But, above all things, an archdeacon should be a man of the world. He

should know well, not only how many shillings there are in a pound, but

how many shillings also there are in a clerical pound,--for in these

matters there is a difference. Five hundred a year is much more in the

hands of a country parson than it is in the hands of a country

gentleman who is not a parson,--all which the efficient archdeacon

understands and has at his fingers’ ends to the last shilling of the

calculation. He should understand, too, after what fashion his brother

rectors and vicars live around him,--should know something of their

habits, something also of their means, and should have an eye open to

their welfare, their pursuits, and their amusements. Of all these things

the really stirring archdeacon does in fact know very much.

The archdeacon is, in fact, a bishop in little, and as such is often

much more of a bishop in fact than is the bishop himself. To define,--or

rather to make intelligible by any definition,--an archdeacon’s power

and duties, would be very difficult; as also it is very difficult, or I

may say impossible, to do so with reference to a bishop’s functions. The

archdeacon holds a court, and makes visitations. These visitations may

be made pretty much at his pleasure. He must, I believe, make them once

in three years, but may make them every year if he thinks fit. He

inquires as to the administration of the services, seeing that the

canons are maintained, but has no power to alter aught; and as there

seems to be much difficulty in knowing when and by what the canons are

maintained, and when and by what they are not maintained, we may imagine

that the inquiries of a discreet archdeacon into the practices of a

respectable and efficient parson will not be too close or searching in

this matter of the canons. It is, however, easier to see whether the

windows of a church are in repair, and whether the roof keeps out the

rain, than it is to be intelligibly and efficiently explicit on the

subject of canons, and, therefore, the outward structure of the parish

church gives very safe employment to an archdeacon. The little

difficulty as to church rates which sometimes follows upon an order for

repairs is not uncongenial to the archdeacon’s mind. It hinges upon

politics, and upon a vexed political question in which the archdeacon,

as a strong local Conservative, has hitherto had his victories. There

remain so very few subjects which are still grateful to him in the same

way, that church rates, with all their little impediments and embargoes,

naturally present themselves to him as pleasant matters. And then the

archdeacons receive reports from the churchwardens, if churchwardens

have anything to report,--any scandal of which to tell, or evil

practices on the parson’s side of which complaint has unfortunately

become necessary according to the judgment of those churchwardens! By

the word “scandal” let not the uninitiated reader be led to think that

undignified tittle-tattle with his neighbour’s churchwardens is the duty

or the employment of an archdeacon. Open moral misconduct in a

clergyman’s life is supposed to be matter of justifiable public

scandal--the scandal arising with the clerical sinner, and not with

those who tell of the sin--and, as such, is, by the constitution of our

Church, an especial subject for the care of our archdeacons, and indeed,

under them, of our churchwardens. But in such matters archdeacons are

liberal, and much prefer to wink an eye than to see too much. We may

imagine that a churchwarden, misunderstanding his mission with regard to

scandal, and taking upon himself too promptly the duty of watching the

moral conduct of his parson, would not receive much comfort from a

visiting archdeacon. No one knows better than an archdeacon--no one

knows so well as an archdeacon--that it is needless and absurd to look

for a St. Paul in every parsonage. He would, indeed, be very little at

his own ease with a local St. Paul, much preferring a comfortable

rector, who can take his glass of wine after dinner and talk pleasantly

of old college days. St. Pauls, however, do not trouble him; nor is he

troubled much by the scandals of his clerical neighbours; but he must be

troubled sorely, I should think, by the increasing number and increasing

influence around him of those “literate” clergymen who--from want of

better, as we must in sorrow confess,--are flocking to us from

Islington, Birkenhead, and such like fountains of pastoral care. The man

who won’t drink his glass of wine, and talk of his college, and put off

for a few happy hours the sacred stiffnesses of the profession and

become simply an English gentleman,--he is the clergyman whom in his

heart the archdeacon does not love.

Thus the archdeacon is a bishop in little as regards his own

archdeaconry, which may probably comprise half a diocese; and as an

energetic financial secretary at the Treasury may, under an

uninstructed Chancellor of the Exchequer, have much more to do with the

finances of the country than the Chancellor of the Exchequer himself, so

may an energetic archdeacon have a much stronger influence on his

clerical district than the bishop who is over him. He is the bishop’s

eye, or should be so, and may not improbably become the bishop’s hand.

But the archdeacon, in spite of all his power and authority, though he

be so great among his brother parsons, is hardly in the way to better

promotion. High promotion in the Church now comes from political

influence or from the friendship of Ministers,--from those things,

combined of course with high clerical attainments--and an archdeacon is

not often in the way to obtain political influence or the friendship of

Ministers. As deans live in towns, so do archdeacons live in the

country; and like other country gentlemen they are always in opposition.

