ment. Thus, without reckoning the Cathedral, the Mayor's chapel, or the private chapels of two asylums, the Church of England provides for Divine worship to the extent of forty churches and two chapels. Of the incumbents of these probably about twenty-eight may be reckoned as belonging to the Evangelical school. Since 1851 the Wesleyans have built but one chapel, and sold one to the Established Church, while in the case of one, if not two, the number of sittings has been diminished. But the inactivity of Wesleyans has been fully made up by the energy of seceders from them. The Methodist Free Churches have erected nine chapels; the New Connexion, the CHAPTER IV.-THINGS WORTHY TO BE NOTED. Any notice of Congregationalism in Bristol would be incomplete which did not advert to some of those more prominent characteristic features which its history develops, but which could hardly have been brought out in the rapid survey we have hitherto made. Foremost among these must be placed, its extent. Not only are Congregationalists the largest and most powerful body of Nonconformists in Bristol, but the provision they make for the purely spiritual wants of the community will bear favourable comparison with that which Independency has made in any other of the great provincial towns of England. As an illustration we will take the proportion of places of Divine worship to the population. Leaving the metropolis out of the question, there are in England nine cities and towns, the population of which, severally, was returned at the last census as over 100,000. In these the buildings for public worship erected by Congregationalists will bear the following proportions. (I omit all fractions, and take the last return made of Churches, that sent to the Editor of the "Year Book" in the autumn of 1864):-In Wolverhampton, there is one Independent chapel to every 49,215 persons. In Newcastleon-Tyne there is one to every 36,430 persons. Liverpool, the population of which has increased more than fivefold in sixty years, has one Independent chapel for every 26,114 souls. Sheffield has one for every 23,144 souls. Leeds has one for 23,018; and Birmingham one for every 21,139. Manchester, Bradford, and Bristol stand highest in the list. The first, including Salford, has one Congregational chapel for every 16,429 of her population, and Bradford one for every 11,802. Bristol stands the highest of all; and has one chapel provided by Congregationalists for every 9,630 persons. This provision, there is every reason to hope and believe, will be shortly increased. Ar rangements are already considerably advanced for the erection of another chapel in Clifton; and then there will remain two or three other new neighbourhoods in which there will be not only ample room for Congregational Churches, but an imperative demand for increased provision for religious worship. Attention has been already called to these districts. The occupation of them may, possibly, lead to changes among existing city Churches. But there is the will to occupy them. The way in which to do so most wisely will be made clear in due time. Another feature of Bristol Congregationalism which its history develops is its Evangelizing Energy. The number of its churches may be taken as evidence of this. But I refer now particularly to the efforts it has put forth simply to bring men to Christ, rather than to the extension of its own specific ecclesiastical principles, and the increase of its places of worship. The Bristol City Mission had its origin in the devoted zeal and labours of one of the Congregational pastors of the city, who afterwards died as a Missionary in Jamaica. The constitution of the society was entirely unsectarian, but practically its support gradually devolved on the Independent and Baptist Churches, and last year five-eighths of its income, besides a proportionate number of its gratuitous labourers, were supplied by those of our order. Early in the present century a society was formed in Bristol which has not, perhaps, an exact counterpart in any other of our large provincial cities. I refer to the Bristol Itinerant Society. It was founded in the year 1811, by the united action of the Independent Churches and their pastors. Its object is to carry the Gospel of the Saviour to the villages and hamlets around the city, within a circle the diameter of which is about twenty-four miles. It provides for preaching the Gospel by means chiefly of lay-preachers, who visit the different stations according to a quarterly plan drawn out by the superintendent. With these preachers it sends out teachers to organize and conduct Sunday-schools, the establishment of which was one of the primary objects aimed at by the founders of the society. As these labours were successful, as Chapels were built and Churches founded a new want began to be felt. It was seen that the congregations thus gathered needed some supervision during the week, when the agents of the society were not with them. In many cases the only deacon was the superintendent of the school, who was resident in Bristol, so that the sick and the dying could only be