prayers 
 and thanksgivings. In every place whereto they bore the 
 Gospel message the apostles first resorted to the synagogue, 
 and the worship of the synagogue was the worship which 
 they offered unto God.* But the altered circumstances of 
 the new dispensation required additional services, for 
 which the law had not provided. The eucharistic office 
 was, therefore, framed; but the temple services were the 
 model to which the apostles adhered, as closely as circum- 
 stances permitted. The character of the Jewish worship 
 
 * Freeman's " Principles of Divine Service," vol. i. 61.
 
 8 THE OFFEKTORY. 
 
 was thus impressed upon the Christian Church. Although 
 the sacrifices had ceased to be offered, and the commemora- 
 tive offering of the eucharist had superseded it, what was 
 more natural than that, with this exception, the form of 
 worship should be as little changed as possible ? If in minor 
 particulars we may trace a close resemblance, which it 
 would be out of place to discuss in this essay, may we not 
 much rather expect that the great principle of offering 
 unto the Lord of His own should be preserved ? What was 
 there in the Christian dispensation which could lead us to 
 suppose that this rule was superseded ? We can give a 
 reason for the ceasing of burnt sacrifices and of circum- 
 cision, when the one great sacrifice for the ransom of the 
 world had been offered, and when the sacrament of baptism 
 had taken the place of the initiatory rite of the Jewish 
 church ; but surely there is no such reason for the cessation 
 of those offerings by which the Jews acknowledged that 
 their substance was increased by God's blessing, and that 
 they were stewards and not owners of His gifts. The 
 manner might be left more free, for the hearts of those in 
 whom the Holy Spirit dwelt needed not a law to regulate 
 their gifts. In the first outburst of their charity, when 
 Christians called not anything they had their own, such a 
 law would have had a tendency to limit instead of to in- 
 crease their gifts, for they chose to give to God not the 
 first-fruits only, nor the tenth — not the tithe, but the whole 
 of their possessions. And we may not blame them, although 
 we may think that a portion only of their goods was re- 
 quired. Their aim was to follow out that counsel of per- 
 fection which their Lord had given to the rich young man : 
 " If thou wilt be perfect, go thy way and sell all that thou 
 hast and give to the poor;" and from what S. Peter said to 
 Ananias, we may conclude that this excessive liberality 
 was not required of all : " Whilst it remained was it not 
 thine own ; and after it was sold was it not in thine own 
 power ?" 
 
 Besides the offerings which were made at the principal
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 9 
 
 feasts, there was also a more constant form of offering to 
 which allusion was made by our Saviour. AY hen Jehoash 
 was about to repair the Temple, we read that " Jehoiada the 
 priest took a chest, and bored a hole in the lid of it, and set 
 it beside the altar, on the right side as one cometh into 
 the house of the Lord ; and the priests that kept the door 
 had therein all the money that was brought into the house 
 of the Lord" (2 Kings xii. 9). This, which was at first 
 provided to meet the exigencies of a special occasion, 
 appears afterwards to have become a fixed institution 
 amongst the Jews. Therefore, in our Saviour's time, we 
 find the treasuiy existing as a receptacle for the oiferings 
 of the people that all might have opportunity of pre- 
 senting their gift, if they desired not to come empty into 
 the presence of the Lord. When our Saviour was present 
 in the Temple on one of the last few days which preceded 
 His Crucifixion, He was watching the rich men who out of 
 their abundance cast in their offerings to God ; and, when 
 He saw a poor widow approach and present her two mites, 
 He took occasion, from this incident, to teach His disciples 
 that offerings to God were acceptable, not according to their 
 intrinsic value, but in proportion to the self-denial which 
 they had cost the giver (S. Mark xii. 41). The place in which 
 this incident occurred was the so-called court of the women, 
 where stood thirteen brazen vessels shaped like trumpets, 
 into which those who visited the Temple cast their gifts. 
 These were distiact from the yat,o(j^v\dKLov strictly so called, 
 which formed a separate compartment of the Temple, 
 wherein the contributions of money cast into the thirteen 
 vessels were from time to time deposited.* In modern 
 Jewish synagogues little boxes are placed near the door to 
 receive voluntary contributions for the poor.j Our Saviour's 
 commendation of the poor widow was a distinct approval 
 of the practice of making offerings to God in the Temple ; 
 and its importance to the Christian is greatly increased 
 
 * Olshausen, in loco. 
 
 t " Biblical Antiquities: Encyclopjedia Metropolitana," p. 445.
 
 10 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 when we consider the solemn time at which it was 
 given. Observances which were distinctly Jewish were 
 just about to die out, and therefore the commendation 
 of the practice at this particular time seems to point it 
 out as one which was to be continued under the Gospel 
 dispensation. 
 
 But this is not all, for even at an earlier period of His 
 ministry, our Lord had referred to the custom as one which 
 was not to cease. In His sermon on the mount He had 
 said : '^ If thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there remem- 
 berest that thy brother hath aught against thee, leave there 
 thy gift before the altar, and go thy way ; first be reconciled 
 to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift " (S. Matt. v. 
 23, 24). This injunction could not refer merely to a Jewish 
 custom, because, as Bishop Sparrow observes, " whilst all the 
 rest of our Saviour's sermon on the mount was Gospel, and 
 concerning duties obliging us Christians, it is not likely that 
 He should intermix one only Jewish rite amongst them."* 
 We must also remember that the sermon on the mount con- 
 tained a code of moral laws whereof this concerning obla- 
 tions was one, and that they were prefaced by this solemn 
 sanction : " Whosoever shall break one of the least of these 
 commandments, and teach men so, shall be called the least 
 in the kingdom of heaven," which could not truly be said 
 concerning the breach of a Jewish outward rite. Some 
 commentators, it must be acknowledged, have interpreted 
 this text as bearing an exclusive reference to the oblation 
 of the holy Eucharist. The spirit of brotherly love en- 
 joined as a necessary preparation for the offering, no doubt, 
 applies to this, but it does not therefore follow that the 
 reference excluded all other kinds of gifts. S. Irenaeus, 
 speaking of the necessity of charity, says in his treatise, 
 " Contra Haereses," 1. iv. cap. xviii : " By a gift to a king, iis 
 honour and our affection is shown, therefore our Lord, 
 wishing us to offer with all simplicity and innocency, 
 preached, saying, ' When thou bringest thy gift to the 
 * Sparrow's " Kationale," p. 207.
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 11 
 
 altar,' &c. We must therefore offer of our goods to God 
 according as Moses commanded, saying, ' TJhou shalt not 
 appear before the Lord empty.' There are offerings under 
 the Gospel as well as under the Law ; the kind of offering 
 is the same ; here is all the difference, they were offered 
 then by servants, now by sons." 
 
 The only passage in which our Saviour seems to dis- 
 countenance such gifts is S. Mark vii. 11 : "Ye say, if a man 
 shall say to his father or mother, It is Corban, that is to say, 
 a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me ; he 
 shall be free. And ye suffer him no more to do aught for 
 his father and his mother ; making the word of God of none 
 effect through your tradition." It is here, however, evident 
 that it is not against the use but against the abuse of the 
 institution that our Saviour spoke. The Pharisees taught 
 that Tefnple offerings take precedence of all gifts in behalf 
 of parents; and, therefore, it was a common excuse, by 
 which children evaded the duty of providing for the neces- 
 sities of parents, to say that the gifts for which they were 
 asked were already in intention devoted to the treasuiy. In 
 many cases, no doubt, the vow was not performed, but even 
 when it was, it was not an acceptable gift, because the 
 positive commandment was neglected for the sake of that 
 which was, after all, a free-will offering. It was as if a 
 man should spend much in charity while he was in debt to 
 his creditors. The conduct of such an one would be worthy 
 of blame because he neglected the commandment, " Owe no 
 man anything," but the condemnation of such conduct 
 would be no reflection on the value of acts of charity when 
 they are rightl}'- performed. Our Saviour's warning, there- 
 fore, whilst it witnesses to the prevalence of the custom of 
 making offerings, cannot be interpreted as any condemna- 
 nation of the Corban. 
 
 This is also worthy of notice, that the money cast into 
 the treasury was used for the maintenance of the priests, 
 and therefore the approbation bestowed on the poor widow's 
 act of charity is a direct commendation of the custom
 
 12 THE OFFEETOKY. 
 
 of supporting tlie necessities of the sanctuary by voluntarj^ 
 offerings, a practice which, as we shall see, was early 
 adopted in the Christian Church. 
 
 The next point which we have to establish is the practice 
 of the apostles in continuing offerings as a direct act of 
 service to God. Immediately after the first enlargement 
 of the Church, which was caused by S. Peter's Pentecostal 
 sermon, we have a brief description of the services in which 
 the Christians at Jerusalem were engaged. To understand 
 the passage rightly we must refer to the original Greek, in 
 which we read •^crav Se TrpocrKaprepoSvre? rfj ScSa)(rj tow olttoctto- 
 
 A(jDV, Kttt rfj KOtVOOVtOt, KOi TTJ K\d(T€L TOV apTOV, KOL TtttS '7rpO(T€V)(CUg 
 
 (Acts ii. 42). This seems so plainl}^ to refer to four separate 
 acts that it is difficult to see why the authorized version 
 and the Vulgate should have reduced them to three. In 
 the authorized version the first two are united, " in the 
 apostle^s doctrine and fellowship,^' and in the Vulgate the 
 second and third are combined, " in doctrind ajoostolorum, et 
 communicatione fradi panis, et orationibus." The grammatical 
 inaccuracy of the Vulgate is evident, as even if the second 
 KOLL be omitted as it is in some MSS. rfj Kkdaei is still in the 
 dative and not in the genitive case. Our authorized 
 translation on the other hand alters the position of twv 
 oLTToa-ToXwy without either authority or reason ; and although 
 the construction is not ungrammatical, the most natural 
 position of the words should be followed unless good cause 
 can be shown for departing from it. All difficulty, how- 
 ever, is removed, if we consider them as four separate acts : 
 1, 8t8ax'7? the instruction which the apostles gave in the 
 things pertaining to the kingdom of heaven ; 2, KOLvwvta, the 
 offertory; 3, KA.acrtsToi;apToi;, the Eucharist ; and 4, Trpoorcvxats 
 the prayers which were offered when two or three were 
 gathered together in Christ's name. " The word Kotvwvta," 
 Olshausen says, "cannot possibly be understood of the 
 general fellowship of the Spirit, for this could not have 
 been represented as a separate particular, being the general 
 principle from which everything else proceeded. And to
 
 THE OFFEETOET. 13 
 
 connect the word with KXao-t? aprov, so that Koiviovta and 
 KAao-is may be viewed as a hendiadys is plainly precluded 
 by the repetition of koc, which places Koivaivia upon the 
 same level as the three other particulars. It only remains, 
 therefore, that we should understand Kotvcoi/ta, with not only 
 Mosheim ("De Kebus Christianis ante Const, p. 113, sqq.") 
 but also the most recent interpreters of the Acts of the 
 Apostles, to signify the bestowment of outward means of sup- 
 port, whether in money or goods." .... "As the passage 
 before us, however, speaks of the meetings of believers for 
 the worship of God, this circumstance gives to Kotvwvta a 
 modified signification. It must denote such gifts as were 
 presented in the public assemblies. But these were just 
 what were named oblations at a later period, in which, 
 therefore, we must recognize a primitive Christian in- 
 stitution. Mosheim rightly observes that the offering of 
 Ananias, mentioned in chap, v., must have been such an 
 oblation."* 
 
 We read, indeed, that " they that believed had all things 
 common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted 
 them to all men, as every man had need ;" and it may 
 be asked, if the Christians at Jerusalem had all things 
 common, how was it possible for them to make offerings 
 of their wealth whensoever they came together ? In the 
 first devotion of th^se early converts the natural impulse of 
 their love appears to have been to devote all their posses- 
 sions to God. The gifts they had received they esteemed 
 to be of such exceeding value, that all they had was not 
 too much to offer in return, and the apostles do not seem 
 to have checked their generous impulse ; but still the com- 
 munity of goods was never the established order of the 
 Church. In each case the dedication was an individual act, 
 and S. Luke represents what was commonly done, and not 
 what was considered necessaiy for all to do. If it had been 
 otherwise, S. Peter's speech to Ananias would have in- 
 
 * Olshausen, in loco. See also Blunt's " Church in the First Three Cen- 
 turies," p. 32.
 
 14 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 volved a contradiction : " Whilst it remained, was it not 
 thine own ? and when it was sold, was it not in thine own 
 power ?" Ananias was not compelled to sell it, nor was he 
 obliged to dedicate the whole, but his sin consisted in the 
 hypocrisy of pretending to give it wholly to the Lord, 
 whilst he kept back a part of the price for his own use. 
 There may have been some who had nothing to offer in the 
 Christian assemblies, because thej^ had already given all 
 they had, just as a monk in more recent times would make 
 no offering because he had no possessions ; but there 
 may have been others who still retained their property ; 
 and even those who sold their possessions may have laid 
 the price at the apostles' feet when they were assembled 
 for Christian worship, and thus made their offerings a 
 direct act of homage to God. The offerings of the Christians 
 at Jerusalem were, no doubt, excessive, and surpassed the 
 bounds of prudence ; and, therefore, we do not find that a 
 community of goods was ever adopted by other churches. 
 The poverty of the Christians at Jerusalem, which made 
 them objects of the charity of other churches, was taken, no 
 doubt, as a warning, while it gave them opportunites for 
 the generous exercise of almsgiving. 
 
 Evidence of this exercise of charity is found in the apos- 
 tolic epistles, and the general principle is also laid down 
 that the clergy should be supported by the offerings of the 
 people ; but that in which we are now chiefly concerned is 
 to ascertain how far their offerings were a part of public 
 worship. S. Paul's injunction seems to be clear on this 
 point : " Now, concerning the collection for the saints, as 
 I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do 
 ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you 
 lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there 
 be no gatherings when I come" (1 Cor. xvi. 1,2). The passage 
 is thus paraphrased by Dr. Hammond : " On the day of the 
 Christian assembly it is not reasonable for any to come to 
 the Lord empty (see Exodus xxiii. 15 ; Deut. xvi. 16) ; and, 
 therefore, at such a time, upon such a special occasion as
 
 THE OFFEKTORT. 15 
 
 this, let every one of you lay aside whatsoever by God's 
 blessing comes to him by way of increase, so that there may 
 be a full collection made without an}^ more gatherings when 
 I come among you." Here is evidence of the practice of 
 a weekly offertory, in which S. Paul enjoins uniformity in 
 the churches under his direction. The collection was to 
 be made on the first day of the week, because on that day 
 a larger number of persons were assembled than on other 
 days. It was the day, moreover, on which the gratitude of 
 Christians would most naturall}^ be stirred up to acts of 
 charity, in consideration of the hope of the resurrection, 
 which dated its birth from that day. There may have been 
 other reasons also for the observance. The Jews in every 
 city where they dwelt had their collectors of alms, who 
 went about collecting the offerings of every Jew, and on 
 the evening of the Sabbath made distribution to the needy. 
 This example may not unnaturally have been taken by the 
 apostles in ordaining that on the Lord's Day Christians 
 should lay up for the poor and make provision for them. It 
 may be gathered also from S. Paul's words that the Chris- 
 tians put their offerings into a common box, which was 
 kept in the church, for otherwise if they had kept them at 
 home there would have been need of gathering them when 
 the apostle came.* We may see an evidence also of the 
 prudential wisdom which was so eminently characteristic 
 of the mind of S. Paul, for he well knew that if the offerings 
 were not made at short intervals, the money, instead of 
 being saved, would be spent in other ways, and that what 
 was thus given would be less missed than if it was given at 
 once in one large sum. The offertory was the application 
 to practice of the many injunctions to charity which are 
 given both by our Lord Himself and His apostles ; and a 
 custom so certainly apostolical, is in itself, if for no other 
 reason, deserving of being retained in the Church, especially 
 in a branch whose glory is to have followed the model of 
 apostolical institution in the reformation of her system and 
 
 * Whitbv, in loco.
 
 16 THE OFFEKTOKY. 
 
 the reconstruction of her ritual. It is for this reason that 
 the revival of the offertory appeals to English churchmen 
 with a plea peculiar to themselves, which must test the 
 consistency of their adherence to the principles of the 
 Reformation. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE ANCIENT CUSTOM OF THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 « A wholesome, a liturgical, and a scriptural method of almsgiving, in which 
 rich and poor are encouraged to unite in the fulfilment of a plain duty." — Bp. 
 of Lincoln s Charge^ 1861. 
 
 The custom of the weekly offertory, established as we have 
 seen by S. Paul in the churches of Galatia and Corinth, we 
 might expect to find universally adopted, and our expecta- 
 tions are not disappointed. Erom the Apology of Justin 
 Martj^r, which gives an account of the religious services of 
 the Christians, we learn that on the Lord's Day, they that 
 are able and willing, give what they think fit ; and what 
 is thus collected is laid up in the hands of the president, 
 who distributes it to orphans and widows, and other Chris- 
 tians, as their wants require. Amongst churches whose 
 rites and ceremonies were not uniform, we must expect to 
 find some diversity of practice ; but all appear to have 
 agreed in making the offering, although the manner of 
 doing this differed in different churches. In the West, 
 offerings were made in the public assembly, immediately 
 after the catechumens were dismissed, before the solemn 
 prayers began ; but in the East, it appears that the oblations 
 of the people were received before the liturgy commenced ;* 
 but different as was the practice the principle was the 
 same. Offerings were made to God, and his worshippers 
 thought it an unworthy thing to approach him without a 
 gift. 
 