And then they are men who have been made what they are by the bishops,

and, therefore, are known well in their dioceses, but are not much known

beyond them. They culminate in their own local dignity, and, knowing

that they do so, they make the most of it. An archdeacon who is potent

with his bishop, and who is popular with his clergymen, who works hard

and can do so without undue meddling, who has a pleasant parish of his

own and is not troubled by ambitious or indifferent curates, who can

live on good terms with the squires around him, understanding how far it

is expedient that he should be restricted by his coat, and how for he

may go in discarding hyper-clerical constraint, is master of a position

in which he need not envy the success of any professional gentleman in

the kingdom. But he is not on the direct road to higher things, and will

probably die in his rectory, an archdeacon to the last.

If an archdeacon be ambitious of moving in higher clerical matters than

his archdeaconry affords him, he generally looks to gratify that desire

by sitting in Convocation. This method of doing something more than

routine duty is easier and less likely to fail than the other method of

publishing a volume of sermons. Sermons are not read now as they were

some thirty or forty years since, and Convocation has lately held its

head a little up, obtaining recognition in the newspapers, and

appearing to do something. An archdeacon is just the man to believe that

Convocation can do much; and this faith on his part is evidence of a

moral freshness and a real earnestness which adds a charm to his normal

character. Who can bring himself to believe that a bishop believes in

Convocation--a bishop, that is, who takes his seat in the House of

Lords, talks to other peers, and knows what is going on in the

well-instructed blasé London world? Such a one cannot but see, cannot

but know, that Convocation is a clerical toy, a mere debating society to

which belongs none of the vitality of power. But the archdeacon, fresh

from the country, believes in Convocation, and works there with some

real conviction that he is one of a clerical Parliament, and that he is

animated by true parliamentary life.

But it is in his own rectory that an archdeacon must ever shine with the

brightest light. I have said that he is a bishop in little, and I may

also say that he is the very chief among parsons; and as the country

parson--the country parson with pleasant parsonage, pleasanter wife, and

plenty of children--is the true and proper type of an English

clergyman, to which bishops, deans, canons, and curates are mere

adjuncts and necessary excrescences, so is the archdeacon the highest

type of the country parson. He is always married--an exception here or

there would but prove the rule--he generally has a large family; of

course he has a pleasant rectory. He must be an earnest working parish

clergyman, or he would hardly have been selected as an archdeacon. He is

necessarily--I may say certainly--a gentleman. Alas! that the day should

have gone by when the same might have been said of every clergyman

bearing orders in the Church of England. He is a man of the world, as I

have above explained, and as such it is not probable that he will be a

fanatic, though living examples may probably be adduced that fanaticism

can exist under an archdeacon’s hat. And he walks just a head taller

than other clergymen around him, receiving that pleasant attitude from

the modest authority which he carries. Of all attitudes it is the most

pleasant. He who stands high on a column can hardly talk pleasantly with

those who stand round his pedestal; and that haranguing with loud voice

from column top to column top is but a cold ceremonial conversation.

Who can imagine two archbishops slapping each other’s backs and being

jolly together? But an archdeacon is not raised by his dignity above a

capability for jovial intimacy, and yet he walks with his head

pleasantly raised above the heads of other parsons around him.

V.

THE PARSON OF THE PARISH.

