bannerbanner
Stones of the Temple; Or, Lessons from the Fabric and Furniture of the Church
Stones of the Temple; Or, Lessons from the Fabric and Furniture of the Churchполная версия

Полная версия

Настройки чтения
Размер шрифта
Высота строк
Поля
На страницу:
8 из 15

"My two great opponents, Sir John Adamley and Mr. Parvener, are to meet me this evening, and I am come to ask you and Mr. Acres to walk back with me to Droneworth, so that I may have the benefit of your support. You see these two gentlemen had pews in the nave of our church, lined, cushioned, and carpeted in dazzling crimson; each pew was as large as a good-sized room, and the two occupied nearly half the nave. Mr. Parvener was generally at church once on a Sunday, and then he sat not only in luxurious ease, but also in solitary dignity. Sir John never came to church, as there was some old feud respecting the right owner of his pew; but the door was always locked, and a canvas cover was stretched over the top. These precautions, however, failed to keep out an occasional intruder, and at last the door was securely nailed up99. The worst of it was, that all this time there was not a seat in the church which a poor man could occupy with any chance of either seeing or hearing the ministering Priest. Now people talk about proper distinctions in church between the high and the low, and we sometimes hear much about old ancestral pews. Believe me, it's all nonsense, my dear sir; the distinction is solely between riches and poverty. If a man has plenty of money, he may (or rather, till lately he might) secure the biggest pew in England; and if he has not money, though he be entitled to quarter the royal arms on his escutcheon, he will get no pew at all. Mr. Parvener is an exact instance of this. But a few years since he was working for half-a-crown a day. No sooner did he become wealthy than he obtained a large pew at our church, whilst its former owner, whose fall had been as complete and rapid as was the rise of his successor, was driven to a remote corner of the church allotted to degraded poverty."

The walk to Droneworth was soon accomplished, but the Rector with his two friends only reached the Parsonage a few moments before the arrival of the two aggrieved parishioners. It was evident from the first greeting that they had come in no friendly spirit. But few words passed before Sir John came direct to the object of the interview.

"The purpose of our visit," said Sir John, "you are aware, is to protest against the removal of our pews at church, and to declare our determination to have them replaced if it is possible."

"But, gentlemen, you are aware that we have provided good accommodation for you in the restored church," replied the Vicar.

"Good accommodation, sir!" exclaimed Sir John. "Why, you have given us nothing but low wooden benches to sit upon; and, to add to the insult, sir, there is not the semblance of a door; so that our devotions may at any time be interrupted by the presence of an inferior. Why, sir, the very labourers, who earn their half-crown a day, have seats in the church just as good as ours!"

The last sentence made poor Mr. Parvener writhe a little; and that indeed was its real intention, for the two neighbours had, in truth, little love for each other. The words, however, accomplished another and a better purpose; they broke up at once any thing like united action on the part of the opposition.

"Let me ask you, gentlemen, a very simple question," said the Vicar. "Why should not the labourer have as good a place in God's house as yourselves?"

"You might as well ask," said the Baronet, "why they should not have as good houses as we have."

"The cases are in no way similar. You live in better houses than the poor, simply because your worldly means enable you to do so; but I have yet to be taught that in the Church wealth is to be exalted and poverty degraded. No, Sir John, be sure this distinction is out of place there. We go to church to worship and to learn, and if favour is shown to any class, no doubt it should be to the ignorant and the poor; but this is a matter on which we are not left to our own judgment. There are not many instructions in our Bibles as to the manner of arranging our churches, but here the direction is plain and unmistakable."

"Indeed, sir! I had no idea that any thing about church seats was to be found in the Bible."

"Oh, but indeed there is. The passage to which I refer is in St. James' Epistle; and it is this: 'My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of Glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto 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 to him that weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, Sit thou here in a good place; and say to the poor, Stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: are ye not then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts100?'"