 * Palmer's " Oris;. Liturg,," vol. ii. 68.
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 17 
 
 These offerings were probably of two kinds; I., the 
 weekly or daily oblations that were made at the altar, 
 offered most likely on every occasion on which the 
 Eucharist was celebrated ; and II., the monthly oblations 
 which were cast into the treasur}^ of the church.* The 
 first of these consisted of bread and wine, out of which the 
 elements of the Eucharist were taken, that which was 
 needful for the dyaTrat, so long as these love feasts were 
 continued, and also other necessaries, besides sums of 
 money for the maintenance of the clergy and the relief of 
 the poor. The offerings were, therefore, partly in money, 
 and partly in kind. With respect to the latter, the original 
 custom appears to have been to offer only those things 
 which were used for the service of the altar, bread and 
 wine for the Eucharistic elements, oil for the lamps, and 
 incense for the censors. Milk and honey was permitted to 
 be offered in the African Church, on the Saturday before 
 Easter, on account of the mystery of the infants, for it was 
 usual to administer a taste of milk and honey immediately 
 after their baptism. f 
 
 The regulations made in the apostolic constitutions, and 
 by the decrees of ancient councils, seem to indicate that 
 other things were also offered, such as beer, birds, living 
 creatures, and the first-fruits of the produce of the earth.+ 
 The original intention of these oblations probably had 
 reference to the love feasts, but they still continued to be 
 offered long after the love feasts had been abolished. A 
 singular custom was prevalent in the African Church. The 
 oblation of the first-fruits of grapes was still permitted, 
 but because the people were accustomed to join them in 
 the same sacrifice with the Eucharist, and they were 
 distributed to the congregation at the same time, the 
 XXVIIIth canon of the Council in Trullo ordered that 
 they should have a distinct consecration, and a distinct 
 
 * Bingham's " Antiquities," Book v. chap, 4, sect. 1. 
 t Ibid., Book v. chap. 4, sect 3. 
 X Canon Apost. 3, 4, 5. 
 4. n
 
 18 THE OFFEKTORY. 
 
 distribution, if the people were desirous of eating their 
 first-fruits in the church. *' In the meantime, we may 
 observe," says Bingham, " that in other churches, not only 
 the first-fruits of grapes and corn, but all other things 
 Avhich the people were voluntarily disposed to ofi'er, 
 whether money, or the like gifts, were received at the 
 altar. For in France, the first Council of Orleans made it 
 a rule, that of such oblations, one moiety should fall to the 
 bishop, and the other be divided amongst the rest of the 
 clergy." The numerous canons which we find, specifying 
 from whom gifts were not to be received, is a further 
 proof of the universal prevalence of the custom of making 
 oiferings at the altar. These provisions were founded on 
 our Lord's command : " If thou bring thy gift to the altar, 
 and there remember that thy brother hath aught against 
 thee ; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way ; 
 first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer 
 thy gift."* 
 
 Besides these offerings which were presented at the 
 altar, TertuUian mentions the monthly offerings which 
 were placed in the treasury by those who were charitably 
 disposed. t From this it appears, that the ti-easury of the 
 temple was adopted in the Christian churches, and that 
 this was the origin of the poor-box, which is still amongst 
 the necessary articles of church furniture. In this respect 
 the custom of the synagogue and of the church was 
 uniform. TertuUian tells us, that the Christians drew 
 upon the treasury, not for feasts and revels, but for the 
 relief of orphans and aged persons, of the shipwrecked and 
 the prisoner ; and as TertuUian speaks of a monthly collec- 
 tion, Cyprian also makes frequent mention of a monthly 
 distribution, in which the presbyters had their shares in 
 
 * " Altaria, iu quibus fraternitatis munera non jussit Salvatorponi nisi quae 
 essent de pace condita." — Optatus, lib. vi. p. 93. 
 
 f " Si quod arcoe genus est, non de ordinaria summa, quasi redeinpta; reli 
 o'ionis congiegatur : modicam unusquisque stipem menstrua die, vel quura 
 velit, et si mode velit, et si modo possit, apponit : nam nemo compellitur, sed 
 sponte confert." — Tertul. Apol. c. 39.
 
 THE OFFEUTOKY. 19 
 
 equal portions, and other orders after the same manner.* 
 What is now called susjpensio a henejicio, was then suspensio 
 a divisione mensurnd.'\ The treasury itself was called after 
 the Jewish corban, a name which seems to have been com- 
 mon both to the gift and its receptacle. Baronius thinks 
 the ark or treasury was called corban because S. Cyprian 
 rebukes a weathly matron for coming to celebrate the 
 Eucharist without having any respect to the corban, and 
 partaking of the Lord's Supper without any sacrifice of her 
 own.+ Basnage, on the other hand, considers that corban 
 was not a name for the treasury, but for the gift or obla- 
 tion itself, but both usages were probably common, for our 
 Saviour speaks of the gift as corban, and S. Matthew uses 
 the words ek rov Kop(3avav as the treasury, into which the 
 priests would not put the thirty pieces of silver which 
 Judas had cast upon the floor, because it was the price of 
 blood. From this we may also gather, that the proceeds of 
 the treasury, as well as the Eucharistic offerings, were 
 applied to all church pui-poses, including the maintenance 
 of the clergy, the relief of the poor, and the necessary 
 expenses of divine worship. 
 
 The same custom appears to have prevailed in the Anglo- 
 Saxon Church. Amongst the questions sent by Augustine 
 to Pope Gregory for resolution, a part of the first was an 
 inquiry into how many poitions the things given by the 
 faithful at the altar were to be divided, to which the pope 
 answered, that "it is the custom of the apostolic see to 
 prescribe rules to bishops newly ordained, that all emolu- 
 ments which accrue are to be divided into four portions : 
 one for the bishop and his family, because of hospitality 
 and entertainments, another for the clergy, a third for the 
 poor, and the fourth for the repair of churches." Angus- 
 tine, being mider monastic rules, would not need a separate 
 portion^ as he was not to live apart from his clergy ; but it 
 
 * " Ut et sportulis iisdem cum presbyteris honorentur et divlsiones mensurnas 
 aequatis quantitatibas partiantiiv." Cyjjr. Ep. 34 al 39. 
 t Idein,Ep. 28 al.34. 
 X Baron., an. 44 n. 69. 
 
 c 2
 
 W THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 A^^as provided that those who were married should receive 
 their portions abroad. — BecWs Ecc. Hist. I. xxvii. 
 
 From this we may observe that offerings were made in 
 church, and that they who served at the altar were par- 
 takers with the altar. As the church received endowments, 
 the amount of voluntary oblations decreased, under the 
 idea, no doubt, that the clergy did not stand in the same 
 need of them as formerly. This will account for their 
 diminution in England, as well as in other churches ; but 
 it is probable that the clergy were not gainers by the 
 establishment of a more settled source of income. S. Chry- 
 sostom complains (Hom. Ixxxvi. in Matt.) that in his time 
 the ancient revenue coming from oblations was greatly 
 diminished, and that the church, with her lands and pos- 
 sessions, was in a worse condition than before. Her 
 ministers were now forced to submit to secular cares, and 
 the management of lands and houses and the business of 
 buj'ing and selling, for fear lest the orphans and virgins 
 and widows of the church should starve. He therefore 
 exhorted the people to return to the ancient liberality of 
 oblations, which would at once end the necessity of all 
 such cares, and make a good provision for the poor, and 
 take off the bitter scoffs and objections that some were so 
 ready to make and cast upon the clergy, that they were too 
 much given to secular cares and employments, when, 
 indeed, it was not choice but necessity which forced them 
 to it. There were, he said, in Antioch, by the grace of 
 God, a hundred thousand people that came to church. 
 N ow, if every one of them would but give one loaf daily 
 to the poor, the poor would live in plent}'. If every one 
 would contribute one halfpennj^ no man would want, 
 neither would the clergy undergo so many reproaches and 
 derisions, as if they were too intent on their possessions. 
 
 Possidius tells us in his life of S. Augustine of Hippo, 
 that when he found the possessions of the church were 
 become a little invidious, he used to tell the laity that he 
 had rather live upon the oblations of the people than
 
 THE OFFERTOKY. 21 
 
 undergo the care and trouble which these possessions 
 involved, and that he was ready to part with thein pro- 
 vided all the servants and ministers of God might live as 
 they did under the Old Testament, when, as we read, they 
 that served at the altar were partakers of the altar ; but 
 although he often made this proposal to the people, they 
 would never accept of it. This Bingham considers as an 
 argument that the people also thought that the reduction 
 of the maintenance of the clergy to the precise model of 
 the Old Testament w^ould have laid greater charges on 
 them, since the oblations of the Old Testament included 
 tithes and first-fmits.* 
 
 The endowment of the Church was the necessary con- 
 sequence of her position when Christianity became the 
 national religion of the people, and not for a moment 
 should any proposal to confiscate her property be enter- 
 tained ; but yet when we consider how many parishes are 
 inadequately endowed, or without any endowment at all, 
 the exhortations of S. Chrysostom and S. Augustine seem 
 specially applicable to our own times. What is that which 
 they advocate ? Xot pew-rents as a source of income, an 
 institution plainly inconsistent with the whole spirit of 
 Christianity, but the revival of that liberality which the 
 early Christians displayed in the oblations which they 
 oifered in God's house. S. Chrysostom's demand was 
 not extravagant ; one halfpenny a day was all he asked of 
 the Christians of Antioch ; and yet if they had contributed 
 this, the clergy could have afforded to exchange for it all 
 their earthly possessions, and still there would have been 
 more than enough to supply their need, and a large fund 
 would have remained for distribution to the poor. What, 
 indeed, might not be effected by the restoration of this 
 
 * Dum forte (ut adsolet) de possessionibus ipsis invidia clericis tieret, 
 alloquebatur plebis Dei, malle se ex collationibus plebis Dei vivere quam 
 illarum possessionum cuiam vel jubernationem pati ; et paratum se illis cetlere, 
 ut eo modo omnes Dei servi et ministii viveieiit, quo in Veteri Testamento 
 leguntur altari deservientes de eodem coinpaiticipari. Sed nunquam id laid 
 suscipere voluerunt. — Fossid Vit. Aug. c. 23.
 
 22 THE OFFEETOEY. 
 
 good and ancient custom ? Not only might the clergy be 
 supported when they have need, but the means would not 
 be wanting of carrying out great schemes of Christian 
 benevolence. 
 
 In England, as at Antioch, the oblations of the people 
 diminished as the clergy became a wealthy corporation ; 
 but still traces of the ancient custom remained as land- 
 marks to point out the course which we are now engaged 
 in urging. The first of these was the customari/ dues, and 
 the second was the poor man's box, in which the tradition of 
 the ancient corban was retained. The offerings of English 
 churchmen for the maintenance of the clergy never fell 
 wholly into disuse. When tithes were appropriated to the 
 church, and ecclesiastical corporations became possessors 
 of property, the amount was no doubt greatly diminished, 
 but yet, as we shall see, the duty remained. At a synod 
 held at Exeter on the 16th of April, 1287, under the pre- 
 sidency of Peter Quivil, the bishop, the 54th Canon 
 enjoins that " all priests celebrating the communion in 
 chapels annexed to churches shall restore fairly whatever 
 oblations they receive to the rector of the church." From 
 this it appears, that in the thirteenth century oblations for 
 the maintenance of the clergy were made at the eucharistic 
 offertory. Henry Woodlake, Bishop of Winchester, in his 
 constitutions of 1308, enjoined every person over eighteen 
 years of age, who had sufficient means, to offer due and 
 customary oblations on four great feast days in the year. 
 In 1367, Simon Langham, Archbishop of Canterbury, 
 took measures to try a dispute between the clergy of 
 London and the citizens, who were unwilling to pay the 
 oblations which the clergy alleged to be due from every 
 house in proportion to its value. By the statute of 
 Edward YI., § 2 & 3, c. 13, it was enacted, " that all persons 
 who, by the laws &nd customs of the realm, ought to make 
 or pay their offerings, shall yearly well and truly content 
 to pay the same to the parson, vicar, proprietor, or their 
 deputies, or farmers of the parishes where they shall dwell
 
 THE OFFERTOKY. 23 
 
 or abide, and that at four such offering-days as at any time 
 heretofore within the space of four years last past hath 
 been used and accustomed for the payment of the same ; 
 and in default thereof to pay the said offerings at Easter 
 the next following." The four offering-days were Christ- 
 mas, Easter, AYhitsuntide, and the feast of the dedication 
 of the parish church.* The English liturgy, in the year 
 1549, contained the following rubric : " In the mean time, 
 while the clerks do sing the offertory, so many as are dis- 
 posed shall offer to the poor man s box, everyone according 
 to his ability and charitable mind ; and at the offering-days 
 appointed, every man and woman shall pay to the curate 
 the due and accustomed offering." The rubric in Eliza- 
 beth's book was as following : " Then shall the church- 
 wardens, or some others by them appointed, gather the 
 devotions of the i^eople and put the same into the poor- 
 man's box, and upon the offering-days appointed, every 
 man and woman shall pay to the curate the due and 
 accustomed offerings." So it stood in the books of 1559, 
 1607, and 1634. In 1662, the rubric was changed to the 
 following : " The churchwardens shall receive the alms for 
 the poor, and other devotions of the people, in a decent basin, 
 to be provided by the parish for that purpose, and reve- 
 rently bring it to the priest, who shall humbly present and 
 place it on the holy table." " The other devotions of the 
 people " was no doubt identical with the due and accus- 
 tomed offering mentioned in the older rubric, and both are 
 explained hy another rubric, at the end of the ofSce, which, 
 at the last review, only underwent a slight verbal altera- 
 tion : " And note, that every parishioner shall communicate 
 at the least three times in the year, of which Easter to 
 be one. And yearl}^, at Easter, every parishioner shall 
 reckon with the parson, vicar, or curate, or his or their 
 deputy or deputies, and pay to him or them all ecclesias- 
 tical duties accustomably due then and at that time to be 
 paid." From this we may gather that the offerings were 
 
 * Burns' " Ecclesiastical Law," iii. 20.
 
 24 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 presented at the holy communion, although reckoning 
 might have been made before, and that the reason why 
 they were now to be presented at Easter was because on 
 that day no parishioner would be absent from the celebra- 
 tion of the eucharist. 
 
 We must not pass on without briefly adverting to another 
 change, which was made at the last review, by the restora- 
 tion of the words in the prayer for the Church militant, " and 
 oblations.'' Some interpret these words to have reference 
 to the customary dues, and as these are not now offered in 
 the church, but collected at the houses of the parishioners, 
 it is not uncommon to hear these words omitted, on the 
 plea that no oblations are offered with the alms of the 
 people ; but Wheatley and Blunt consider that the obla- 
 tions had no respect to the dues, but to the bread and wine, 
 which had just been laid upon the altar. In the first book 
 of Edward YI., the bread and wine were ordered to be laid 
 upon the table, as in our present rubric, and agreeing with 
 this, the words "and oblations" occurred in the prayer for 
 the Church militant. Both disappeared in the second book 
 of Edward YI., and were not restored, until both were 
 together revived at the last review. The dues were 
 received during the time that the words " and oblations " 
 were omitted, but when the bread and wine were again 
 ordered to be laid upon the holy table, the corresponding 
 expression was restored, from which we may conclude that 
 one had reference to the other.* The natural order, alms 
 and oblations, moreover, strictly corresponded with the 
 preceding rubric, for the alms were first to be presented, 
 and immediately afterwards the bread and wine.f 
 
 It would, no doubt, be interesting to discover the reason 
 why Easter dues ceased to be offered in the church, and the 
 custom arose of collecting them on Easter Monday at the 
 houses of the parishioners. We may, however, conjecture 
 with some probability that the neglect of the rule which 
 
 * Blunt's " Duties of the Parish Priest," 332. 
 t Wheatley " On the Prayer Book."
 
 THE OFFEETORY. 25 
 
 would require all parishioners to commimicate on Easter 
 Day was the cause of this. Some may have absented them- 
 selves to avoid making the offering, and the clergy desired 
 to deprive them of the excuse ; or else when the neglect 
 had become prevalent, the present custom was adopted to 
 compensate the clergy for the loss of income which would 
 have been incurred through the neglect of the Easter 
 communion. 
 
 The other custom, in w^hich the tradition of the liberality 
 of Christians in church is preserved, is the " poor-box." 
 We find it enacted, 27th Henry VIII., in an Act for the 
 punishment of sturdy vagabonds, " that money collected for 
 the poor should be kept in the common coffer or box stand- 
 ing in the church of every parish." It is not here spoken 
 of as the introduction of a new thing, but the reference 
 seems to imply that the box was already there, a relic of 
 the corban, or treasury, of the ancient Church, although 
 perhaps little use was accustomed to be made of it. Possibly 
 on account of the little use made of the poor-box, whilst 
 the monasteries undertook the care of the poor, the law of 
 Henry provided for its restoration. But even this does not 
 appear to have been universally obeyed ; for the 84th Canon 
 of 1603 ordered that the churchwardens "shall provide and 
 have, within three months after the publishing of these 
 constitutions, a strong chest, with a hole in the upper part 
 thereof, to be provided at the charge of the parish, if there 
 be none such provided already; .... which chest they 
 shall set and fasten in the most convenient place, to the 
 intent the parishioners may put into it their alms for their 
 poor neighbours." 
 