The word parson is generally supposed to be a slang term for the rector,

vicar, or incumbent of a parish, and, in the present day, is not often

used without some intended touch of drollery,--unless by the rustics of

country parishes who still cling to the old word. But the rustics are in

the right, for of all terms by which clergymen of the Church of England

are known, there is none more honourable in its origin than that of

parson. By that word the parish clergyman is designated as the palpable

and visible personage of the church of his parish, making that by his

presence an intelligible reality which, without him, would be but an

invisible idea. Parsons were so called before rectors or vicars were

known, and in ages which had heard nothing of that abominable word

incumbent. A parson proper, indeed, was above a vicar,--who originally

was simply the curate of an impersonal parson, and acted as priest in a

parish as to which some abbey or chapter stood in the position of

parson. The title of rector itself is new-fangled in comparison with

that of parson, and has no special ecclesiastical significance. The

parson, properly so called, had not only the full charge of his parish,

but the full benefit derivable from the tithes; and then he came to

change his name and to be called politely a rector. The vicar was he who

had the full charge of his parish, as also he has at present,

vicariously at first for some abbey or chapter; and now, in these days,

vicariously for some lay improprietor,--but who had and has the benefit

only of the so-called small tithes; and then he also came to be called

the parson. Rectors and vicars at present hold their livings by tenures

which are equally firm, and they have done so now for more than four

hundred years. The rustics above mentioned would be much surprised if

told that their vicar was not a real parson. In speaking, therefore, of

the parson of the parish, let us be understood to mean the parish

clergyman, who has that full fruition of his living which is given by

freehold possession. There is a pleasant flavour of old crusted port

present to the palate of one’s imagination when mention is made of a

rector, which he misses perhaps in inquiring after the vicar, whose beer

may be better than his wine; and the rector cuts lustily from the

haunch, while the vicar is scientific with the shoulder. But we expect,

on the other hand, and are gratified in expecting, a kinder and more

genial flow of clerical wit from the vicar than the rector gives us; and

I have generally found the vicar’s armchair to be easier than that of

his elder brother. But here, in speaking of the English parson,--of the

priest who has full clerical command in his parish,--no distinction

between rector and vicar shall be made.

The parson of the parish is the proper type and most becoming form of

the English clergyman as the captain of his ship is of the English naval

officer. Admirals of the Red and Admirals of the Blue, and Commodores

with authority ashore, are very fine fellows, and may perhaps be greater

in their way than the captain can be in his; but for real naval

efficiency and authority the captain of the ship on his own quarter-deck

stands unequalled. And so it is with the parson of the parish in his

own glebe. He is pure parson and nothing else, and in the daily work of

his life, if he does that daily work diligently, he cannot but feel that

he is devoting himself to those duties which properly belong to him.

Whether a bishop in the House of Lords may so think of himself, or a

bishop speaking from a platform, or a bishop in the turmoils of

correspondence, or even a bishop dispensing his patronage, may be more

doubtful. And the easy dean may doubt whether such ease was intended for

him when he took upon himself to bear the arms of St. Paul. And the

fellow of a college, even though he be tutor as well as fellow, may feel

some qualms as to that word reverend with which he has caused the world

to address him. But the parson in his parish must know that he has got

himself into that place for which he has been expressly fitted by the

orders he has taken. The curate, who is always a curate, to whom it is

never given to exercise by his own right the highest clerical authority

in his parish, cannot be said to have fulfilled the mission of his

profession satisfactorily, let him have worked ever so nobly. He is as

the lieutenant who never rises to be a captain. But the parson requires

no further exaltation for clerical excellence. The higher he rises above

parsondom, the less will he be of a clergyman. He may become a peer of

Parliament, or the head of a chapter, or a local magistrate over other

clergymen, as is an archdeacon; but as simply parish parson, he fills

the most clerical office in his profession.

The parson of the parish in England, a few years since, was almost

necessarily a man who had been educated at Oxford or Cambridge. An

English parish might indeed have an Irishman from Trinity College,

Dublin; and, now and again, an outsider was admitted into the fold as a

shepherd. There was a small college in the north to fit northern

candidates for northern congregations, and the rule was not absolutely

absolute; but it prevailed so far that it was felt to be a rule. And

thence came an assurance, in which trust was put more or less by all

classes, that the parson of the parish was at least a gentleman. He was

a man who had lived on equal terms with the highest of the land in point

of birth, and hence arose a feeling that was very general in rural

parishes, and as salutary as it was general, that the occupant of the

parsonage was as good a man as the occupant of the squire’s house. It

would be interesting to us to trace when this feeling first became

common, knowing as we do know that for many years after the Reformation,

and down even to a comparatively late date, the rural clergyman was

anything but highly esteemed. We are told constantly that the parson

left the dining-room when the pudding came in, and that he by no means

did badly for himself in marrying the lady’s maid. We most of us know

the character of that eminent divine Dr. Tusher, who lived in the reign

of Queen Anne. Then came the halcyon days of British clergymen,--the

happy days of George III. and George IV., and the parson in his

parsonage was as good a gentleman as any squire in his mansion or

nobleman in his castle. There is, alas! a new order of things coming on

us which threatens us with some changes, not for the better, in this

respect. There are theological colleges here and there, and men and

women talk of “literates.” Who shall dare to say that it may not all be

for the best? Who will venture to prophesy that there shall be less

energetic teaching of God’s word under the new order of things than

under the old? But, as to the special man of whom we speak now, the

English parish parson, with whom we all love to be on familiar

terms,--that he will be an altered man, and as a man less attractive,

less urbane, less genial,--in one significant word, less of a

gentleman,--that such will be the result of theological colleges and the

institution of “literates,” no one who has thought of the subject will

have any doubt.

And in no capacity is a gentleman more required or more quickly

recognized than in that of a parson. Who has not seen a thrifty

household mistress holding almost unconsciously between her finger and

thumb a piece of silk or linen, and telling at once by the touch whether

the fabric be good? This is done with almost an instinct in the matter,

and habit has made perfect in the woman that which was born with her.