"If those words are in the Bible, I must confess the Bible is against me; but I had no idea that they were there."

"I assure you they are the exact words of Holy Scripture."

"It's clear enough to me," interposed Mr. Parvener, "that the labourer ought to have as good a place at church as the lord. I don't think the church is the place to show off aristocratic pride. Why, for that matter, there's many a man that doesn't know who was his grandfather doing more for the glory of God and the good of his fellow-creatures than your grandest aristocrats." This was intended as a counter-thrust, and it created a wider breach in the enemy's camp. "But," continued he, "I don't see why, if all have good places in the church, we should not make our own seats as comfortable as we can."

"Ah, but there comes in just what St. James tells us we ought to keep out: the distinction between riches and poverty, distinctions which among our fellow-men have their advantages, but not before God in His house. Just hear what St. James says again: 'Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which He hath promised to them that love Him? But ye have despised the poor101.' I was much struck with a sermon I heard the other day on this subject. The preacher said, 'If our Lord Jesus Christ were to enter some of our churches just as He went to the temple at Jerusalem, do you think He would take His seat in the luxuriously furnished pew of the rich, or in the open bench of the poor102?' Now, let me ask you too, Mr. Parvener (for this is, after all, the sum and substance of the matter), do you think that He 'who was rich, yet for our sakes became poor103,' and whose life was a perfect pattern of humility, would sanction the distinctions which either pride of station, or pride of riches, would create in the House of Prayer?"

"Well, sir, I must say that's a solemn question, and it sets one a-thinking more than I have thought before about this."

"But, Mr. Beeland," said Sir John, interrupting, for he saw the ground of his arguments was slipping from under him, "you will acknowledge that these open benches in church are a novelty, and you often talk to us about keeping to the old paths. Now, here you are teaching us to strike out a new way altogether. I wish I knew something more than I do about the history of these pews."

"I anticipated some such remark from you, and knowing that my friend Mr. Ambrose is more learned than I am in all these subjects, I induced him to join us this evening, and if he will kindly give us the benefit of his information, he will, I am sure, convince you that pews, and not benches, are the modern innovation."

"If you can have patience to listen to me," said the Vicar of St. Catherine's, "I will gladly give you the history of pews, as far I know it."

CHAPTER XIX

THE NAVE

>"Take theses things hence; make not My Father's house a house of merchandise."John ii. 16"Not raised in nice proportions was the pile,But large and massy; for duration built;With pillars crowded, and the roof upheldBy naked rafters intricately cross'd,Like leafless underboughs, 'mid some thick grove,All wither'd by the depth of shade above,… The floorOf nave and aisle, in unpretending guise,Was occupied by oaken benches rangedIn seemly rows."Wordsworth.

"In order to trace the history of pews104 to their first source, I must, as Mr. Beeland has hinted, go back to a time when pews, as we now see them, had never been thought of. It is pretty certain that the first seats in churches were stone benches placed round the north, south, and west walls, portions of which are still remaining in many old churches105. In some ancient churches in Ireland the stone bench has also been found adjoining the eastern wall, the altar being placed a little distance before it. In those early times people were far less self-indulgent than at present in God's House, and the usual custom was to stand or kneel during the whole service. The first wooden seats were small stools, each intended to seat one person, and placed in the nave as suited the convenience of each occupier. Then came plain benches, and next, benches with backs to them. The priest's reading-pew was probably the origin of all pews. They seem to have been unknown in any form till the end of the thirteenth century, but the earliest record we have of a pew is 1602106. Next to the 'reading-pew' came the 'bride's pew107,' the 'churching-pew,' and the 'churchwarden's pew.' In the nave of Little Berningham Church, Norfolk, is a pew erected by a shepherd; a skeleton carved in wood is fixed at the south-west corner of it, and these lines are carved on the pew: —

'For couples join'd in wedlock; and my friendThat stranger is: this seat I did intend,But at the coste and charge of Stephen Crosbee.All you that do this place pass by,As you are now, even so was I —Remember death, for you must dye,And as I am, soe shall you be.'Anno Domini, 1640108.'