 Another rubrical difiSculty here occurs. In Elizabeth's 
 time the alms collected at the offertory were to be put into 
 the poor man's box; but it appears from the subsequent 
 order of the canon that, in many churches, no poor-box ex- 
 isted. From this we may conclude that the poor-box men- 
 tioned in the rubric was not the chest, which w^as to be 
 placed in some convenient place in the church, but a little
 
 26 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 box which the churchwardens carried about with them in 
 their hands. Wheatley mentions the practice of carrying 
 little boxes to receive the offerings as being still in his time 
 the custom at the Temj)le Church in London, and in many 
 churches collecting-boxes are even now found in use. If 
 the fixed and permanent poor-box had been used, we must 
 suppose that the custom of laying the alms on the altar was 
 intended to be abandoned, and there is no reason for such a 
 supposition, which the retention of the form of offering in 
 the prayer for the Church militant seems to preclude. The 
 use of the decent basin was adopted from the Scotch office, 
 as more convenient for being laid upon the altar. Wheatley 
 mentions a diversity of custom in collecting the alms. In 
 some places they were collected from seat to seat, whilst in 
 others the churchwardens stood at the entrance of the 
 chancel to receive the offerings of the people as they drew 
 towards the altar. This last he considers more conformable 
 to the practice of the primitive Church, which, in pursu- 
 ance of S. Matthew v, 23, ordered that the people should 
 come up to the rails of the altar, and there make their 
 offerings to God. It would however appear that in some 
 churches the people not only came up to the rails of the 
 altar, but actually laid their gifts upon the altar itself. It is 
 related of Theodosius, after his reconciliation with the 
 Church, that when the time came for presenting the oblation 
 at the altar, instead of retiring from the chancel, he re- 
 mained through foi'getfulness within the rails, according to 
 the custom of the Eastern Church, there to receive the 
 sacrament. Ambrose ventured not to relax one tittle of 
 the stern discipline of the Latins even to reward a penitent 
 monarch. He sent his archdeacon to signify to him that 
 none but ordained persons were allowed to remain in the 
 sanctuary, on which the emperor promptly retired. But 
 he was not offended at this exercise of discipline ; for 
 Theodoret relates that, on his return to Constantinople, 
 one day after making the offering at the altar as usual, he 
 retired, as he had learned from Ambrose to do, but was re-
 
 THE OFFEKTOPvY. 27 
 
 called by the patriarch Lecturiiis. Upon this he observed, 
 " Of all whom I have met, Ambrose is the only bishop."* 
 Some relic of this ancient custom of making the offering 
 directly at the altar is still preserved in the English Church. 
 At the coronation the sovereign offers not only a mark of 
 gold, but also the bread and wine which are to form the 
 eucharistic elements. It is also the custom at Westminster 
 Abbey and at some other cathedrals for the officiating 
 clergymen to go in turn and kneel before the altar, and 
 there make their offering, before the alms of the people are 
 collected. The usual custom, however, is for each to make 
 his offering whilst the bags or plates are being handed 
 round, and these being collected and received by the priest, 
 are laid with reverence on the altar. 
 
 The use of bags instead of plates is not, as is thought by 
 some, a rubrical innovation. The decent basin spoken of in 
 the rubric is probably the large alms-dish which we usually 
 see in cathedrals and college chapels. The alms are collected 
 in some more convenient vessels, and placed in the alms-dish 
 to be laid on the altar. It does not matter, therefore, whe- 
 ther the actual collection is made in a box, basin, or bag, so 
 long as it is placed on the alms-dish, in order that it may be 
 laid on the altar. And as there are many advantages in 
 bags, of which not the least is the prevention of ostentation 
 in alms-giving, no fear of transgressing the directions of the 
 rubric need restrain their use. 
 
 Kespecting the propriety of laying the offerings, collected 
 at the celebration of the holy communion, on the altar, no 
 question can arise, since the law of the Church requires that 
 they should be so presented ; and where collections are made 
 at other services, it seems more reasonable that they should 
 be presented at the altar when collected, than carried at 
 once into the vestry. The objection is that the Church does 
 not enjoin the custom ; but neither, we may answer, does 
 she forbid it. She never contemplated, when the prayer- 
 book was compiled, the collection of alms at other services 
 * "The Church of the Fathers,"' p. 52,
 
 28 THE OFFERTOKY. 
 
 than the holy communion ; and, therefore, objection might 
 as well be raised to making a collection at all, as to present- 
 ing the alms at the altar. 
 
 It may also be said that the custom of the early Church 
 was to place offerings in the ark, or corban, which answers 
 to our modern poor-box, and the similar receptacle which is 
 found in Jewish synagogues. This custom we still may 
 follow. When the chuches are open to the people, as the 
 Bishop of London has recommended, for the purpose of 
 private devotion, thank-offerings will no doubt be often 
 cast into the poor-box ; but when collections are made at 
 any service, there are strong reasons for laying them on the 
 altar. 1. The holy communion is the chief and central act 
 of Christian worship, round which all others radiate. The 
 ancient liturgies or eucharistic of&ces were the models on 
 which all other services were framed ; and with this prin- 
 ciple the oblation of the alms is most consistent. 2. As 
 the altar is the symbol of sacrifice, by laying them thereon 
 we make our alms more directly offerings to God, than if 
 they were carried at once into the vestry. 3. Our Saviour's 
 words, " when thou bringest thy gift to the altar," &c., are 
 a direct sanction for the custom, which serves to recall 
 continually to our mind the necessity of seasoning our alms 
 with charity and good-will, in order that they may be ac- 
 ceptable to God. The principle on which alms are made at 
 every service is also an application of the eucharistic idea. 
 Alms are then collected to mark our thankfulness for being 
 admitted to the highest Christian privilege. Then, indeed, 
 should they be larger, as implying our greater thankful- 
 ness ; but if there is a blessing promised to common wor- 
 ship, and we can realize the truth of our Saviour's saying, 
 that where two or three are gathered in His name, there is 
 He in the midst, our natural feelings would suggest the 
 propriety of approaching Him with a gift whensoever we 
 come into His presence. It will thus have the eifect of 
 teaching us to value the blessings of public worship, and to 
 realize the communion of saints, by making offerings when-
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 29 
 
 soever we are assembled in the congregation for the main- 
 tenance of God's ministers and the relief of the necessities 
 of the poor. The principle of course attaches to all services ; 
 but its application may be regulated by circumstances. 
 Sundays and festival days will receive a higher dignity if 
 collections are made at the services then, and thus alms 
 may become special acts of thanksgiving for the blessings 
 commemorated in the services of that day. 
 
 The sentences of the offertory which are passages of 
 Scripture, which inculcate the duty and privilege of alms- 
 giving,^ took the place of the Anthem which, in the old 
 English office books, was sung during the collection of the 
 alms. In the ancient Church intervals of time were usually 
 filled up with psalmody, and the practice of singing whilst 
 the alms were being collected was probably a very old 
 custom. Cardinal Bona thought that S. Augustine alluded 
 to this custom as commenced at Carthage in his time, when 
 hymns from the Book of Psalms were sung at the altar 
 either before the oblation, or when that which was offered 
 was distributed to the people.* Anthems for the offertory 
 are found in the sacramentary of S. Gregory, who is reputed 
 .by some to be its author. They appear in all the liturgies 
 which were used in the English Church before the Eeforma- 
 tion, and, therefore, it is probable that they were either 
 introduced by S. Augustine, or found by him already in the 
 use of the ancient British Church. f In England it had 
 been customary for the officiating priest to chant the 
 offertory with his ministers, and this was, probably, the 
 reason which induced the reformers of the litm-gy to direct 
 that it should be read by the priest instead of being 
 chanted by the choir as is the custom in the Church of 
 Rome. The purpose of this was probably to make the 
 
 * Morem qui tunc esse apud Carthaginem cceperat, ut hymni ad altare 
 dicerentur de Psalmorum libio, sive ante oblationem, sive cum distribueretur 
 populo quod fuisset oblatum. — Augusti7i, lib. ii., Retract, c. xi. 
 
 f Palmer's Orig. Litur., vol. ii. p. 73. Deinde dicitur ofFertorium. — Miss. 
 Ebor. vol. 73. Sacerdos — canat cum suis ministris otleitoiium. — Miss. 
 Hereford. Deinde dicitur ofFertorium. — Miss. Sar. vol. 73.
 
 30 THE OFFEKTORY. 
 
 exhortation to liberality more impressive as being an 
 autboritative declaration of the precepts of the Gospel. 
 
 The oiFertory was formerly invariable, as is now the case 
 in the Church of Eome, having reference rather to the 
 services of the day, than to the special duty of charity. 
 This alteration shows the importance which the reformers 
 attached to the duty of almsgiving, and, perhaps, also the 
 necessity which existed at the time of enforcing it more 
 strongly than it had been in the age that preceded. It 
 could not have been without much care and thought that 
 the compilers of the Prayer-book gave such prominency to 
 the ofFertor}', and this is a consideration which can be of 
 no little weight with those who venerate their memory. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 PEW RENTS. 
 " Make not my Father's house an house of merchandize." — S. John ii. 16. 
 
 The preceding chapters are but preliminary to the special 
 purpose of this essay, which is to show the superiority of 
 offertory collections to pew rents. The principle upon which 
 the offertory rests and the use which the Church has made of 
 it in past ages has been shown, and now considering the 
 present position of the question, we find that the Church 
 provides for collections being made whenever the com- 
 munion office is used, whether there is a celebration or not, 
 and that the purpose of this collection may be gathered 
 from the offertory sentences to be the maintenance of the 
 clergy and the relief of the poor. Many of the sentences 
 have special reference to the former, many to the latter 
 purpose ; whilst others enjoin almsgiving as a general duty, 
 and therefore it appears that the same purpose for which 
 rents have been adopted has already been provided for by 
 the offertory. The offertory, therefore, is the rule of tbe
 
 THE OFFERTORY. ol 
 
 Church, whilst pew rents have never received her sanction. 
 The only excuse for the custom of pew rents must be made 
 on the principle of expediency ; and the object of this essay 
 is to show that the principle of expediency no less than 
 Christian duty requires that pew rents should be altogether 
 abandoned. 
 
 The appropriation of seats for the consideration of rent 
 is a distinct invasion of the rights of the parishioners. It 
 is as much so as the letting common land would be. If a 
 common were parcelled out, and let in several small tene- 
 ments, the rights of commonage would be invaded. Those 
 to whom the common rights belonged, who should be fortu- 
 nate enough to obtain an allotment, would be oppressed by 
 the exaction of a rent, whilst those who received no portion 
 of the common land would be still more oppressed, inasmuch 
 as they would be shut out from the use of that to which 
 they had a right. And it is just so with the parish church. 
 As the freehold of the common belongs to the lord of the 
 manor for the use of the parishioners, so does the freehold 
 of the church belong to the incumbent for the use of the 
 people ; and it is the duty of the churchwardens to arrange 
 them according to their station; but except in the case of 
 some churches built under a special Act of Parliament, in 
 the reig-n of Queen Anne, the law recognises no rent as 
 a consideration for the use of the seats which belong by 
 right to the parishioners. New districts, being for all 
 ecclesiastical purposes as distinct as the mother parishes 
 from which they were formed, cannot be exempted from 
 this rule, and, therefore, the exaction of pew rents in 
 district churches is as illegal a tax as it would be in the 
 mother church. The recent bill for the consolidation of 
 the Acts under which district chiTrches have been built, 
 which was thrown out in the last session of parliament, con- 
 templated the legalization of those rents which by custom 
 have been exacted ; but happily the bill was lost, and the 
 intended violation of the rights of the parishioners was 
 frustrated.
 
 32 THE OFFERTOKY. 
 
 The origin of pews appears to have been the selection of 
 some portion of the church for their private use by the 
 founders and patrons of churches. The rest of the church 
 was free to the parishioners. The seats consisted usually 
 of movable benches, which were the property of the incum- 
 bent, and were often devised by will to his successor, and 
 sometimes to other persons. But it is easy to understand 
 how in time other parishioners would try to imitate the 
 pomp of the patron, and erect pews for themselves. This 
 explains a canon made by Bishop Quivil's council at 
 Exeter, a.d. 1287, which says, " Also we have heard that 
 parishioners often quarrel concerning the seats in the 
 church, two or more of them claiming the same seat, 
 whereby great scandal arises and divine service is often 
 hindered ; we therefore enact that no person in future 
 shall be allowed to claim any seat as his own ; the nobility 
 and patrons of churches being alone excepted ; but he who 
 first comes to church to pray shall choose his own place 
 for prayers." When we read this canon we might almost 
 fancy that it was made in the nineteenth century, for we 
 can call to mind many instances of the scandal arising from 
 disputes about pews ; but if any bishop would have the 
 courage to imitate the example of Bishop Quivil, and assert 
 the law of the Church as plainly and fearlessly, an end 
 would be put to those dissentions which so often vex the 
 peace of country parishes. Little trouble was given to the 
 ecclesiastical courts before the time of the Reformation by 
 disputes respecting seats. Burn says, that the common 
 law books mention but two or three, and these relate to 
 the chancels and seats of persons of great quality. The 
 patrons of churches had seats appropriated to them, and 
 these were sometimes of magnificent construction, as the 
 ancient pews, still remaining in the church at Lavenham 
 in Sufi'olk attest, whilst the rest of the parishioners had only 
 a common right to the use of the floor of the church. The 
 evil which was crushed in its infancy by Bishop Quivil 
 grew up again after the Reformation ; and now the church
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 33 
 
 authorities met the difficulty by another expedient which 
 they converted into a source of profit ; and that expedient 
 was granting faculties for the appropriation of seats by 
 particular persons. Happily the application for faculties 
 has disappeared, and no one can now claim the exclusive 
 appropriation of a seat unle^^^s he has a faculty for its 
 possession. The appropriation is, therefore, only a matter 
 of arrangement between the churchwardens and the 
 parishioners ; but although the churchwardens are bound to 
 seat the parishioners according to their quality, they have 
 no right to exact rents, or to appropriate seats to individuals 
 or to the inhabitants of certain houses in perpetuity. The 
 assignment of seats may be made at ever}^ service, or at 
 stated times, but no churchwardens can be bound by the 
 appropriation of their predecessors, nor can they assign 
 seats to persons who do not occupy them. 
 
 The violation of these rights has been productive of the 
 following evils : 
 
 I. The best seats have been assigned to persons who could 
 afford to pay the highest rents, and thus the injunction of 
 S. James has been set at nought : " If there come into your 
 assembly a man with a gold ring in goodly apparel, and 
 there come in also a poor man in vile raiment, and ye have 
 respect unto the man that weareth the gold ring, and say 
 unto him, ' Sit thou here in a good place,* and say to the 
 poor, ' Stand thou there,' or, ' Sit thou here under my foot- 
 stool,' are ye not partial in yourt;elves, and are become 
 judges of evil thoughts ? Hearken, my beloved brethren, 
 hath not God chosen the poor in this world, rich in faith, 
 and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to 
 those that love him ; but ye have despised the poor," 
 (S. James ii. 3 — 6.) 
 
 II. The poor, who could afford to pay no rents, have 
 been practically shut out of the church. Accommodation 
 has been provided for them in the worst parts of the church, 
 where oftentimes they could neither see nor hear, in places 
 
 4. D
 
 34 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 which were Tinsmtable for pews, because they were in 
 situations where no one would choose to rent them ; or, at 
 best, the setting apart of " free seats" for the poor has had 
 the effect of stamping them with the stigma of poverty in 
 church, from which the independence of the peasantry of 
 the present day has revolted. The consequence of this has 
 been that the poor, in great measure, have ceased to frequent 
 the j)arish church at all. In rural parishes, where the 
 feudal influence of the landed proprietors still exists, the 
 evil has in some degree been counterbalanced by the fear of 
 losing the good-will of their employers and benefactors ; but 
 in city parishes, where no such influence is felt, the free 
 seats are comparatively empty. Between the rich and the 
 poor there is, moreover, a middle class, too proud to occupy 
 the free seats and too poor to rent pews, and the efi'ects of 
 the system on this class has been to alienate them alto- 
 gether from the church. The middle class, with its in- 
 creasing power, influence and intelligence, has been for the 
 most part lost to the Church of England. Those who are 
 influenced by religious convictions are found in the ranks 
 of dissent, and those, who are not, exercise by their example 
 the worst possible influence over the class which is placed 
 immediately below them, and with whom they are brought 
 into the most intimate contact, whilst small indeed — 
 lamentably small — is the portion that remains faithful to 
 the church. 
 
 III. And besides these evils, there is another of no lesser 
 magnitude which aifects the renters of pews. They cannot 
 divest themselves of the idea that they enjoy a privilege 
 for which their money has paid. Where rich and poor meet 
 together, and God is the maker of them all, they look forth 
 from their pews, and eye their poorer brethren placed on 
 seats of a different kind, — and they find it hard to realize 
 that they are all equal in God's sight. A class feeling is 
 engendered where it ought to be forgotten, and the separa- 
 tion between rich and poor is nowhere so apparent as it is
 
 THE OFFERTOKY. 35 
 
 in churcli. The feeling of distinction, thus fostered, i 
 carried with them into the world, and they learn to regard 
 the poor as men of a different race, instead of being, as they 
 are, of the same flesh and blood with themselves. The idea 
 of the church as a type of heaven here below is marred, and 
 the pattern of the things shown on the mount is disregarded. 
 There was no distinction in the Temple at Jerusalem which 
 money could obtain, and the places of highest dignity in 
 heaven are not to be purchased, but shall be given unto 
 them for whom they are prepared. 
 