Exactly in the same way, only much more unconsciously, will the English

rustic take his new parson between his finger and thumb and find out

whether he be a gentleman. The rustic cannot tell by what law he judges,

but he knows the article, and the gentleman he will obey and respect,

in the gentleman he will believe. Such is his nature. While in the

other, who has not responded favourably to the touch of the rustic’s

finger, the rustic will not believe, nor by him will he be restrained,

if restraint be necessary. The rustic in this may show, perhaps, both

his ignorance and servility, as well as the skilled power of his

fingering,--but such is his nature.

But the adult parson of the parish in England,--the clergyman who has

reached, if I may so say, the full dominion of his quarter-deck,--is

still customarily a man from Oxford or from Cambridge, and it is of such

a one that we speak here. He has probably been the younger son of a

squire, or else his father has been a parson, as he is himself.

Throughout his whole life he has lived in close communion with rural

affairs, and has of them that exact knowledge which close communion only

will give. He knows accurately, from lessons which he has learned

unknowingly, the extent of the evil and the extent of the good which

exists around him, and he adapts himself to the one and to the other.

Against gross profligacy and loud sin he can inveigh boldly, and he can

make men and women to shake in their shoes by telling them of the

punishment which will follow such courses; but with the peccadilloes

dear to the rustic mind he knows how to make compromises, and can put up

with a little drunkenness, with occasional sabbath-breaking, with

ordinary oaths, and with church somnolence. He does not expect much of

poor human nature, and is thankful for moderate results. He is generally

a man imbued with strong prejudice, thinking ill of all countries and

all religions but his own; but in spite of his prejudices he is liberal,

and though he thinks ill of men, he would not punish them for the ill

that he thinks. He has something of bigotry in his heart, and would

probably be willing, if the times served his purpose, to make all men

members of the Church of England by Act of Parliament; but though he is

a bigot, he is not a fanatic, and as long as men will belong to his

Church, he is quite willing that the obligations of that Church shall

sit lightly upon them. He loves his religion and wages an honest fight

with the devil; but even with the devil he likes to deal courteously,

and is not averse to some occasional truces. He is quite in earnest,

but he dislikes zeal; and of all men whom he hates, the over-pious young

curate, who will never allow ginger to be hot in the mouth, is the man

whom he hates the most. He carries out his Bible teaching in preferring

the publican to the Pharisee, and can deal much more comfortably with an

occasional backslider than he can with any man who always walks, or

appears to walk, in the straight course.

It almost seems that something approaching to hypocrisy were a necessary

component part of the character of the English parish parson, and yet he

is a man always on the alert to be honest. It is his misfortune that he

must preach higher than his own practice, and that he is driven to

pretend to think that a stricter course of life is necessary than that

which he would desire to see followed out even in his own family. As the

mealman in the description of his flours can never go below “middlings,”

knowing that they who wish to get the cheapest article would never buy

it if it were actually ticketed as being of the worst quality, so is the

parson driven to ticket all his articles above their real value. He

cannot tell his people what amount of religion will really suffice for

them, knowing that he will never get from them all that he asks; and

thus he is compelled to have an inner life and an outer,--an inner life,

in which he squares his religious views with his real ideas as to that

which God requires from his creatures; and an outer life, in which he is

always demanding much in order that he may get little. From this it

results that a parish parson among his own friends differs much from the

parish parson among his parishioners, and that he is always, as it were,

winking at those who know him as a man, while he is most eager in his

exercitations among those who only know him as a clergyman.

The parish parson generally has a grievance, and is much attached to

it,--in which he is like all other men in all other walks of life. He

not uncommonly maintains a mild opposition to his bishop, upon whom he

is apt to look down as belonging to a new order of things, and whom he

regards, on account of this new order of things, as being not above half

a clergyman. As he rises in years and repute he becomes a rural dean,

and exercises some small authority out of his own parish, by which,

however, his character as a parish parson, pure and simple, is somewhat

damaged. He is great in the management of his curate, and arrives at

such perfection in his professional career that he inspires his clerk

with mingled awe and affection.

Such is the English parish parson, as he was almost always some fifty

years since, as he is still in many parishes, but as he will soon cease

to become. The homes of such men are among the pleasantest in the

country, just reaching in well-being and abundance that point at which

perfect comfort exists and magnificence has not yet begun to display

itself. And the men themselves have no superiors in their adaptability

to social happiness. How pleasantly they talk when the room is tiled,

and the outward world is shut out for the night! How they delight in the

modest pleasures of the table, sitting in unquestioned ease over a ruddy

fire, while the bottle stands ready to the grasp, but not to be grasped

too frequently or too quickly. Methinks the eye of no man beams so

kindly on me as I fill my glass for the third time after dinner as does

the eye of the parson of the parish.

VI.

THE TOWN INCUMBENT.

Clergymen of the Church of England · 第 2 / 5 段