The general adoption of pews began with Puritanism, and with its increase they too grew in width and stature. First of all, people were satisfied with the uniform arrangement and space of the old oak benches, only erecting on the top of them an ugly and useless panelling of deal. This was bad enough, but worse soon followed; and, to make the seats more luxurious, first one bench was taken away, and the two benches made one pew; then two were removed, then three, till at last it required the removal of six benches, which formerly would accommodate thirty persons, to make one pew to accommodate two or three. Now, either men are giants in these days and were pigmies in those days, or else the pride and luxury of man claim a prominence now in God's House, which was quite unknown then. I will ask either of you, gentlemen, to decide which is the true explanation."

"I fear it must be against ourselves," said Mr. Parvener.

"I fear so, indeed109. But now let me explain to you more fully what are the real evils of this wretched pew system. And first, as to the private pew– for, besides sharing in the evils of all the rest, it has some peculiarly its own. Of these, the pride it fosters, and the 'respect of persons,' so severely condemned by St. James, are the worst. My dear sir, I assure you it has often made my blood boil to see some poor old man with his venerable bare head exposed to the cold draught of a neglected part of the church, whilst a young, pampered son of fortune has been cushioned up under the stately canopy of his own pew110. Oh, sir, I'm sure you must agree with me that this is altogether against the spirit of Christianity! I'm no leveller out of church; the social distinctions must be there kept up; but in God's House these should have no place at all. Then, surely, the luxury of many of these private pews is altogether inconsistent with the object of our meeting in the House of Prayer. It is – as it shows the progress of luxury, and its concomitant, effeminacy – a curious circumstance, that when the custom of having pews in our churches began to spread, they were, by our hardy ancestors, considered as too great indulgences, and as temptations to repose. Their curtains and bed-furniture, their cushions and sleep, have, by a long association of ideas, become intimately connected. The Puritans thought pews the devil's baby, or booby hutches111. I have heard that in America they go even beyond us in the luxury of pews, and that in Boston some of them are actually lined with velvet112. I believe that both there and here the private pew system has done very much, not only to force the poor from the Church, but to drive many of all classes over to dissent."

"I can't see how that can be," said the Baronet.

Why, "naturally enough, sir, for they find all this the very opposite to what the Church professes to be and to teach. They see the rich exalted, and the poor debased; they find a house of pride, instead of a house of prayer.

"The exclusiveness of this system is one of the most curious as well as absurd features in its history. True, the change in our social habits has created a change for the better here; but much of the old temper survives. You would hardly believe, perhaps, that years ago it was not only considered an impropriety for the squire and the dame to sit in the same pew with any of their inferior fellow-worshippers, but the presence of their own children113 was even considered an indecent intrusion. This was, indeed, ridiculous; but, in truth, the whole system would be monstrously grotesque, were it not so very wicked.

"There is a curious inscription on an old seat in a church at Whalley, which seems to throw some light on the early history of private pews; it is this: – 'My man Shuttleworth, of Hacking, made this form, and here will I sit when I come, and my Cousin Nowell may make one behind me if he please, and my sonne Sherburne shall make one on the other side, and Mr. Catterall another behind him; and for the residue, the use shall be first come first speed, and that will make the proud wives of Whalley rise betimes to come to church114.'

"The first seat thus appropriated was, no doubt, a rude wooden bench; but certain it is, that no sooner were even these claimed as private property than quarrelling began115; and the quarrel has, alas! been kept up to our own day. The right to these faculty pews, as they are called, is, however, in most cases very questionable, and often leads to costly law processes116. Many sensible men and earnest Churchmen are giving up their supposed right to them, and are contented to take their place in church like ordinary mortals. I sincerely trust, gentlemen, this may be your case.