 Amidst the bustle and the turmoil of the world it is 
 refreshing to think of the church as a type of heaven. It 
 is there that we are learning the hymns of praise which the 
 redeemed shall sing in their glory. It is there that we 
 should yearn for the communion of saints with God, in 
 which consists the chiefest joy of the inhabitants of heaven. 
 There, where two or^three are gathered in his name, Christ 
 is present in the midst, present to the eyes of faith in 
 anticipation of that presence which we shall behold with 
 our sight, when not two or three, but the assembled host of 
 all the ransomed of every age and nation shall be gathered 
 before the Throne, and the Lamb shall be present in the midst 
 as the object of adoration, before whom all shall bow. There, 
 when the Saviour comes to meet his people, the angels, too, 
 are present, and because of them the women are bidden by 
 S. Paul to cover their heads. In so august a presence, then, 
 how can distinctions of earthly rank be recognised ? The 
 church is different from the world without. In the world 
 there must be social distinctions ; but how greatly is the 
 idea of the church, as a type of heaven, marred, when the 
 most honourable places can be purchased with money ! Can 
 the thrones of heaven be so obtained ? and is not the rebuke 
 of Simon Magus in some degree applicable to the renters 
 of pews? " Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast 
 thought that the gift of God can be purchased with money." 
 
 If the idea of the church as a place of assembly for Christ's 
 
 D 2
 
 36 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 people, whether they be rich or poor, is to be realized, the 
 accommodation provided for all must be without distinction ; 
 and this is scarcely possible where the system of pew rents 
 prevails. Objections will be made by some, who admit the 
 truth of this in theory, that there are some practical diffi- 
 culties which ought to be considered. It is fancied by some 
 that the abolition of social distinctions in church may have 
 an injurious etfect upon the poor, and be productive of 
 inconvenience to the higher classes. Instances are imagined 
 of persons redolent of tobacco or the stable, seating them- 
 selves beside their more refined neighbours, to their great 
 annoyance and inconvenience ; and it is often said that, on 
 this account, if our churches were free and open, the 
 wealthier classes would be driven away. But the practical 
 experience of all m ho have tiied the experiment is an evi- 
 dence that the objection exists only in imagination. If 
 there was any fear of it the remedy would exist in the 
 hands of the churchwardens, to whom the duty pertains of 
 seating the people according to the most convenient regu- 
 lations; but the interference of the churchwarden will 
 never be found necessary, for the natural good taste and 
 delicacy of the poor always leads them so to seat themselves 
 that their position shall be no annoyance to others. Just 
 as the rich will seat themselves together amongst their 
 acquaintance, so will the poor do also. No complaints are 
 ever heard of inconvenience arising from the mixture of rich 
 and poor in the public meeting held in the parish school- 
 room for a missionary or any other purpose ; without any 
 interference, they so arrange themselves that the rich have 
 no intrusion to complain of, and it is difficult to see why the 
 same arrangement will not naturally be followed in the 
 church. The objectors may be satisfied with the assurance 
 that all experience proves that the good taste and delicacy 
 of the poor may always be relied on, and that if any inter- 
 ference is necessary, it is to induce the poor to take better 
 places than they would naturally choose for themselves. 
 It is also objected that the abolition of appropriations
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 37 
 
 and pew rents would be a great inconvenience to the per- 
 sons who now rent pews, because they like to have a 
 settled place in church whei^e they can sit with their 
 families. Even if it were so, the great advantage of the 
 change ought to counterbalance the private inconvenience, 
 for the inconvenience would be confined to themselves, 
 while the advantage would be general, inasmuch as the 
 poor would be admitted, not by sufferance, as now, to 
 places which are a stigma on their poverty, but to those to 
 which they have equal right with the rest of the parish- 
 ioners. But after all, they need not fear, for here again 
 experience shows that the objection is more in idea than in 
 reality. In open churches, Sunday after Sunday, we see 
 the same people in the same places, and families sitting 
 together just as much as they did under the old pew 
 system. Without the assertion of any rights, or any dis- 
 pute respecting them, regular churchgoers, who come 
 before the service commences, find the seats left for them 
 which they are accustomed to occupy. Their habitual 
 custom, or their predilection for that particular place, is 
 well known to their fellow-parishioners, who will always 
 be ready to show a good-natured respect for their habit. 
 This we could not have anticipated before we had expe- 
 rience that such is the case, but as in many places this has 
 been the result of the experiment, good old-fashioned 
 people, who like always to sit in the same place, need not 
 fear that their prejudice will not be respected. Two 
 things, however, the}^ must bear in mind ; first, that it will 
 be necessary to come to church before the service com- 
 mences, for if they lounge in afterwards they cannot expect 
 to find their accustomed seats unoccupied ; and secondly, 
 that under the free-church system it will not be possible 
 for one or two persons to occupy the accommodation which 
 is sufficient for six or eight, — as they are accustomed to do, 
 when they shut their pew doors and exclude all but the 
 members of their own family. It is unnecessary to say 
 that the amount of church accommodation will be greatly
 
 38 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 increased when tlie appropriation of sittings has ceased to 
 exist. 
 
 Another objection to free churches is, that where the 
 church is filled, and the amount of the offertory is quite 
 sufficient for all requirements, the congregation does not 
 consist of the parishioners, but of strangers from all parts, 
 who, coming early, preoccupy the seats which ought to be 
 preserved for the accommodation of the parishioners. All 
 Saints, Margaret Street, is specially pointed at as an 
 instance of this ; but it can scarcely be said that the 
 example is a fair one, when we consider the peculiar posi- 
 tion which All Saints occupies in London. On account of 
 the richness of its decorations, and the style in which the 
 services are performed, it presents attractions which other 
 churches do not usually afford. We could not expect that 
 the services in all churches would be similarly attractive ; 
 but if all were free and open, and pains were taken to render 
 the services as attractive as circumstances would permit — 
 and for this the offertory would provide the funds — the 
 parishioners would have less inducement to leave their 
 own parish church in search of greater attractions else- 
 where. A heaUhy rivalry would be created, when it was 
 found that unless services were made attractive the parish- 
 ioners would wander off to other churches ; for all things 
 being equal, people will always be found to prefer their 
 own parish church. They will desire to cultivate the 
 pastoral relationship between their parish priest and them- 
 selves, and many associations will make their parish church 
 perferable to any other, and the convenience of proximity 
 will tend to increase this influence. 
 
 Of course there will always be exceptions. Popular 
 preaching and beautiful music will always make some 
 churches more attractive than others ; but this is found to 
 be the case quite as much under the pew-rent as under the 
 open-church system. Nevertheless, the introduction of the 
 offertory will render it possible for every parish to keep 
 pace with its neighbours. If the parish be slenderly
 
 THE OFFEETORY. 39 
 
 endowed, the parishoners may, if they desire it, provide 
 the funds requisite for an efficient choir. If ehiquence be 
 not the incumbent's gift, the offertory will furnish means 
 for obtaining the assistance of earnest and attractive 
 preachers, and therefore he never need complain that his 
 poverty places him in an unfavourable position in com- 
 parison with the incumbents of surrounding parishes. 
 
 Another advantage of the offertory over pew rents is the 
 opportunity given to the poor of contributing to the fund 
 thus raised. We often hear it said that it is better to exact 
 a small pew rent from the poor than to supply them with 
 seats entirely free, because they are accustomed to value 
 that which they pay for, more than that which costs them 
 nothing. There is some force in the argument, for we 
 invariably find that the attendance of children at school 
 is far more regular where a weekly payment is exacted, 
 than where they are gratuitously educated; and it is 
 possible that the attendance of the poor at church would 
 be more regular, and their appreciation of the blessing 
 greater, if they paid something for their seat, than if it was 
 entirely free. There is some force, but that force is not 
 against the system advocated, but against the division of 
 the church into rented pews and free seats ; it altogether 
 tells in favour of the offertor}^ as a substitute for pew rents, 
 for the advantage of giving the people a more decided 
 interest in the service of the church would be obtained, 
 whilst the disadvantages attending pew rents would be 
 avoided. There would be two disadvantages which appear 
 to have escaped the notice of the advocates of cheap sittings. 
 We will suppose that a sitting has been hired at a rental of 
 a shilling a quarter. The shilling is paid in advance, and 
 for the next three months the occupant is regularly seen in 
 his place ; but when the next quarter comes round, he may 
 be out of work, or may have had some unusual domestic 
 expense to meet, and the shilling is not forthcoming ; con- 
 sequently he is unable to renew the hire of his sitting. It 
 is let to another, and he is never more seen at church.
 
 40 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 The other disadvantage is that which belongs equally 
 to rich and poor, the idea of exclusiveness in the house 
 of God; and the evil produced on the mind is even 
 greater in the case of the poor than in that of the rich, 
 resulting from the feeling that their money has purchased 
 the privileges to which they are admitted in public 
 worship. 
 
 The offertor}", however, collected from the whole con- 
 gregation, and not from the rich only, will give the poor 
 an opportunity of making contributions for the mainte- 
 nance of the clergy and the services of the church, which 
 will enable them to feel that they take their share in 
 furthering these objects. It will interest them as much in 
 the services as if they paid pew rents, and the object aimed 
 at by the advocates of cheap pews will thus be obtained. 
 In prosperous times their gifts would far exceed the amount 
 exacted as pew rent, whilst at a season of adversity their 
 inability to raise a shilling would not deprive them of the 
 blessings of public worship. They will give less when 
 they have less, and nothing when they are destitute ; but 
 the difference in their offering will scarcely be observed ; 
 and they will still come to church as gladly as before, in 
 the persuasion that if they had more to give it would be 
 most willingly offered. 
 
 Under the present pew system, the fund raised is collected 
 only from the rich, and the poor have no opportunity of 
 contributing ; but our Lord has taught us, in the lesson 
 which he elicited from the widow's mite cast into the 
 treasury, that such gifts are not to be despised, for they 
 are offerings to God, who esteems them according to what 
 a man hath, and not according to that he hath not. She 
 had cast in more, measured by that rule, than all the rich 
 men, who gave out of their abundance, and her gift was 
 proportionably valued in His sight; but the pew system 
 depiives the poor of this opportunity of laying up treasure 
 in heaven, and of showing their love to Him who came to 
 preach the Gospel to the poor. Surely an injustice is don©
 
 THE OFFEETOEY. 41 
 
 to them by withholding the opportunity of presenting 
 their offering to God, which is scarcely less than that by 
 which they are banished to the most inconvenient parts of 
 the church, or are excluded from it altogether. 
 
 CHAPTER lY. 
 
 THE AMOUNT AND CERTAINTY OF REVENUE. 
 " It is more blessed to give than to receive." — Acts xx. 35. 
 
 If the reader has followed out the train of thought which 
 has found expression in the foregoing pages, he will now 
 be ready to relinquish the principle on which the establish- 
 ment of pew rents rests, and prepared for the substitution 
 of voluntary offerings in their stead. Many would think 
 this a bold experiment, and certainly that clergyman, who- 
 ever he may have been, who first proposed to his parish- 
 ioners to exchange pew rents for an offertory must have 
 been regarded as a somewhat adventurous person. 
 
 The well endowed parish, and the ecclesiastical district 
 in which the incumbent has been entirely dependent on 
 pew rents, are two distinct cases. The experiment might 
 be made b}^ the rector of the endowed parish with little 
 injury to himself, but the incumbent of the unendowed 
 district, to whom the pew rents have provided the whole 
 of his maintenance, must necessarily consider the matter 
 very seriously before he throws himself on the voluntary 
 contributions of his congi-egation. It is right that he 
 should weigh every objection carefully and do nothing 
 hastily. No wise man would exchange a certain for a 
 precarious income, and if he has a wife and family depend- 
 ing on him, he would not be justified in making a rash 
 experiment for the sake of a correct idea; but if it can be 
 proved that there is no uncertainty in the matter, all his 
 scruples will vanish.
 
 42 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 In a parish sufficiently endowed, the maintenance of the 
 clergy may be omitted in the distribution of the alms ; but 
 this is the only difference which need be considered, for if 
 it can be shown that the offertory will raise an amount suf- 
 ficient for all requirements, the incumbent of the unen- 
 dowed district need no longer fear to make the experiment. 
 Where the offertory has been attempted, various circum- 
 stances have led to its adoption. In some parishes the in- 
 sufficiency of subscriptions for the support of local charities 
 has led the parishioners to this resource. In others, the 
 absence of church rates has necessitated an appeal to the 
 voluntary offerings of the people for those expenses which 
 were usually chargeable on the rate. In some, again, the 
 desire of making almsgiving a part of public worship, has 
 been the motive for its introduction ; whilst in others the 
 offertory has superseded pew rents. In all of them the ex- 
 periment has almost invariably proved successful, and at 
 least no instance of failure after a fair trial has ever been 
 made public. An example of the first may be found in the 
 parish of Kidderminster, where neither church rates nor 
 pew rents were abolished. The inconvenience of collecting 
 subscriptions and the insufficiency of their amount induced 
 the vicar of Kidderminster to introduce a weekly offertory 
 in his parish. 1 he result proved more than equal to his 
 expectations, for in the year 1861 the amount collected in 
 three churches, was respectively £359 6s. 3d. ; £390 4s. lid., 
 and £150 15s. 7(^., sums which greatly exceeded those which 
 appeared in the subscription lists, which were now laid 
 aside. With the exception of some special offertories, the 
 whole was divided into three portions, which were applied 
 to the following objects : — 
 
 I. The relief of the sick and needy. 
 II. The support of schools. 
 III. The expenses of Divine worship which are not 
 chargeable on the church rate. 
 
 Surely there was encouragement here for the abolition
 
 THE OFFERTOKY. 43 
 
 of tlie objectionable system of pew rents, for if the amount 
 of these had simply been added to the sums collected at the 
 offertory, the incumbents would have lost nothing; but, if 
 the money so collected for charitable objects exceeded the 
 amount of subscriptions formerly raised, why should we 
 doubt but that a similar increase would have taken place in 
 the sums offered for the maintenance of the clergy ? 
 
 The rejection of church rates has, in many parishes, led 
 to the introduction of the offertory ; and although the aboli- 
 tion of church rates would be an invasion of the rightful 
 property of the Church, and no argument in favour of such 
 a step can fairly be drawn from these cases, the result has 
 been that where the experiment has been made the amount 
 has considerably exceeded that which was formerly collected 
 by the rate. 
 
 Where rates existed, and there was no necessity for supple- 
 menting the endowment, the offertory has in many parishes 
 been revived simply and purely for the sake of establishing 
 almsgiving as a portion of Divine worship. As a matter of 
 principle it was adopted, and as such accepted by the con- 
 gregation. Thus, where there might have been greater 
 difficulty in convincing the parishioners of the necessity for 
 such a step, it has invariably been productive of the most 
 beneficial results. The people have contracted the habit of 
 liberality, which must ever bring a blessing on their heads, 
 and a fund has been raised which has facilitated the esta- 
 blishment of many useful parochial institutions. 
 
 In other parishes, again, incumbents encouraged by the 
 success of the offertory collected for other purposes, and con- 
 vinced of the impropriety of the pew-rent system, have had 
 what seemed at first the hardihood to throw themselves on 
 the voluntary offerings of the people, and of all who have 
 made the experiment we have never heard of any one who 
 has regretted it. If the incumbents of parishes have con- 
 tented themselves with no larger income than was formerly 
 raised, it has enabled them to increase their ministerial 
 usefulness by obtaining the services of additional curates.
 
 44 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 The reasons for this increase will be obvious when we con- 
 sider its cause. 
 
 1. That which has heen given has been given as an offering to 
 God. 
 
 That which was contributed under the pew-rent system 
 was a sum paid for the purchase of the money's worth. 
 The value of a pew was estimated according to its situation 
 in the church, and when a scale of charges was settled, the 
 money was paid without any idea of making it an offering 
 to God. All responsibilities were liquidated by the pay- 
 ment, and no thought was ever entertained of making addi- 
 tions to it in proportion to the blessings which the giver 
 was conscious of having received. It was simply a mer- 
 cantile transaction with which both parties to the bargain 
 were satisfied, and the only complaint ever heard on the 
 one hand was that the pew rents were high, and on the 
 other that many of the sittings were unlet. But the offer- 
 tor}^ introduces an entire change in the principle on which 
 the payments are made. It is no longer a mercantile trans- 
 action, but an act of homage to God. The contribution 
 which was simply the fulfilment of a bargain before, will 
 now be affected by many considerations. 
 