irregularly visited, and little could be done to carry the Gospel to the minds of the careless and the degrade l. Thus the society was led to the employment of Evangelists, whose time might be wholly devoted to ministerial work. Last year three such Evangelists were employed, each of whom had two or three congregations under his care. In this way the Gospel is regularly preached, and Christian Ordinances administered in twenty villages immediately around the city. In this work the students of the Institute for training Home Missionaries now take their full share; and they are thus practically prepared for the great work for which they are intended. According to the last report these village Churches contained 579 mem bers, of whom 57 had been added during the year. The congregations were made up of 2,395 persons; 1,293 children were under instruction on the Lord's day; and 1,138 families were under domiciliary visitation. sent by any one congregation to the London Missionary Society went from one of them. Their missionary zeal has never flagged. They have been as anxious as ever for the conversion of the world to Christ. They have only begun to have a clearer and deeper insight into the meaning of the Saviour's words, "beginning" at Jerusalem. In the blessings of this evangelizing energy the county at large has also greatly shared. Twenty-five years ago, when the Bristol Home Missionary Society was united with the Gloucestershire Congregational Union, the representatives of the Churches passed a resolution"to prosecute the work of evangelization with increased energy, and to attempt to plant the standard of the Cross in every destitute village and hamlet of the county." This pledge has not yet been redeemed, but not a little has been done towards it; and in all that has been done the Bristol Churches have borne their full part. Last year they raised two-thirds of the income of the County Union, besides contributing £395 2s. 10d. towards the support of the Training Institution. The growth of this spirit of Home Evangelization in Bristol has been very rapid during the last ten or twelve years. The efforts made for Foreign Missions, it must be admitted, shew no corresponding advance. But then it should be remembered, that while in preceding years the demands of Home had been but feebly and inadequately responded to, the claims of the Heathen had been clearly recognized and generously met. should also be remembered, that while the Bristol Churches have grown more alive to the spiritual wants of their own neighbourhood and county, they have continued to be abreast of the foremost provincial congregations in their contributions for Foreign Missions, and last year the largest amount bury and Redland the names of Wil It Not less worthy of notice is the power of individual effort which the history of Independency in Bristol peculiarly developes. It has been already seen that Nonconformity in this. city derives its origin from the solitary labours of a vicar of St. Philip's in the early part of the seventeenth century, and the extent to which a similar feature may be traced in the history of the Congregational Churches severally is not a little remarkable. The Tabernacle is the memorial of the apostolic zeal and self-denying labours of George Whitefield. The Lodge-street Church arose out of the work of the Countess of Huntingdon. Zion Chapel is the result of the musings of a solitary heart over the religious destitution of the large population of Bedminster, and it stands a monument of the liberality of the late John Hare, of Firfield, who erected it at his own expense. The very names of Hope Chapel and Arley Chapel associate them with individuals through whose exertions or generosity chiefly they were erected. Two of the Churches in St. Philip's arose out of the evangelical earnestness and toil of two of a band of brothers, over the loss of the eldest of whom, who was ever foremost in every good work, we have not yet ceased to With the chapels at High mourn. liam and Henry Wills, and the venerable Richard Ash will be for ever associated. In all these cases the sense of individual responsibility, leading to individual labour and liberality, has issued in blessed results. Nor is the influence of this principle less manifest in connexion with the evangelizing efforts of the Churches of this city. The late William Thorp was one of the first to contend for the holding of missionary meetings out of London. Through his influence and exertion the first Auxiliary to the London Missionary Society was formed, and that in Bristol. The success of this enterprize, “notwithstanding the discouraging prognostications of many," led very speedily to the formation of similar auxiliaries in Manchester, Liverpool, and other towns in the north of England. The large sums which are now annually collected here during the missionary week, and which form so peculiar a feature in the Bristol anniversary, may be ascribed in no small measure to the example of a Christian lady, followed up by the influence and eloquence of John Leifchild and William Thorp. The necessary limits of this paper will