"Now, let me notice a few of the evils which are common to all pews. They tend to destroy the unity and uniformity of common worship, which forms so grand a feature in our church system. 'They are very inconvenient to kneel down in, necessarily oblige some to sit with their backs to the speaker, and when they rise up, present a scene of confusion, as if they were running their heads against one another117. As God's House is a House of Praise and Prayer, so before all things the arrangement there should have reference to the proper posture118 of praise and prayer. Then see how these pews shelter and encourage levity in God's House. As long ago as the year 1662, a bishop of Norwich wrote this satire upon pews: 'There wants nothing but beds to hear the Word of God on. We have casements, locks and keys, and cushions – I had almost said bolsters and pillows – and for those we love the church. I will not guess what is done within them: who sits, stands, or lies asleep at prayers, communion, &c.; but this, I dare say, they are either to hide some vice or to proclaim one119.' I will only mention one more objection to pews: they harbour dust and dirt120, and otherwise disfigure the beauty of our churches."

"Well, Mr. Ambrose, I must confess myself brought to the same opinion as yourself," said Sir John, "and the reformation of the evil may commence at Droneworth to-morrow without any obstacle whatever from me."

"Nor yet from me," rejoined Mr. Parvener: "I certainly never heard the case fairly stated before, and now I have, I own I'm convinced."

"Heartily glad, I'm sure, my friend here must be to part with the old half empty packing-cases, and to see proper benches in their place. And as you have been kind enough to listen to me so far, I will just say a few more words to explain the two desks which the Vicar has placed in the nave of your church, and of which I heard you had disapproved. One is the Litany-desk, or faldstool121, – as it is called in the Coronation Service. The Litany is a very solemn, penitential service, and from very early times it has been said from the appropriate place where the Vicar has placed the Litany-desk in your church – namely, just at the entrance to the chancel. Its position there has reference to that Litany of God's own appointing, of which we read in the Book of Joel122, where, in a general assembly, the priests were to weep between the porch and the altar, and to say, 'Spare Thy people, O Lord.' In allusion to this, our Litany – retaining also the same words of supplication – is enjoined, by the royal injunctions123, still in force, 'to be said or sung in the midst of the church, at a low desk before the chancel-door124.' The other desk is called the lectern, or lettern, and sometimes the eagle-desk; and, as you are aware, is the desk from which the lessons are read. They were first made of wood, and often richly carved; afterwards they were commonly made of brass or copper. They were first used about the end of the thirteenth century, and although most of our country churches have been despoiled of them, yet they have never ceased to be used in our cathedrals, as well as many other churches125. The desk is often supported by a pelican feeding its young with its own blood, the emblem of our Saviour's love; more frequently it is supported by an eagle, the symbolic representation of the Evangelist St. John. It is true that both the faldstool and the lectern have long been unknown at Droneworth, yet I feel sure you will not, on second thoughts, consider the restoration of such convenient and appropriate furniture as objectionable."

The two late dissentients agreed that as they had overcome the greater difficulty, they should withdraw all opposition in the matter; and, it being now late, the party broke up, each one feeling glad that a good thing had been done on a good day.

CHAPTER XX

THE AISLES

"Praise ye the name of the Lord; praise Him, O ye servants of the Lord. Ye that stand in the house of the Lord, in the courts of the house of our God."Ps. cxxxv. 1, 2"Three solemn parts together twineIn harmony's mysterious lineThree solemn aisles approach the shrine,Yet all are one."Keble.

Mr. Beeland accompanied his two friends some distance on their way home.

"I remember noticing," said Mr. Acres, "that the pews of your two parishioners very much blocked up the centre aisle of the church; their removal will much widen the aisle, which will be a great improvement."

"Forgive me for correcting you," said Mr. Ambrose, "there can be no such thing as a centre aisle. You are speaking of the centre alley or passage. The word aisle126 can only refer to the wing of a building, and it always denotes that portion of a church which runs laterally north or south of the nave or chancel. I see, Mr. Beeland, you have some work to do in that aisle of yours before your church will be in good order."