 First and foremost will be that of gratitude to the Giver 
 of all blessings for the spiritual benefits which they have 
 received in the church. Many are the devout worshippers 
 who will make the reckoning within their own hearts, 
 " What shall I render unto the Lord for all the benefits that 
 He hath done unto me ?" They have been admitted to the 
 privilege of public worship. They have come to meet 
 their Saviour in the place which He has appointed, where 
 two or three are gathered in His name, and He has pro- 
 mised His presence in the midst; they have drawn near 
 unto Him with the confession of their sins, and His 
 appointed minister has made an authoritative declaration of 
 His mercy to all them that truly repent and unfeignedly 
 believe His holy Gospel. They have joined in the song of
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 45 
 
 praise which, oifered up by Christ's people on earth, mingles 
 with the unceasing h^^mns which the angels sing in heaven. 
 Their service, if heartily used, has been a foretaste of 
 heaven, and when ihey remembered dear friends who once 
 walked with them in the house of God now departed to 
 their rest, they felt that they were nearer to them whilst 
 they sang on earth the praise of the same Lord whom their 
 dear departed ones were praising in Paradise. The words 
 of Holy Scripture w^hich they heard read gave precepts of 
 holy counsel, the chart by which their course must be 
 guided as they sailed over the waves of this troublesome 
 world ; and the sermon enforced these lessons and brought 
 them home to their hearts. If there is any blessing in the 
 ordinance of preaching, they must have felt it most when 
 the exhortations of God's minister had scarcely died upon 
 their ears. Explanations of the way of salvation, counsels 
 for the diificulties, and comfort for the sorrows of life, each 
 unfolding the richness of God's love, were the themes on 
 which the preacher d welt ; aud if the word preached was 
 mixed with faith in them that heard it, when would their 
 liberality be more aroused than w^hen the offertory bags 
 were handed round amongst the congregation ? The love of 
 God would seem to speak within them then, and say in the 
 poet's words : 
 
 Give all thou canst. High heaven disdains the lore 
 Of nicely calculated less or more. 
 
 Perhaps they are about to partake of the sacred mysteries of 
 their Lord's undying love. Their souls were faint and 
 hungry, and they are about to be fed with the living 
 bread which cometh down from heaven. If they had learned 
 to act on the principle of returning to God a thank-offering 
 in proportion to their sense of blessing, what earnest desire 
 must they feel at such a time to give all they can for the 
 love of their Master, who has said, " It is more blessed to 
 give than to receive." 
 
 Nor will the feeling of gratitude to God's ministers be 
 absent from their thoughts. Although their hearts will pass
 
 46 THE OFFERTOEY. 
 
 on to Him who is the source of every blessing, they will 
 remember that He has made use of His ministers as the 
 earthen vessels through which spiritual benefits are con- 
 veyed to themselves, and that a debt is due to them also on 
 this account. S. Paul thought it not unmeet to remind Phi- 
 lemon of this debt when he sent back Onesimus with the 
 epistle in which he wrote, " If he hath wronged thee or oweth 
 thee aught, put that on mine account. I, Paul, have written 
 it with mine own hand, I will repay it, albeit I do not say 
 to thee how thou owest unto me even thine own self beside." 
 (Philem. 18, 19.) And they will feel that to each one of them 
 in some measure these words apply. Although the minis- 
 ters of Christ are all His ambassadors and act only in His 
 name, yet the same natural feeling which would have led 
 Philemon to consider that he owed his very self to S. Paul, 
 will cause the people to remember how Christ's ministers 
 were made the channels through which such great blessings 
 were received from the day of their baptism even to that 
 hour when they have just been listening to the exhortations 
 spoken by their mouths, and are about to receive at their 
 hands the body which was broken and the blood which was 
 shed for their salvation. The time and circumstances 
 under which the collection is made renders it more than 
 probable that the offering will be larger and more cheer- 
 fully given than when the stipulated pew rent was called 
 for by the clerk during the long hours of secular employ- 
 ment. This will hold good of every collection made during 
 Divine service. The inducement to liberality will be 
 greater at the holy communion, but it will not be wanting 
 at any time when the congregation is gathered in Christ's 
 name within the walls of the sanctuary. 
 
 II. Wlien the liahit of giving is contracted, liheraUty increases. 
 This will invariably be found to be the case. To whom do 
 persons in distress apply for relief ? Not to the richest, or 
 to those who are known never to give, but to those who are 
 always giving away their money. They know that from
 
 THE OFFEKTORY. 47 
 
 such their application will meet with consideration and a 
 kind response, and therefore it is to such that the}^ will 
 make known their distress. When liberality has become 
 a habit, those who have acquired it will find a pleasure in 
 bestowing their alms upon the needy, and they will be 
 more ready to give than those who only do so on rare 
 occasions. There are many reasons for this. That which 
 Aristotle says, of things being pleasant when they become 
 habitual, is true of charity as of all things else ; and as the 
 habit is formed from a succession of actions, the oft-repeated 
 collection will be more gladly responded to than that which 
 is unfrequent and exceptional. The duty of liberality in 
 proportion to our wealth has been much overlooked of late ; 
 but when men are once convinced that it is a duty, the 
 sense of its being a burden will gradually disappear, and 
 it will be regarded rather in the light of a privilege. The 
 existence of the offertory will give many opportunities to 
 the clergy of inculcating the duty, and of encouraging 
 those who are acquiring the habit of devoting a portion of 
 their goods to God's sei"v^ice. Men who are unaccustomed 
 to give fear lest they should miss that which they are asked 
 to give, but when they make the trial they discover how 
 little they seem to lose by it. Money so spent brings them 
 more satisfaction than that which is bestowed on the pur- 
 chase of luxui-ies. They feel the duty of liberality, and 
 the responsibility attaching to them as stewards of the 
 wealth committed to their charge ; and when they are told 
 that almsgiving is valued in God's sight, not by the in- 
 trinsic worth of the gift, but by the measure of self-denial 
 which it costs them, they will feel ashamed that their gifts 
 involve so little sacrifice, and instead of grudging what 
 they give they will rather wish to increase their alms. 
 This is the reason why offeiiories grow larger from year to 
 3'ear, when they become the established custom of a con- 
 gregation. 
 
 The duty of setting apart some certain portion of their 
 income for God's service is one which men will very easily
 
 48 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 learn to comprehend. If the Jews gave a tenth of all 
 things, the Christian should surely give no less. Xo settled 
 rule was laid down under the Gospel, that Christian libe- 
 rality might be all the more free and generous. It was not 
 to ease men of a burden that no rule was made by our 
 Saviour, but rather that they might learn that their alms 
 should be proportioned to their gratitude. It can scarcely 
 be supposed that the first Christians would have contented 
 themselves with the limit of Jewish charity. Their love 
 led them rather to reserve nothing for themselves, like the 
 Christians at Jerusalem, than to consider how small a por- 
 tion of their goods would satisfy the claims of God. En- 
 couragements to liberality are often found in the epistles of 
 S. Paul, but nowhere had he occasion to rebuke Christians 
 for their indisposition to contribute to the needs of others. 
 And the reason of this was, that charity is the natural con- 
 sequence of Christian love. To have enjoined the duty of 
 devoting a tenth would have been to sei a limit, where no 
 limit was intended to exist. Christianity was a true and 
 real bond of fellowship, and the Christian felt his brother's 
 needs as if they were his own. We can scarcely imagine 
 the need of a charity sermon, in the modern sense of the 
 word, in apostolic times. There was no necessity for strong 
 appeals when each man's conscience told him that the 
 doctrine of the communion of saints was a blessed reality, 
 which supplied the principle on which his alms must be 
 bestowed. That, which was given for Christ's sake, was 
 given to Him, and, as a gift done unto Himself, He would 
 accept it in that day when even the cup of cold water 
 should not be forgotten. 
 
 III. The promises attached to liberality must not he forgotten. 
 Many are the instances in which the wise man's words have j 
 been verified : " I'hei-e is that scattereth and yet increaseth.". 
 We may see many of our most prosperous manufacturers 
 amongst the most liberal dispensers of their wealth, and 
 we may ask whether their liberality is the consequence of
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 49 
 
 their wealth, or their wealth the consequence of their 
 liberality. When the promise is so often repeated in Holy 
 Sciiptnre, can we doubt that the increase of their wealth is 
 the blessing of God bestowed on their liberality ? " Except 
 the Lord build the house, their labour is but lost that build 
 it ;" and in the building up of a fortune we must acknow- 
 ledge that all is the gift of God, and that without His bless- 
 ing the wisest schemes cannot command success. AVe 
 know of the instance of a man who rose from a humble 
 station, amassing a piincely fortune by his trade, and the 
 secret of his success he always attributed to the resolution 
 he had made in yonth, and in which he had steadily per- 
 severed all through his life, of devoting a tenth of all his 
 gains to charitable uses.* It may be that such instances 
 are permitted to occur for our encouragement, that we may 
 learn how even in temporal things God will bless our store, 
 if we dedicate to him the first-fruits of our gains ; but that 
 this should be universall}^ the case would be ill suited to 
 our present condition, in which reverse of fortune, poverty, 
 and sorrow, are oftentimes necessary to our sjnritual health. 
 Yet, nevertheless, God wiU be faithful to his word, and 
 the promise attached to charity will be fulfilled. Although 
 our earthly stores be not increased, we may find that for 
 the corruptible riches of the earth we receive the im- 
 perishable wealth of heaven ; for the things that perish in 
 the using, spiritual blessings which are far more exceeding 
 worth. Although the gift of God cannot be purchased 
 with money, he will reward lib^^rality with the inciease of 
 spiritual graces ; and thus the more we give, if it be done 
 simpl}^ for the love of Christ, and without ostentation or 
 display, for which the offertory afibrds no opportunity, we 
 shall find our hearts more disposed to liberality. For the 
 graces and the consolations which we receive we shall ever 
 have a thank-offering to bestow, and this is another reason 
 why the offertory collected week by week, and year by year, 
 will always be found to increase. 
 
 * The late Mr. Fiiizell, of Bristol. 
 4. E
 
 50 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 Anotlier reason for the offertory exceeding the amount of 
 
 pew rents is, that tlie collection is made frequently, and from 
 the lohole congregation. The frequency of the collection is 
 especially suited to those whose income is constantly coming 
 in, who constitute the bulk of an ordinary congregation. 
 It is on the same principle that coal and clothing clubs 
 and benefit societies are established, for many who would 
 find a difiiculty in subscribing a pound a year, find it a 
 much easier matter to set apart a shilling or sixpence a 
 week. When work is plenty, and gains are proportionately 
 large, they can give as God hath prospered them in the 
 week past ; while at times when employment is scarce, or 
 provisions are dear, the offering can be decreased without 
 attracting observation. When no settled sum is fixed, the 
 ability which they possess at one time will counterbalance 
 their inability at another, and thus, although the amount 
 of the offertory may fluctuate, its average will not be 
 diminished by reason of scarcity and want. When collec- 
 tions are seldom made, a wet Sunday, or the absence from 
 home of some members of the congregation, will influence 
 their amount ; but, when they are of constant occurrence, 
 these influences will not operate, for those who are absent 
 on one Sunday will be present on the next, and supply the 
 lack which their absence occasioned. 
 
 The offertory is collected from the whole congregation. 
 The poor as well as the ricb have an opportunity of giving, 
 and the pence of the poor will very considerably swell the 
 amount; so that not only will the voluntary offerings of 
 the rich exceed the sum formerly contributed as pev/ rent, 
 but the offerings of the poor, who paid no rent, will form a 
 very considerable addition. At Mr. Akroyd's church, at 
 Haley Hill, account was kept, during the first year, of the 
 proportions of gold, silver, and copper, which were con- 
 tributed to the offertory, and the result was found to be as 
 follows : — 
 
 Gold, £50. Silver, £U4. Copper, £60.
 
 THE OFFERTORY. • 51 
 
 Since the amount of copper exceeded that of gold, it is 
 clear that the addition of the pence was no inconsiderable 
 advantage, for we may not unreasonably conclude that the 
 givers of the copper would have had no opportunity of 
 contributing anything under the pew-rent system. The 
 only objection that can be made to this conclusion is the 
 supposition that persons contented themselves with giving 
 pence who could have aftbrded silver, and would have been 
 ready to pay more for the hire of a sitting. This objection 
 may be met by the answer, that the amount of silver, 144Z., 
 was not small, and that in other churches, after both sys- 
 tems have been tried, the amount of the offertory has been 
 found greatly to exceed the pew rents. At S. Philip's, 
 Clerkenwell, for instance, the pew rents amounted to 
 80Z. per annum ; but since these have been abolished, 
 400Z. to 500/. per annum has been obtained from the 
 offertory. At S. Matthias, Stoke Xewington, the offertorj^ 
 averages lOOOZ. per annum, a sum certainly greater than 
 could be obtained by pew rents, and this, it must be 
 remembered, is not collected from a rich congregation like 
 that of S. Andrew's, Well Street, or All Saints, Margaret 
 Street, but from one which is mostly composed of the 
 middle and lower classes. This has been found sufficient 
 not only to double the endowments, which the incumbent 
 receives, but also to provide curates, and to defray the 
 expenses of all the parochial institutions. 
 
 Instances of the success of the offertory might be indefi- 
 nitely multiplied, and these might be taken from every 
 kind of parish and every sort of congregation. Indeed it is 
 one of the advantages of the offertory, that it is suitable to 
 all circumstances. Of course cases might be adduced of ill- 
 will being stirred up b}^ its adoption, when it has been 
 introduced in violation of the wishes of the parishioners ; 
 but this has not arisen from any objection to the offertory 
 in itself, but from the supposition that it was a party badge, 
 or an indication of some form of ritualism to which the 
 feelings of the people were repugnant, but even in such 
 
 E 2
 
 52 THE OFFEKTORY. 
 
 cases the oppositio)) has ahiiost always died away when the 
 reasonableness of the custom was understood and when its 
 advantageous results were perceived. Great wiisdoni and 
 tact will, of course, be required at its first introduction, 
 but the necessity of perfect unanimity may be doubted, 
 since this is a thing always hard, and sometimes impossible 
 to be obtained. In all cases, when the incumbent is 
 satisfied with the desirableness of the introduction of the 
 offertory, he should clearly explain his motives to the 
 congregation, and if possible take such counsel with them 
 that the proposal may appear to emanate from themselves. 
 It is well if it can be adopted, as at Kidderminster, by the 
 unanimous resolution of the people; but Kidderminster 
 was a happy parish, and its vi(;ar possessed of more tact 
 perhaps than ordinarily falls to the share of parochial clergy- 
 men . In most parishes some will be found ready to oppose 
 every proposition which is made to ihem, and we can 
 scarcely suppose that the offertory will escape their objec- 
 tions. But if it is right in principle and expedient in 
 practice, why should we be afraid of a little opposition ? 
 When, at the Oxford Chuich Congress, Mr. Claughton sug- 
 gested that it should never be adopted except as the 
 unanimous resolution of the parishioners, Mr. Pierrepoint 
 gave the assembly the result of his own experience at 
 Warrington. When it was first introduced by the present 
 Bishop of Sodor and Man, he was himself opposed to it. 
 For some time he made it his habit, as a kind of silent 
 protest, not to contribute more frequently than he had 
 been accustomed when alms were collected once a month ; 
 but he gradually became convinced that the rector was in 
 the right, and ho was not ashamed to declare the discovery 
 of his mistake ; but he confessed his opinion that if the ; 
 rector had waited until all opposition was disarmed, the 
 offertor}^ would never have been adopted. This is one of 
 those cases in which the test of experience is the most 
 convincing answer to opponents. It is certainly desirable 
 * Report of the Oxford Church Congress, 113.
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 53 
 
 to convince the parishioners of its propriety beforehand ; 
 but when prejudice still exists there is every reason to hope 
 that this will be removed when the success of the offertor}'- 
 is seen. 
 
 In strict principle, pew rents should cease as soon as the 
 offertory is adopted, but yet it cannot be denied that the 
 offertory has been found very successful where pew rents 
 have been still maintained. At tlie church of the Holy 
 Trinity, Tottenham High Cross, pew rents have not been 
 abandoned, and yet the offertory last year exceeded 250Z. 
 The principle on which it was adopted was the duty of 
 habitual almsgiving ; but its success would certainly be an 
 encouragement to substitute the offertory for pew rents. 
 One curate is heie supported out of the offertory, and this 
 is a step in the right direction, for if one clerg\ man can be 
 so maintained, why should not three ? 
 
 To secure the success of the offertory, it will be neces- 
 sary to enlist the interest of the parishioners, as far as 
 possible, in its distribution. The fund so formed maj^ be 
 divided into three portions, of which the first should be 
 appropriated to the support of the clergy ; the second to 
 the maintenance of the church (where there is no rate) and 
 its services, including the expenses of the choir; whilst 
 the third should be devoted to various charitable purposes, 
 parochial institutions, as well as home and foreign missions. 
 This may be done by having separate offertories for 
 diffei-ent purposes, or b}^ the custom of wrapping up the 
 offerings in paper, indicating the objects to which they are 
 devoted ; but another plan, which would be very feasible, 
 is for the incumbent, with the assistance of the church- 
 wardens, and, perhaps, a committee of the congregation, to 
 divide the whole amount of the offertory in sut-h proportions 
 as may be requisite. This last plan has one advantage in 
 particular, and that is that the incumbent, and those of the 
 parishioners who are specially interested in the manage- 
 ment of the parochial charities, know better than the con- 
 gregation in general the proportions in which the divisions
 
 54 THE OFFERTOEY. 
 
 can most advantageously be made. Yet, on the other hand, 
 if it is found that the congregation like to know the special 
 object beforeliand to which their alms are to be devoted, it 
 ma^/ be well to adopt one of the other plans. : 
 
 One thing, however, should never be omitted, and that 
 is the publication of a statement of the amount of every 
 offertory, and an account of its expenditure. This is neces- 
 sary in order to give the congiegation confidence in the 
 proper appropriation of their offerings, and to secure the 
 incumbent against all suspicion. It will, moreover, give 
 the incumbent an opportunity of printing an annual address 
 to his parishioners on the advantage of almsgiving, and of 
 furnishing them with valuable particulars respecting the 
 success of those parochial institutions which are supported 
 from the offertory, which will always have a tendency to 
 increase their zeal and stimulate their liberality. However 
 small the amount may be, and however limited the parish, 
 the publication of such a statement, accompanied by a pas- 
 toral address, will always be found expedient. It will be 
 valued by the parishioners themselves, and in many in- 
 stances circulated amongst their friends at a distance, and 
 thus prepare the way for the adoption of the offertory in 
 places remote from that from whence the address first ema- 
 nated. The liberality of one parish will thus stir up the 
 emulation of another, and its effects will be productive of 
 results which will be advantageous to the Church at large. 
 