not permit us to pursue this subject further, or it might have been shown in many other instances, how the history of the Bristol Churches developes the power and fruitfulness of individual effort in connexion with the spread of the Saviour's kingdom. There is one feature of Bristol Congregationalism which fidelity compels us to notice, which must be held to be a serious defect. I refer to its neglect of popular education. While Independency has done very much towards meeting the religious wants of this great city, it has done comparatively VOL. II-NEW SERIES. little towards providing for the masses of the people the means of elementary secular education. It is true, indeed, that some members of our Churches have done much in this matter, and some excellent day-schools exist supported largely by Congregationalists. But we speak now of the action of the Churches rather than of that of individual members. Considering the number and strength of these Churches, they have manifested no earnestness in the cause of elementary education at all worthy of their position. While it would be difficult to find a parish without its national school, it is quite the exception to find a Congregational Church with a dayschool supported by it, or largely under its influence. And what is worse, the Churches are not yet alive to the importance of the subject. They do not see the bearing it must have on the future history and prosperity of their denomination in the city. Into the causes and remedies of this state of things it is not for us here to enter. We simply notice the fact. Fidelity to truth would not allow us to pass it over in silence when speaking of the characteristic features of Bristol Independency. The last feature of the Bristol Churches we shall notice is the feeling they discover of the need of greater denominational unity. Perhaps there are few cities, the Congregational Churches of which are more closely united than those of Bristol. Their co-operation in all common labours may be said to be complete, altogether undisturbed by the jealousies and rivalries which may possibly exist elsewhere. This union binds together the two great branches of the Congregational family, pædobaptist and D anti-pædobaptist. But among the Churches of the former branch in this city there has grown up a feeling of the need of greater union among themselves,—of truer unity, indeed. There has been awakened a sense of the value, nay, of the necessity of some mode of practically realizing and exemplifying the fact, that they are truly but one Church, if I may be allowed the expression, however many congregations there may be. With this feeling unconsciously, perhaps, influencing many, yet really existing notwithstanding, efforts have been made, and hailed with delight, to draw the Churches closer together, to tighten and strengthen the bond which has united them to one another. For nearly three years past a meeting has been held, at fixed times, of the pastors and deacons, at which united prayer is offered, and subjects of common interest are discussed. These meetings are as much as possible of an informal character, and topics connected with the spiritual condition of the Churches, questions of discipline, of worship, of mutual relation, and the like, are considered. A feeling of deeper mutual sympathy is thus cherished, and an effort is made towards greater denominational unity. In one district of the city a similar feeling has led the pastors and deacons of the Churches to project periodical united celebrations of the Lord's Supper. Independency has often led to isolation. Such was not, however, the apostolic idea. And the Bristol Churches seem to be feeling their way in the direction of the true apostolic thought of one Church in one city, though it is all but certain that now the difficulties in the way of organic unity are insuperable. In conclusion, it would be interesting, and, without doubt, instructive also, to know something of the inner religious life of these Churches, and of the moral and spiritual power which they exert in this city and neighbourhood. But, beyond what may be gathered from the remarks already made, these are questions on which I do not feel competent to speak. Possibly no materials could be gathered from which a satisfactory opinion upon them could be formed. Or, if they could, it would only be as the result of a prolonged induction of facts spread over a very wide surface, and often very subtle in their form. Such a process would consume much time, and require not a little profound thought. For the present, therefore, it must be left untouched. In the meantime, while we mourn over many defects, and while we earnestly and devoutly seek that Bristol Congregationalism may be a brighter, a holier, a more blessed thing in the future than it has ever been in the past, we would also thank Almighty God, the source of all grace and mercy, for what the Churches in this city have been and are, for what they have done and are doing. "Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us, but unto Thy name give glory, for thy mercy and for thy truth's sake." |