"Yes, that is my greatest remaining difficulty. I have observed that those of the congregation who occupy that aisle are far less attentive and devotional than the rest; and the reasons are obvious. They are cut off from the main portion of the church, not only by the high backs of the existing pews, and by the hat and cloak rails which run from pillar to pillar, but also by needless masses of modern masonry. Moreover, they can see nothing of that part of the church which is sacred to the most solemn offices of our worship. Then, again, what the people do see is enough to divert all devotional thought and feeling from any but the most seriously and religiously disposed."

"You mean the hideous heathen monument which occupies the east end of the aisle. If I remember rightly, it is a sort of monstrous Roman altar, with four huge bull's heads at each corner."

"Yes; it is in the centre of a mortuary chapel, once belonging to a family named Bullock, and their frightful crest, in gigantic proportions, is the one object on which the eyes of at least a third of our congregation must rest, if they open their eyes at all. I can hardly conceive any thing more calculated to deaden the fervour of Christian worship than an object like this placed before the gaze of the worshipper. Much as I object to the bare walls of Dissenting meeting-houses, and the many-altared aisles of Roman Catholic churches, I believe neither are so distracting to the minds of the congregation generally as are the mortuary chapels, with their uncouth adornments, which occupy so large a space in the aisles of many of our own churches. Unfortunately, this chapel now belongs to a young man who has recently seceded to the Church of Rome, and he will neither allow me to appropriate for the use of the parishioners any of the space we so much need, nor will he consent to have the unsightly monument removed to a less conspicuous place."

"The bitter hostility to wards the Church of their baptism, and the utter absence of Christian sympathy in good works of this nature, which characterize so many of those who have fallen away from our Communion, is indeed most deplorable. But even if your unreasonable and narrow-hearted parishioner will oppose all improvement in that part of the aisle which – stolen from God and His people – he claims as his own private property, there is much you can do, when you set about your work of restoration, to make that part of the church less isolated than at present. At least, you can remove much of the useless wood and masonry which now separate the aisle from the nave."

"I propose also to re-open the ancient hagioscope in the south wall of the chancel, by which means the people in the aisle will once more gain a view of the altar, and be enabled to see and hear the priest when officiating there."

"Will you kindly tell me, Mr. Beeland," said Mr. Acres, "what are hagioscopes127? I never remember having heard the word before."

"You probably have heard them called by their more common name of squints. They are openings in the north or south walls of the chancel, or perhaps more commonly in the walls supporting the chancel arch, and are intended to give a view of the altar to those who are worshipping in the aisles. They are to be found in most old churches, but they have commonly, as in our case, been bricked up. It is manifestly very desirable that in all cases they should be restored, not only on account of their architectural beauty, but also for their practical utility in the services of the Church."

The party then separated, and the Vicar of Droneworth took back to his parish a lighter heart than he had known for many a day.

CHAPTER XXI

THE TRANSEPTS

"Strength and beauty are in His sanctuary."Ps. xcvi. 6"Pace we the ground! our footsteps treadA cross – the builder's holiest form —That awful couch where once was shedThe blood with man's forgiveness warm,And here, just where His mighty breastThrobb'd the last agony away,They bade the voice of worship rest,And white-robed Levites pause and pray."Hawker.

"Much of the objection which you have expressed to the prevailing arrangement of the aisles," said Mr. Acres, continuing the conversation with his Vicar, "seems to me to apply also to that of the transepts – I believe that is the proper name for those portions of a church which extend in a transverse direction north and south?"

"Yes," replied the Vicar; "and the remedies for the evil are in both cases nearly the same. Great inconvenience often arises from the exclusive character of the parclose. I would have the solid part of this made lower, and the upper part more light and open."

"Pardon me, my friend, but I am ignorant as to what you mean by the word parclose."

На страницу:
8 из 15