 It will also be beneficial to ascertain the feelings of the 
 people with respect to the offertory, and to converse often 
 with them on its advantage, and the weakness of the ob- 
 jections raised. This should be done not in sermons only, 
 but in the course of pastoral visitation. To ascertain objec- 
 tions where they exist, will always be the first step towards 
 their removal, and the}^ can be more effectually answered 
 in the course of conversation than in sermons. In conver- 
 sation objections can be met step by step, and the objector 
 having opportunit}^ of reply, will find the ground sink 
 from under him ; while, in listening to a sermon, however
 
 THE OFFEETOEY. 55 
 
 clear the argument may be, the objector will think that 
 whilst the clerg^'man is speaking from the j)ulpit, he must 
 have it all his own way, and that the statement is one-sided, 
 since he has no opportunity of urging his objections. The 
 objections will often be found to be of such a nature as to 
 cause a smile, such as would never have been anticipated, 
 and good-natured forbearance will often be necessary ; but 
 the minister of Christ must be able to condescend to the 
 weakness of all, that he may remove ever}^ obstacle which 
 stands in the way of the success of so right and holy a 
 custom. Of such a nature was the objection once made to 
 the writer by a very well-meaning parishioner, that by our 
 frequent collections we were assimilating ourselves to the 
 dissenters. " Fas est et ah lioste doceri" clothed in intelligible 
 language, will be an overpowering answer ; and the church- 
 man must confess that it would be an unworthy thing to 
 allow the more munificent liberality of the dissenters to 
 put us to shame, and that in things that are right, it cannot 
 be wrong to follow the example of those whose opinions in 
 other respects we may not approve. The veiy weakness 
 of the objections should give courage to the reviver of the- 
 oifertory, and instead of lamenting the unreasonableness of 
 his parishioners, he should rather rejoice that their argu- 
 ments are capable of so easy an answer. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE REAL INDEPENDENCE OF THE MINISTER. 
 " Esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake." — 1 Thess.x. 13. 
 
 The real independence of the clergyman is the next point 
 to be considered. The objection is often made that the sub- 
 stitution of the offertory for pew rents would make the 
 clergyman more dependent on the caprice of the congrega- 
 tion. This is urged by many who approve the principle of
 
 56 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 the offertory, and are prepared to adopt it as a means of 
 raising a fund for charitable purposes. The general prin- 
 ciple of the offertory is of course applicable to all parishes ; 
 but the question of supporting the clergy out of it is one 
 which only applies to those parishes where the clergyman 
 has been dependent on pew rents. The field of argument 
 is therefore narrowed to the consideration of the circum- 
 stances of these parishes. 
 
 It is said that where pew rents exist parishioners will 
 hire their sittings for a year, and although they may take 
 offence at something in the course of that time, they will 
 not leave the church at once, because they would lose the 
 value of the rent which they had paid, and before the end 
 of the year their misunderstanding may be removed, or their 
 anger be softened, and they will then take on their seat for 
 another year ; whereas, if the clergyman is dependent on 
 the offertory, he might find himself suddenly deserted by 
 the most influential and wealthy members of his congrega- 
 tion. There is much that is specious in the argument, and 
 therefore it demands attention ; but an attentive considera- 
 tion will rather remove than substantiate the objection. 
 People will take offence sometimes, and with the utmost 
 tact a faithful pastor will often find it impossible to avoid 
 treading on a sore point. Independence is necessary to the 
 influence of a clergyman, and this is one advantage of en- 
 dowments, that they remove him from dependence on the 
 favour of the people ; but where no endowments exist, it is 
 desirable that he should be placed in as independent a posi- 
 tion as is possible. Absolute independence is a very diffi- 
 cult thing to be obtained. Even where endowments are 
 ample, considerations of popularity may make a clergyman 
 in great measure dependent on his parishioners ; and even 
 with those that are above such unworthy influences, the fear 
 of doing anything which may cause the weak brother to be 
 offended may greatly diminish the independence of the most 
 faithful and diligent pastors. If absolute independence is so 
 difficult to be obtained, the question must be considered as
 
 THE OFFERTOEY. 57 
 
 one onl}^ of degree. It will, therefore, be necessary first to 
 show that under the system of pew rents no clergyman is 
 independent, and then that he is really more so when he 
 relies on the offertory for support. 
 
 Cases will sometimes occur where the clergyman gives 
 offence to some portion of his congiegation. The causes 
 may be either grave or trivial. It once happened that 
 many of the principal members of the congregation of a 
 proprietary chapel suddenly forsook their pews and carried 
 home their cushions because a pew-opener, who had been 
 illegally dismissed, was obliged to be reinstated in his 
 office. A painted window or an ornamental reredos has 
 sometimes been the means of dispersing a congregation; 
 and in such cases the prejudices aroused are so strong as 
 altogether to weigh down the commercial consideration of 
 the impolicy of losing half a year's rent of a pew by not 
 occupying it. Offence is sometimes taken at a sermon, or 
 at some ritual change, and then the oti'ended pew-renter, if 
 he is very zealous, carries off his cushions and his books, 
 and his secession is made in the most Obtentatious manner. 
 If he is a man of a more peaceful disposition he may retain 
 his seat until the end of the year, and sometimes appear in it ; 
 but when the year is ended he will relinquish it, and even 
 if he does not state his reasons for dissatisfaction to the 
 churchwardens or the incumbent, the cause of his relin- 
 quishing his pew is well known and generally canvassed 
 amongst the congregation. A change of ministers will 
 always induce some persons to give up their pews. Clergy- 
 men do not like to see the best pews in the church un- 
 tenanted, and the fear of this will be a great temptation 
 to them to please particular members of the congregation 
 rather than to be faithful, and no one in whom such influ- 
 ences operate can ever be really independent. 
 
 Under the pew-rent system, the secession of a member 
 of the congregation must always be a somewhat ostentatious 
 step. He is no longer seen in his pew. The cushions and 
 books have been taken away, and the reasons for his de-
 
 58 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 partiire will be a topic of conversation amongst those wlio 
 remain. This will make his return a matter of considerable 
 difficulty, for he will be obliged to avow that he has been 
 mistaken, or that he acted too hastily in giving up his pew. 
 He will, therefore, naturally shrink from coming forward 
 and applying again for sittings which he had so ostenta- 
 tiously relinquished, especially when the application must 
 be made to the same persons to whom, perhaps, his reasons 
 for secession were stated with some considerable warmth 
 of feeling. Of course, when a man is convinced of a mis- 
 take or a wrong action, he ought not to be ashamed to avow 
 it ; but we must take men as we find them, and as a matter 
 of fact, many are found read}^ to profit by past experience, 
 and to act differently for the future, who shrink from a 
 public avowal of their change of mind. For these reasons, 
 we generally see that under the pew system, when a man 
 gives up his seat, he leaves that church, and never returns 
 to it again. 
 
 But if churches are free and open, and the offertory sub- 
 stituted for pew rents, the clergyman will be far more in- 
 dependent. He is not supported by a few members, but by 
 the general mass of the congregation, and therefore the 
 withdrawal of the support of one or two individuals will make 
 little real difference in the course of the year. If some go 
 away offended, others will take their places, and their absence 
 will scarcely be observed, except perhaps by the anxious eyes 
 of their pastor. It is impossible but that offences will come, 
 and therefore we must always anticipate their probability, 
 but when the church is open and free those who depart 
 offended take no step at their departure which will require 
 to be retracted before they come again. They went away, 
 and the utmost they could do was to absent themselves. 
 There was no need to write to the incumbent or the church- 
 wardens a statement of their reasons for ceasing to attend 
 that church. There was no formal act like the resignation 
 of a pew. If they continue to stay away others take their 
 place ; and if they wish to return, they can do so, because
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 59 
 
 the cliur(;li is open and free. The other members of the 
 congregation will not care to investigate the cause of their 
 absence. They may have been away from home, or suffer- 
 ing from indisposition, or they may have been led by some 
 inducement to frequent the services of another church, but 
 the seats are all open and free ; no questions will be asked ; 
 and they can return when they like. They have thought over 
 the oftence they took, and it seems to them less grave than 
 it appeared at first. They have talked it over with friends, 
 or reasoned it out in their minds, and have become con- 
 vinced that they were wrong, and then there is no impedi- 
 ment to their return. There is nothing to be unsaid or 
 undone before the}^ come again. Every one who has had 
 to do with free and open churches can remember instances 
 of this, and doubtless there were many more which never 
 came to his knowledge. The clergyman will be less in- 
 fluenced by the fear of giving offence, that great hindrance 
 to usefulness, when he finds that the effect of the oftence 
 taken is not indelible ; and in proportion as this influence is 
 removed, his independence will be increased. The pastor 
 who cultivates an intimate acquaintance with his people 
 will probably be the first to observe their absence, and will 
 be anxious to seek them out in order to ascertain its cause. 
 He may therefore be the only one to discover the ground 
 of offence, which a little quiet conversation ^\'ill generally 
 avail to remove, for v/here there is no open act of secession, 
 like the surrender of a pew, there will be no other im- 
 pediment to their return when the misunderstanding is 
 removed. 
 
 The facility with which the wanderer may be recoveied 
 b}' kind and judicious reasoning is no small reason for the 
 greater independence of a clergyman, who is thrown upon 
 the ofiertory for support, than of another who is maintained 
 by pew rents ; and this is the pleasantest aspect in Avhich 
 to view the question. But it must also be considered that, 
 supposing the persons offended should remove to another 
 church, as they must be expected sometimes to do, their
 
 60 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 places will easily be siipplied. That which is a cause of 
 offence to some will be an object of attraction to others, 
 and the very same reason which deprives the congregation 
 of some of its members may also increase it by the addition 
 of others. AA'here uniformity of ritual is little insisted on, 
 as in our churches, this will always be found to be the case, 
 the adoption of some particular ritual observance maj^seem 
 objectionable to some persons, who will go to other churches 
 in consequence. They will, of course, make selection of a 
 church where that ritual observance is wanting ; but then 
 there will be some worshippers in the chuich, to which 
 they betake themselves, who, lamenting the absence of that 
 ritual observance, will, on that account, leave their church 
 and go to that one which, from this cause, has been deserted 
 by others, and so in this manner there will be an exchange 
 by which neither congregation will be diminished. A 
 difference in the style of service M'ill be productive of the 
 same results. Man}'- men have many minds, and as it will 
 be impossible to reduce the tastes and opinions of all to one 
 Procrustean level, we must not expect that in large towns 
 the parochial system will, under our present circumstances, 
 be very strictly adhered to. Theoretically, of course, it is 
 right that every man should attend his own parish church, 
 but practically, it would be found impossible to enforce the 
 rule, unless uniformit}^ were first established. 
 
 If all churches are free and open, and the clergy sup- 
 ported by the offertory, it will soon be found that incum- 
 bents are much more independent than under the pew 
 system. People can come or go as they please, although 
 habit and other influences will of course attract them to 
 their own particular church. If they can go without the 
 formalitj^ of relinquishing their pew, they can come without 
 the still greater formality of making application for one, 
 to which they will be bound for a year. And if they should 
 take offence and depart, the very thing which is a cause of 
 offence to them will be an attraction to others, so that 
 their departure will entail no pecuniary loss on the incum-
 
 THE OFFErvTORY. 61 
 
 bent. And if at Haley Hill the pence exceeded the gold 
 in amount, it is a certain proof that the clergyman is not 
 dependent on the few rich membiirs of the congregation, 
 but on the whole body. Dependence on a multitude comes 
 nearer to independence than dependence on a few, for 
 although popular clamour may intoxicate a multitude for 
 a time, there is enough common sense and right feeling in 
 the people at large to secure a patient hearing and a fair 
 judgment in the case ; and if we wanted a proof of this, 
 the progress of the oifertory movement is sufficient evi- 
 dence of its truth. The prejudice which existed against 
 it twenty years ago has ahnost entirel}^ disappeared, and 
 some whose opinions are most opposed to those of its first 
 adherents, are now found amongst its most strenuous sup- 
 porters. Let a clergyman only do his duty faithfully and 
 earnestly, and he may have confidence that whatever may 
 have been the case under the pew-rent system, he will not 
 be left without support if he trusts himself to the liberality 
 of his congregation. The mutual trust will create a sym- 
 pathy which will increase his influence. For temporal 
 things he trusts himself to his people, and in spiritual 
 matters they trust themselves to him. A mutual confidence 
 will thus be gained, which will make the pastoral tie m(»re 
 deep and real. A pew rent is a mercantile transaction. 
 It is paid in advance. It is a stipulated sum: and all 
 these are circumstances which imply a want of confidence, 
 which will be \vholly wanting in the offertory. There is 
 no stipulation there, no payment in advance, but each con- 
 tributes according to his sense of duty and his feelings of 
 gratitude towards God and His Church for the spiritual 
 benefits which he has received. Why then should the 
 clergyman, now dependent on pew rents, fear that he 
 would lose his independence if pew rents were abolished, 
 and an offertory at every service substituted in its stead ? 
 Under the pew-rent system he certainly is not independent. 
 Not only the pews, but his own ministrations are rented ; 
 and if he should give offence, and the pew renters shouli
 
 62 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 ail agree to give up their seats, he would be starved out. 
 He is almost as dependent on his congregation as that 
 most dependent of all men, an independent minister, a veii- 
 table " lucus a non lucendo" who is voted in, and may be 
 voted out, by the suffrages of those to whom he ministers. 
 In a free and open church, this dependence could not 
 exist. If the congregation should all forsake their minister, 
 the very fact of their so doing, unless it were for a cause 
 discreditable to himself, would serve as an advertisement, 
 which would draw a crowd from curiosity, it might be, at 
 first, to ascertain the cause, but from out of these a new 
 congregation would be formed, who might value those 
 ministrations which the former one rejected. AVe are sup- 
 posing an extreme case, which would seldom, if ever, 
 liappen ; but even if it should, that which would ruin the 
 clergyman who is supported by pew rents would rather 
 tend to increase the maintenance of him who throws him- 
 self upon the offertory. 
 
 Nothing, of course, is less desirable than that a clergy- 
 man should make the experiment by giving needless 
 offence to his congregation ; but if it should happen that 
 his choice must be made between his duty and his popu- 
 larity, he has no reason to fear the result, if he should 
 decide in favour of his duty. We must suppose also that 
 the services in the church are conducted with propriety, 
 and that the clergyman is a zealous preacher and an active 
 minister. If it be otherwise, or the services are lifeless 
 and careless, he would probabl}^ lose his congregation in 
 either case, and therefore his failure to obtain a mainte- 
 nance from the offertory would be no argument against the 
 system. The necessities of his case might, however, prove 
 a healthy spur to his energies, and then he might regain 
 the congregation which he had lost under the system of 
 pew rents. If these arguments should convince one clergy- 
 man, who is in doubt, of the possibility of substituting the 
 offertory for the objectionable rent, the labour bestowed 
 on this essay will not have been expended in vain.
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 63 
 
 CHAPTEE VI. 
 
 THE SPIRITUAL BENEFIT OF THE PEOPLE. 
 
 " It is twice blessed. 
 It blesseth him that gives and him that takes." — Merchant of Venice. 
 
 The last advantage of the introduction of the offertory is 
 not the least, and it is reserved as the crowning argument 
 of this essaj^, because all that has gone before is subservient 
 to this. The offertoiy system has been proved to be in 
 accordance with the custom of the ancient Church, after the 
 model of which our own has been reformed. Its superiority 
 to pew rents as a sj'stem of Church finance has been shown 
 both in respect to amount and the certainty of income. 
 The greater independence of the minister who is maintained 
 by the offertory has been proved ; and now this last chapter 
 will be devoted to the consideration of the practice as con- 
 ducing to the spiritual benefit of the people. It will, there- 
 fore, be consistent with this design to consider it first as 
 giving an opportunity for the acquirement of the habit of 
 almsgiving . 
 
 We are not our own, but we are bought with a price. 
 The baptized Christian can claim no right either in himself 
 or in his possessions. This principle lies at the very root 
 of Christianity; we, and all that we have, are God's. It 
 would be so even apart from our redemption ; for what 
 have we that we have not received ? Our lives were God's 
 creation, our possessions were the gifts of his bounty; we 
 had no right to destroy the one, or to waste the other ; but 
 our duty in respect to each is greatly increased by our 
 redemption. If we are no longer our own, but bought with a 
 price, we are the servants of Him, by whom we are redeemed. 
 Our lives must be spent in His service, and our wealth 
 expended according to His directions who committed the 
 stewardship unto us. The idea of sacrifice extends over
 
 64 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 both, for if we are included in the benefits of Christ's 
 sacrifice, we must present our bodies and our souls as holy 
 and acceptable ofiferings to God. The whole idea of worship 
 is involved in this, but to be acceptable to God it must be 
 habitual. The offering of ourselves to God is not to be 
 made on some great occasions only, but to be continually 
 renewed by pi-ayer and the holy communion. Prayer must 
 be habitual, and for this reason special times of prayer and 
 solemn services have ever been appointed in the Church ; 
 but from them is derived the spirit of praj'er which must 
 pervade our hearts in the intervening season. Prayer is 
 the solemn act of dedication to God, but the spirit which it 
 arouses dwells with us as we go forth to the performance 
 of our daily tasks. The holy communion again is a solemn 
 act of worship through which we obtain unity with Christ ; 
 but this unity is not divided when the act of reception is 
 over, fur it continues to abide with the faithful communi- 
 cant until he renews it, when he next partakes of the 
 eucharistic feast. It supplies the principle which bears 
 fruit in the daily life of the Christian. 
 
 The same is also true of almsgiving. In prayer we 
 worship God ; in the holy communion we obtain that unity 
 with Christ which is essential to our spiritual life ; but 
 almsgiving is no less an act of homage to the Creator. 
 By offering to Him a portion of our substance we acknow- 
 ledge that all is His gift, and that since we are His stewards, 
 He has a right over its expenditure. This should never be 
 forgotten, but ought to be remembered and acted on every 
 day of our lives. When this is done continually, the remem- 
 brance has become a habit ; but as habits are only to be 
 acquired by a succession of individual acts, it is well that 
 there should be stated times and occasions at which we 
 may make our offerings to God, and this is just the purpose 
 of the offertory. An offering is made to God as an 
 acknowledgment of His property in our wealth, and the 
 act helps us to act on the principle every day that we 
 live.
 
 THE OFFERTORY. OO 
 
 Liberality in itself does not supply the principle. A 
 man may give largely in charity because he takes a pleasure 
 in relieving the necessities of others. This is in performance 
 of a human but not of a strictly Christian duty. Another 
 may give liberally at times, but still regard his wealth as 
 a properi'y of his own, and spend it in selfish uses on the 
 ordinary days of his life. Both of these may have no 
 thought of God in the gift. In the latter case, however 
 large may be the acts of charity, no habit is acquired. It 
 can only be produced by oft-repeated acts, and, therefore, 
 he who so gives may be all the while a stranger to the 
 piinciple which regulates the Christian's charity. He may 
 give from ostentatious motives, and in receiving the praise 
 of men he has all the reward which he desired. The other 
 may give from simple good-nature, without a thought of 
 God, and he is satisfied with the pleasure which results 
 from witnessing the benefits which he bestows on the 
 recipients of his bounty. 
 
 There is an importance in having stated times for alms- 
 giving. It may be said that we can give alms whenever 
 occasion requires ; but may not the same be said of prayer ? 
 We may pray whenever our needs require it, but we should 
 never acquiie the habit of prayer unless there were stated 
 seasons for its exercise. ^Vho would pra}^ in the day of 
 adversity who had not made it his daily practice ? We 
 must hold constant intercourse with our heavenly Father 
 before we can acquire that perfect confidence which leads 
 us to lay before Him all our cares and griefs. The whole 
 design of religious observances was intended to foster the 
 habit by a succession of acts of devotion ; we find it even 
 in Eden, when God walked in the garden in the cool of the 
 day, that accustomed hour, most likely, when the Creator 
 manifested His presence, that by an act of intercourse our 
 first parents might acquire the habit of walking with him 
 continually. The recurrence of the weeld}^ Sabbath, as a 
 day of rest from labour, taught men to look beyond the toil 
 of earth to that rest of which the Sabbath was a type ; and, 
 4. F
 
 66 THE OFFERTOKY. 
 
 therefore, tlie shadow of the Sabbath was cast as a hallow- 
 ing influence over the ordinary days of the week. And 
 now, under the Christian dispensation, the recurrence of 
 holy seasons and festivals produces the same effect. The 
 joy of Easter is not done when the commemoration of our 
 Lord's resurrection is over ; and the penitential heart- 
 searchings of Lent are not forgotten when they are lighted 
 lip by Easter joy ; but yet it is well that there should 
 be stated seasons for Easter joy and for Lenten sorrow, to 
 recall onr hearts from their own imaginings and from the 
 busy cares which pertain to this our present earthly state. 
 If we apply the same reasoning to the offertory, we shall 
 see the spiritual benefit which it is calculated to bring 
 to Christ's people. The solemn setting apart of some 
 portion of our goods, and presenting them as an offering to 
 God will accustom our minds to receiving all as from Him, 
 and to being ready to give unto Him that which is His 
 own. The duty of thus offering to God of our substance 
 was not constituted on any mere utilitarian principle. It 
 entered into the idea of the ancient sacrifices when the 
 sacrifice was wholly consumed by fire, for the animal 
 sacrificed was the property of the offerer, either by previous 
 possession or by purchase. This was necessary to make it 
 acceptable, and, theiefore, David rejected the munificent 
 offering of Araunah, and insisted on paying a price for 
 that which he offered in sacrifice. 
 
 The KOLvwvLa of the early Christians was no doubt a sacri- 
 ficial act, which was designed to foster that life of sacrifice 
 in which they gave themselves wholly unto God ; and the 
 discontinuance of the offertory of late may account for that 
 selfish view of life and property which has been the pre- 
 vailing sin of the present age. The remedy for this evil 
 will be found in its revival, inasmuch as it will recall the 
 minds of men to the lessons which they cannot fail to learn 
 whilst they make their offering to God. It is laid upon the 
 altar in token of its being a sacrifice to God, and those who 
 witness the act will ask themselves the question : " What
 
 THE OFFEETOPvY. 67 
 
 mean ye by tliis seiTice ?" The answer will suggest a train 
 of thought which will lead them back to the sacrificial 
 idea which pervades the whole Christian life, that idea 
 which was never absent from the minds of the first disciples, 
 but which comes to too many amongst ourselves almost in 
 the light of a new doctrine. 
 
 Almsgiving makes our prayers accejpfab'e unto God. The 
 prayers and alms of Cornelius came uj) for a memorial unto 
 the Lord (Acts xi. 4). The correspondence of this ex- 
 pression with one which plainly speaks of sacrifice, illus- 
 trates the meaning of the words which were spoken by the 
 angel : " The priest shall take from the meat-oifering a 
 memorial thereof, and shall burn it. It is an oflering 
 made by tire, of a sweet savour unto God." (Lev. ii. 9.) 
 We see the close resemblance between the memorial of 
 the meat-oifering ascending to God in the smoke of the 
 fire as a sweet savour ; and the prayers and alms, the 
 outward expression of the heart's inward devotion going 
 up as a sweet savour unto God. Both were outward 
 expressions proceeding from the same soui'ce, and, there- 
 fore, w^e must not think, as men are too apt to do, of the 
 one as carnal and the other as spiritual. Prayer as well as 
 alms was the outward expression of the feelings which 
 existed in the heart, and one without the other would have 
 been imperfect. Devotional feelings are without form until 
 they are brought out by the words in which our petitions 
 are framed ; and alms are, in like manner, the outward 
 expression of that love which must pervade the heart of the 
 Christian. It was this that made the alms of Cornelius no 
 less acceptable to God than his prayers. It was not that 
 the favour of God could be purchased with money, but 
 that without that disposition of heart which produced alms 
 as well as prayers, he could not find acceptance with God. 
 If any one objects that alms may be a mere formal act, the 
 same objection may be made to prayer; for the words of 
 prayer might be recited as a mere formal act, although 
 they would not reach the ear of God, just as money might 
 
 F 2
 
 68 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 be given to the poor, and yet be no real expression of the 
 heart's desire. Such were the alms of the Pharisees, who 
 had their reward in the praise which they received from 
 men, and made long prayers standing in the streets that 
 men might see them. Neither were acceptable to God, 
 because they were not the genuine expressions of the heart, 
 whilst the prayers and the alms of Cornelius came up for 
 a memorial, because they had their root in a devout and 
 loving heart. What God hath joined together we may not 
 put asunder ; and in depriving the people of the offertor}^ 
 we deprive them of half the blessing of Cornelius. 
 
 But almsgiving has a double object. Its root as a reli- 
 gious service is grateful love, which leads the Christian to 
 ask : " What reward shall I give unto the Lord for all the 
 benefits that he hath done unto me?" (Ps. cxvi. 11.) But 
 that love which rises up to God is to be extended to all 
 mankind, for this is the characteristic of the love of God : 
 " Whoso loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how 
 can he love God whom he hath not seen?" And this com- 
 mandment have we from God, " that he who loveth God 
 loves his brother also " (1 S. John iii. 20, 21) ; and there- 
 fore the gift is not consumed with fire as of old, but expended 
 upon those that have need of it. Viewed on one side, it is 
 a thank-offering to God, and the frequent repetition of the 
 thank-offering has a tendency to draw out and increase our 
 gratitude ; but viewed upon the other side, it is an act of 
 charity to our neighbour, and the frequent repetition of the 
 gift has a similar tendency to enlarge our love towards our 
 brethren ; and if this increase of our love towards God and 
 our neighbour can be effected by means of the offertory, it 
 cannot be otherwise than productive of spiritual blessing. 
 
 Into this consideration the disposition of the offertory 
 must also enter. The gift is presented to God, but the 
 earthly objects on which it is bestowed will not be absent 
 from the mind of the giver. Each purpose to which it is 
 devoted will be remembered. A portion may be set aside 
 for the repairs of the church and the maintenance of the
 
 THE OFFEETOKY. 69 
 
 services. The blessing of public worsbip could not be en- 
 joyed unless we bad churches in which we may assemble, 
 and other expenses are incurred in making the church 
 worthy to be God's house, and the services worthy of His 
 honour. Each who contributes to this cause will esteem it 
 a privilege to take his share in the cost ; and the very act 
 of giving will create an interest which those who have no 
 concern in it will not experience. The giver will be led to 
 estimate the value of that which his gift secures him. He 
 will reason on the proportion which his gift bears to that 
 which he has received, and he will learn to estimate the 
 sanctuary of God, the services of prayer and praise and 
 the blessings of the sacraments in a manner that he never 
 would have thought of, if it had not been presented to 
 him in this light. The value which he sets on these 
 blessings, and his desire to contribute with a willing mind, 
 will increase in equal proportion ; so that the words of the 
 Psalmist will be the true expression of his feelings : " I 
 was glad when they said unto me, ^\e will go into the house 
 of the Lord. For my brethren and companions' sakes, 1 
 will wish thee prosperity. Yea, because of the house of the 
 Lord I will seek to do thee good " (Ps. cxxii. 1, 8, 9). 
 
 The maintenance of the clergy is another object to which 
 the offertory is devoted ; and what lias been said of the 
 increased value set upon the house of God will be also true 
 resiDccting the services of his ministers. The Levite had 
 no inheritance in Israel ; but the people were commanded 
 never to forget the Levite in their tithings and their offer- 
 ings (Deut. xiv. 28, 29). A portion of the sacrifices was 
 reserved for the priest, and thus each offerer contributed to 
 his maintenance. And under the Christian dispensation 
 the same rule was established. They who waited at the 
 altar were to be partakers with the altar, and provision was 
 made for them out of the offerings of the people : " If we 
 have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great matter if 
 we reap 3-our worldl}^ things ? Do ye not know that they 
 who minister about holy things live of the sacrifice ? and
 
 70 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 tliey who wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? 
 Even so hath the Lord also ordained that they who preach 
 the gospel should live of the gospel" (1 Cor. ix. 13). The 
 services of God's ministers were never more greatly valued 
 than when this provision was made for them, in which all 
 bore a share. Although it would be sacrilege to deprive 
 the clergy of their endowments where they exist; yet, 
 where they do not, it may be well to consider how the ad- 
 vantage to the people, derived from ministering unto them 
 that teach, counterbalances the disadvantage which arises 
 from the absence of endowments. S. Chrysostom and 
 S. Augustine thought that the advantage weighed down the 
 balance, and desired to return to voluntary offerings ; and 
 there was much reason in the arguments which they ad- 
 duced. Certainly the mutual interehauge which was the 
 idea of the first provision for the clerg}" largely cements 
 the bond of sympathy between them. Who among the 
 clergy cannot remember the pleasure with which he has 
 received the little oiferings of gratitude which have been 
 presented to him by the poor, which he knew to be as great 
 a satisfaction to the giver as to himself? The clergy were 
 ordained to stand between God and the congregation. They 
 are the channels, earthen vessels though they be, through 
 whom the blessings of heaven are received. By them the 
 sacraments are administered, and the blessed tidings of the 
 Gospel preached. They minister peace to the penitent and 
 comfort to the sorrowing ; and the desire to present some 
 token of their love is but the natural impulse of a grateful 
 heart. Cowper's picture of the tithe-day represents a state 
 of things now happily passed away, when all was without 
 love and warmth, and the ministry of the pastor and the 
 devotion of the people were equally cold and spiritless. But 
 when God's ministers are earnest and loving, and the duty 
 of supporting them and the advantage of their ministry is 
 felt, their maintenance will be esteemed no burden, but a 
 privilege. The gratitude of the people will be stirred up 
 by the opportunity which is afforded them of making their
 
 THE OFFEETOKY. 71 
 
 gifts, and the habitual exercise of this -^-ill teach them to set 
 an increasing value on the labours of those whom they are 
 instrumental in supporting. This will be a blessing if it 
 dmws out their love towards their pastors, and leads them 
 to esteem them very highly for their work's sake. 
 
 In common things it is frequently observed that men 
 value more what they pay for. It is on this principle that 
 we receive a w^eekly payment from parents for the education 
 of their children. It goes but a little way towards defray- 
 ing the expenses of the parish school, but it is found to be 
 an immense advantage in increasing the value which the 
 poor set upon the education of their children. And if the 
 poor contribute towards the maintenance of the school- 
 master, why should they not towards that of their pastor ? 
 They do not res]3ect the schoolmaster the less because they 
 pa}'' something towards his salary, but they esteem the ad- 
 vantages of education more. Neither will they respect their 
 pastor the less because they are instrumental in supporting 
 him, but they will set a higher value on the blessings which 
 he ministers to them. Xo unwilling gift is extorted from 
 them, but a free-will offering is asked proportioned to the 
 readiness of their mind, their sense of blessing, and the 
 largeness of their gratitude. This is an offering which each 
 w411 make according to his means. The rich wall do it out 
 of their abundance, but the gift of the widow, w^ho has only 
 her mite to offer, will be no less acceptable in the sight of 
 God. The poor will value the opportunity of giving no 
 less than the rich, because it wall make them feel that they 
 have a real part in their minister. And the clergjTnan wdll 
 be drawn towards his people by the good-will which they 
 manifest in their readiness to give ; and next to a sense of 
 his position as Christ's ambassador, there is nothing that 
 will give greater energy to his zeal than the discovery of the 
 little sacrifices which the people are willing to make for him. 
 
 Under the pew system, no such feelings were called 
 forth, for the whole business was a mere mercantile trans- 
 action. Where there is no offertory, the clergyman has
 
 72 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 often no opportunity of ascertaining whether the people 
 appreciate his labours. This may, in some cases, be a 
 liealthy discipline, but many is the number of faithful and 
 zealous labourers in the vineyard whose hearts are depressed 
 and cast down because they know not the sympathy with 
 which the people regard them. Englishmen are by nature 
 undemonstrative, and, unless they have such an opportunity 
 as the offertory aifords, they will find great difficulty in 
 giving such expression to their feelings as will strengthen 
 and cheer the hearts of their pastors. Even 8. Paul, 
 though he wished to be chargeable to none, was not above 
 such considerations. It was an unspeakable comfort to 
 him, in the midst of all his trials, to be able to write to the 
 Galatians, " I bear ye record, that, if it had been possible, 
 ye would have plucked out your own eyes, and have given 
 them to me " (Gal. v. 15). And whatever would strengthen 
 the heart of the minister would tend also to increase his 
 energy, so that the people would be doubly blessed ; 
 blessed in the clearer perception of the blessings which 
 result from the existence of a Christian ministry, and 
 blessed in the unwearied zeal with which their pastors 
 would labour amongst them. 
 
 The Koivoivia was a thank-offering to God, proportioned 
 to the sense of blessings impressed upon the Christian's 
 heart ; and when we consider the depth of gratitude which 
 the newness of the Gospel message would engender, we 
 cannot wonder at what would otherwise seem to us a pro- 
 fuse and extravagant liberality. We to whom the blessings 
 of the Gospel are no novelty can scarcely sound the depth 
 of gratitude which stirred the hearts of the Pentecostal 
 converts. The truths of Christianity dawned upon us in 
 our earliest childhood, and we have grown up beneath 
 their sacred influence. But if the Gospel had burst forth 
 upon us in the full light of day, as it did on those who 
 were converted on the day of Pentecost, it is probable that 
 we too should have thought the whole of our possessions 
 no greater ofiering than our hearts would have constrained
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 73 
 
 US to present in return for the wondrous mercy which God 
 has shown us. We, too, might have been amongst the 
 company who sold their possessions and laid the price at 
 the apostles' feet ; but, nevertheless, althoiigh the duty of 
 doing all we can is more difficult to be realized now, we 
 must not forget that the blessings we enjoy are no less 
 than those which the first Christians found themselves 
 suddenly possessed of, and the tliought of this should 
 enhance our desire to present a worthy offering unto the 
 Lord, and to show that, for their work's sake, we highly 
 esteem His ministers. When this feeling has thoroughly 
 impregnated our hearts, we shall then be satisfied with no 
 pew-rent bargain, but shall desire to make our offerings as 
 liberal as we can, remembering with thankfulness that 
 God accepts them not according to what a man hath not, 
 but according to what he hath. 
 
 But the simple offering to God, although more promi- 
 nent, was not the whole idea of the Kotvajvia. It was an 
 expression of the Christian's deep-seated faith in the com- 
 munion of saints. It seems to be a principle inherent in 
 human nature that the expression of our feelings quickens 
 and invigorates them. We draw them from a fountain, 
 from which the more largely we draw the more freely the 
 waters flow. Is it not so alwaj'S ? Expressions of anger 
 or envy deepen these feelings in our hearts, and therefore 
 we should set a bridle on our lips ; but our desires after 
 God are increased by our expressions of those desires in 
 the secret intercourse which the heart is privileged to hold 
 in prayer with our heavenly Father. The constant repeti- 
 tion of the Creed strengthens our faith in all its articles, 
 and just so our appreciation of the deep reality of the com- 
 munion of saints is increased by every practical application 
 of the doctrine. The brotherhood of the members of 
 Christ's body was one of the cardinal doctrines of the 
 Gospel, and the practical result of the doctrine was seen in 
 the liberality of Christians who called nothing their own, 
 but considered that their brethren in Christ had an equal
 
 74 THE OFFERTORY. i 
 
 right witTi tliem in their possessions. It may have been > 
 an exaggerated application of the principle, and the general i 
 distress which succeeded may have shown that, as regards 
 worldly expediency, they were mistaken. They may have 
 forgotten that other truth which is so clearly laid down in 
 the Gospel, that we are set as stewards over that which is 
 committed to our charge, and that instead of yielding up 
 our stewardship by the total resignation of our wealth, it is 
 better to husband it prudently, and to spend it for Christ ' 
 according as He hath need of it. But we must remember 
 that the first Christians expected that the time of our 
 Lord's second appearing was at hand, and acting on this 
 supposition, they felt constrained to watch whilst it was 
 day. Soon, they thought, their goods would be of no 
 use to themselves or others, and, therefore, that they might , 
 not be lost in the general destruction at the last day, it was) 
 better to resign them all to God at once. When we think 
 of this, we can no longer blame them, for their liberality 
 took a right direction, although their supposition was a 
 mistaken one. Kow that eighteen hundred years have 
 passed, and the Lord still delayeth his coming, although 
 the times and seasons are hidden from our sight, we are 
 more apt to settle down in the belief that many genera- 
 tions may yet succeed before the final day shall come. 
 The principle on which the liberality of the first Christians 
 was founded is not changed, although in practice its appli- 
 cation may be altered. Although we need not lay our 
 wealth in one great sacrifice upon the altar, the communion 
 of saints is yet a doctrine which we profess to believe. 
 
 If this be true the Koivoivia follows as a natural sequence. 
 If Christians were fellow-members in that one body of 
 which Christ was the head, the necessities of each must bo 
 the concern of the rest. Our Saviour had specially taught 
 this in the descrijDtion of the Last Judgment, in which acts 
 of charity done unto the least amongst His brethren, were 
 regarded as done unto Himself. And the duty of charity I 
 was not left to chance occasions, but it formed a special fea-
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 75 
 
 ture in the public worship of the first Christians. As a 
 part of public worship it was exalted to a place beside the 
 holy commnnion, j)reaching, and prayer. It was at once 
 an expression of faith and the means of building up a habit. 
 Faith was increased by the expression, and the habit was 
 formed by the oft-repeated act. And these are just the 
 blessings which we may expect to see from the revival of 
 the offertory. Alms are given for those that are in need, 
 not as a common act of humanity, but as an act of commu- 
 nion with the Church at large. The Christian took some- 
 thing from his own store that he might impart it to his 
 brethren, because they were one with him in Christ. The 
 poor man felt the reality of this communion when in the 
 distribution of the alms he shared in the goods of his more 
 wealthy neighbours, and the rich man rejoiced that the 
 poor accepted his gift. There was none of that stern and 
 selfish independence which is too often applauded in the 
 present day. All were willing to communicate their goods. 
 The poor man helped the poor as far as he was able, and 
 the rich man contributed of his wealth ; but what was given 
 in simple love was not lost to the giver. The prayers of 
 the poor profited the rich, and the rich and poor giver 
 both laid up a store in the securest bank, where they shall 
 receive their own again with usury. 
 
 Godliness hath a promise for the life that now is, as well 
 as for that which is to come. Here on earth they would re- 
 ceive for earthly things spiritual blessings, and in heaven 
 the act of charity was written by the recording angel in the 
 book of remembrance which was kept before the Lord. 
 Kone could lose, but all would be gainers by the exchange, 
 and this thought, impregnating the minds of the early 
 Christians, produced the liberality of which we read in the 
 Acts of the Apostles. And can we believe that it would 
 be less so now ? The revival of the oifertory as a solemn 
 act of public worship would rather tend to restore the doc- 
 trine of the communion of saints to its true position in the 
 Christian's creed.
 
 76 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 The feeling of loneliness and isolation, which is a trial to 
 so many, would in great measure be removed. The idea 
 of the Christian brotherhood would be revived ; the poor 
 would feel that the offertory was an institution for their 
 benefit in earthly things, and the more prosperous would 
 regard the poor as God's messengers, angels sent to convey 
 that which was given for Christ's sake to the mansions 
 above, where it would survive the wreck of this present 
 earth and all that it contains. The poor, in receiving alms, 
 would experience no sense of degradation, for they would 
 receive them from a common fund, to which they had them- 
 selves contributed according to their means. By the out- 
 ward act of communication the jealousies which divide the 
 harmony of different ranks would be obliterated, for nothing 
 could teach them all more powerfully, the holy commu- 
 nion excepted, that they were all one in Christ. The poor 
 would see that the lich clung to their wealth with no 
 selfish grasp, but that for Christ'^ sake they were glad to 
 communicate and willing to distribute it. The feeling thus 
 formed would exert its influence in all the transactions of 
 life, and the habit of brotherly love thus formed would be 
 seen in all the relations in which they were brought in 
 contact. The command which we have received from God 
 tuat he who loves God shall love his brother also, would 
 then find a practical fulfilment, and the two parts of the 
 commandment would be seen in all their harmony. That 
 which in the first place was an act of love to God, would be 
 converted into an act of charity towards the brethren. 
 
 By means of the offertory, a fund for other purposes 
 would be raised, and from each purpose to which it was 
 devoted a special blessing would be derived by the giver. 
 The repair of God's house and the maintenance of the 
 sei-vice would be a simple act of love to Him, which would 
 not be without its reward. The support of God's ministers 
 would enhance the value which the people W(mld set on 
 the blessings of which they were made the instruments of 
 conveyance. Bounty to the poor would be rewarded by
 
 THE OFFERTORY. 77 
 
 their Lord as acts of charity clone nnto Himself; whilst 
 the objects to which the rest of the fund woiild be devoted 
 would not be without blessings annexed to each. 
 
 In the missionary work of the Church all would be enabled 
 to take a share, for under this head all those purposes would 
 fall which have not already been considered. The evange- 
 lization of the world by means of home and foreign mis- 
 sions is a great and noble work, and God has willed that it 
 should be eifected through the instrumentality of men. 
 This is our privilege, that we may be all sharers in our 
 Saviour's triumph as we have part in His cross and passion ; 
 and although we may not all be able to devote our indivi- 
 dual assistance to the work, yet we all may aid it by the 
 help of our alms. The object is to win souls to Christ, and 
 each who takes part in the work has a share in the promise 
 that " they that turn many to righteousness shall shine as 
 the stars for ever and ever " (Dan. xii. 3). Schools and mis- 
 sions, both at home and abroad, are established for this pur- 
 pose, and they who aid them shall share in the reward of 
 their success. 
 
 There are so many considerations which arise to en- 
 courage and support this duty, that enlargement on them 
 would convert this essay into a missionary sermon, but 
 still they cannot but be glanced at in a chapter which 
 treats of the spiritual benefits resulting to the jDCople from 
 the offertory. We started with it simply as n substitute 
 for pew rents, but it is as a river which widens as it flows 
 on. It will soon become a fund too large to be simply a 
 substitute for that objectionable system, for the duty on 
 which it rests embraces other objects, and the hand which 
 has learnt the blessedness of giving cannot easily be stayed, 
 and therefore it will grow and increase, and become a 
 river, whose streams will flow out into all the nations of 
 the earth. The missionary prayer, " Thy kingdom come," 
 will be felt to be vain unless we do what we can to enlarge 
 the boundaries of our Master's kingdom. The blessings of 
 the Gospel, realized in the stated offering presented by
 
 78 THE OFFERTOKY. 
 
 each grateful heart to God, will stir up our compassion for j 
 those to whom the Gospel is not preached, whilst the 
 thought that others lack what we prize so dearly, will 
 increase 3'^et more our gratitude to God, for why, we shall 
 ask, are we more favoured than they ? and thus the offertory 
 will tend to widen our sympathies, whilst it will serve also 
 to deepen our gratitude and love. Into all enterprises for 
 the spiritual benefit of his fellowMnen, the willing giver 
 gladly and zealously enters, and he cannot do this without 
 receiving a blessing in his own soul, since that which he 
 bestows he lendeth to the Lord. 
 
 One spiritual advantage of the offertory sj'stem, which 
 has not yet been considered, cannot altogether be over- 
 looked, and this is the opportunity which it gives for 
 secret alms. When the collection is made in bags, a plan 
 much to be recommended, the amount contributed by each 
 is a secret between God and his own soul. The benefit of 
 many an offering is lost to the giver by the ostentatious 
 display of a subscription list. To many the temptation 
 thus offered is too strong to be resisted, and they give 
 what they do to be seen of men, rather than as an act of 
 secret love to God. Satan sets his snares around our holiest 
 works that he may convert them to his own uses, and rob 
 us of their reward ; and thus it often happens that acts of 
 charity degenerate into ostentation and display, but the 
 offertory aiJ"ords us opportunities of almsgiving without 
 any danger of this. It reconciles the precept of our Lord, 
 " Let your light shine before men, that they may see your 
 good works " (S. Matt. v. 16), with that other command- 
 ment, which at first sight seems a contradiction, " Take 
 heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of 
 them, otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which 
 is in heaven ; but when thou doest alms, let not thy left 
 hand know what thy right hand doeth, that thine alms 
 may be in secret, and thy Father which seeth in secret 
 shall reward thee openly" (S. Matt. vi. 1). In respect to 
 the act, our light shines before men, whilst in respect to the
 
 THE OFFEETOEY. 79 
 
 amount we give, our alms are done in secret. Let it not 
 be thonght that the secrecy of the gift will diminish its 
 amount, for all experience proves the contrary. It is true 
 that .there are some who will not give largely', unless their 
 munificence is known and applauded of men; but the number 
 of those is greater who will give more for the love of God 
 in secret than they would like men to know that they gave. 
 If the amount of their gifts were known, some who did not 
 understand how the dispersion of wealth increases it, would 
 say that they gave more than they could afford; whilst 
 others might attribute it to ostentation and display, and 
 therefore when gifts are made in secret it will be found that 
 in the aggi'egate they will be far gi'eater in amount. 
 
 By the weekly ofiertory a facility is also given for the 
 good and righteous custom of laying aside for God a fixed 
 proportion of our income. AYhat propoiiion this should 
 be must be left to the decision of each man's conscience, 
 but to have a settled rule will be as the offering of the first- 
 fruits, which will bring a blessing on all the rest of our 
 substance. The example of Bishop Wilson may be instruc- 
 tive on this point. He began when he was a young man 
 by devoting a tenth to God, but this he subsequently 
 increased from time to time, as we find from entries in 
 his " Sacra Privata," until he was enabled to form the 
 following resolution : " The Lord having convinced me 
 by an experience of more than fort}^ years that he will be 
 no man's debtor, and having in every station of life in 
 which his providence has placed me, given me much more 
 than what was necessary for a decent support, in a 
 humble gratitude to my gracious Benefactor, I do from 
 henceforth dedicate one-half of all my rents to pious uses, 
 as also the whole interest of all my moneys, one-tenth in 
 corn of the profits of the demesnes, and of all customs paid 
 in moneys." — Sacra Privata, p. 285. 
 
 To those who revere the memoiy of this great saint, 
 and look upon his example as valuable for imitation, the 
 weekly ofl'ertory affords a great facility for devoting a fixed
 
 80 THE OFFERTORY. 
 
 proportion of their gains to God. It is easier to calculate 
 week by week what we can give, according to the apostolic 
 injunction, than if the offering was only made on rare 
 occasions ; and we shall be more likely to be stedfast in 
 our resolution than if a considerable time elapsed between 
 our acts of charity, and, therefore, although this subject is 
 distinct from that which is the purpose of this essay, the 
 opportunity thus afforded must be mentioned amongst the 
 many advantages of the offertory. 
 
 No doubt in the middle ages the exercise of charity was 
 often abusedjwhen men who had led unholy lives thought they 
 could compound for their sins by giving their lands to the 
 Church on their death-beds. This indeed was no real charity, 
 for they were but giving' away what was no longer of any 
 use to themselves. They fell perhaps into the mistake of 
 thinking that an entrance to heaven could be purchased by 
 their costly gifts. It was a grievous mistake indeed, and a 
 most baseless superstition ; but in our revulsion from it we 
 have too often fallen into the other extreme of undervaluing 
 works of charity. But theie is no doctrine more clearly re- 
 vealed to us in the New Testament than this, that our 
 works do follow us, and that no act of charity rightly per- 
 formed shall be without its reward in heaven. The Saviour 
 cannot have unduly exalted the value of works, and therefore 
 his precepts must be safe to follow and his promises such as 
 we may take for our encouragement. Gold cannot purchase 
 heaven, nor can it wipe away the stain of sin. The price 
 which the Eedeemer paid for our salvation can only effect 
 this ; but yet habits of chaiity are the needful p]-eparation 
 for heaven. It is part of that mind which must be formed 
 within us here on earth, that we may be fit for the enjoy- 
 ment of the glories of heaven hereafter. Without the for- 
 mation of such habits we cannot follow the example of the 
 Saviour, the actions of whose life are a law for us to obey ; 
 but if acts of charity are rightly done, there will be no ruom 
 for vainglory or spiritual pride. Liberality is one of those 
 graces which God bestows upon his people; and when
 
 THE OFFEETOET. 81 
 
 we rightly perfoiTQ acts of charity, Christ himself is work- 
 ing them in us. And the certainty of the reward does not 
 diminish the sense of onr unworthiness, or destroy our 
 humility. Though each one such act shall be as a jewel 
 which shall shine in the crown for which we look, the re- 
 deemed shall cast their crowns before the throne of God, 
 ascribing the honour unto him alone, and acknowledging 
 that nothing was done without his aid. Therefore, when 
 this is remembered, exhortations to liberality cannot be re- 
 garded as an undue exaltation of our own merits, since all 
 good works are the effects of God's grace, which is freely 
 given to those that diligently seek it. 
 
 But, after all, arguments are mere words, and there are 
 some minds which arguments will never reach. The course 
 of reasoning may be quite correct and yet fail to convince ; 
 yet we do not fear, for if there should still remain a doubt 
 respecting any portion of what has been advanced, the 
 remedy is a simple one. If any should fear the failure of 
 the offertory as a system of church finance, let it only be 
 tried. If any one doubts its expediency, the only fair 
 answer is to make the experiment and see the results. If a 
 clergyman has doubts respecting his own independence, 
 these also will vanish ; and as regards the spiritual benefit 
 of the people, if God's promises are tme, let the sternest 
 objector to the offertory only make use of his oppoiirunity, 
 and his mind will soon change, when he has learned the 
 blessedness of giving alms as an habitual exercise of charity 
 and a solemn act of worship. All this is not mere conjec- 
 ture, for the experiment has now been made in a sufficient 
 number of cases to justify the induction which assures us of 
 the probability of its success wherever it may be tried. It 
 was the primitive custom of the early Church ; and, although 
 it has been discontinued for a while, the tradition still re- 
 mains enshrined in the services of our Prayer-book. That 
 which is the common practice of the Presbyterians in Scot- 
 land can scarcely be regarded as a popish innovation, and 
 that which has been adopted and recommended by men of 
 4. G
 
 82 THE OFFERTOEY. 
 
 every shade of opinion can no longer be regarded as a party 
 badge. It is sufficient to appeal to the candid judgment of 
 every one who may read these words. 
 
 And now, in concluding this essay, in which a humble 
 attempt has been made to illustrate a subject which has for 
 many years occupied the attention of the writer, he desires 
 to sum up all that he has said in the words of one who 
 spoke the conclusion of a long personal experience : " It is 
 but the first essay of charity to give alms. Whosoever 
 shows mercy to men will certainly receive mercy from 
 God."— ^p. Wilson, Sacra Privata, p. 302. 
 
 'KINTIO) EV WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, STAinTORD STRERT 
 AND CHARING CROSS.