Chapel Trust Deeds. the combined force of earth and hell rise against them. To this cause I have sacrificed much of my own personal happiness, by giving up to the councils of America one of my nearest connexions, and living for more than three years in a state of widowhood. I hope before long you will be able to return to your native land with a heart truly American; as such, no one will rejoice more to see you than your affectionate friend and former correspondent, A. A. If you can write to me with safety, a letter would be very acceptable. SIR, Liverpool, October 14, 1822. MY attempt to introduce to the consideration of your readers the nature and operation of the Deeds of Trust by which our several places of worship are held, (pp. 410, 411,) seems to be thought a work of supe rerogation by your Bristol correspondent, G. P. H. (pp. 527, 528). I hope, however, I shall not offend that gentleman, when I state that his remarks have tended strongly to confirm my previous conviction of the necessity of an ample inquiry into the subject; for, notwithstanding the complacency and confidence with which he has written, it is evident that his information is extremely circumscribed. G. P. H. seems to imagine that all Chapel Trust Deeds are of the same tenor; and that some one which he has happened to meet with is the identical model of the rest. Hence it is that he " really cannot understand what I aim at, or mean to express;" and hence the "confusion" of which he complains. It shall be my present business, as far as I am able, to dispel this confusion, and to enter into a brief detail, with a view to elucidate my former letter, which I hoped was already sufficiently intelligible. G. P. H. may be very correct in representing that, "by the usual mode of settling trust property of this description, the premises are conveyed to Trustees, so as to vest the legal estate in them, upon trust for such person for the time being, as the major part of the subscribing congregation shall elect to the office of mi 671 nister;" and it will no doubt surprise him to learn that this very mode is objected to on two grounds; first, because it is contended that the chapel may be virtually wrested from the trustees by the election of a minister not to their taste, either in consequence of dissension in the congregation, or of stratagem among rival sects, who, it is imagined, may insidiously cause such a number of their own people to subscribe, in order to obtain the right of voting, as would outnumber the congregation: and, secondly, because it is thought expedient to prevent the minister from having that permanent occupation of the pulpit which has seemed in some cases to place him out of the reach of responsibility or removal. To what extent the founders of other chapels, to whose Trust Deeds I have referred, have been influenced by these considerations, it is not in my power to say. I understand that in one case they have been brought into full operation, and that it has been the work of much study and correspondence so to frame a Trust Deed as to guard the property in the building against every possible contingency of this nature. Chapels have been erected in many places at the cost of one or more individuals, who, "taking no thought for the morrow," have assigned them to Trustees in the usual form which G. P. H. describes; but in other places the parties subscribing have been either unable or unwilling to give their money; and have therefore received in exchange a certain proportion of the building. G. P. H. can surely understand why such persons do not choose to play the part of what he terms 'legal mutes;" why it would not answer their purpose to convey the chapel in trust for the officiating minister; and why the restraints have been ordained on the subcribing congregation, against which I think it right to protest. 66 Let me not be supposed to complain that persons who contribute to the building of places of worship do not give their money; or that they are careful to secure to themselves that share of the property which they consent to receive as an equivalent. On the contrary, I am anxious to acknowledge (in order to prevent future misapprehension) that I see in this nothing to censure, or which may not be commendable. But I do complain that any body of Dissenters, and more especially of Unitarian Dissenters, should arrogate a power which is justly odious: I do complain that in guarding their own pecuniary rights, they seek to violate the personal rights of others to exact in the name of security the forfeiture of that independence of mind which money cannot purchase, and which must cease to exist in those who cease to withstand such unreasonable pretensions. SIR, YOUR I.* B. Harrowgate, October 14, 1822. OUR correspondent G. P. H, in your Repository for September last, p. 527, is perfectly correct in what he asserts respecting Trustees of Chapels and Estates, or endowments connected with them. I am pretty well acquainted with the Trust Deeds of many Dissenting Chapels, and I have seen none which give to Trustees or others the power of removing, as well as appointing the minister, or any controlling power over the Meeting-House or its proceeds, or the pulpit and congregation, or the minister; as if they were (according to J. B., pp. 410, 411) the real and ostensible occupants." They are no such thing. Their office is, as G. P. H. says, if strongly, yet justly, "that of legal mutes, passively to subserve and support the equitable purposes of the Trust, and which they are bound to do; and have no discretion to exercise therein." The minister is the real and legal occupant; and if the place be freehold, (as many of the old establishments are,) the minister is the freeholder, and is entitled to all the rights appertaining to freehold property the same as the clergy of the Church. This has been proved and admitted on a variety of occasions in our courts. In point of fact-he is the sole landlord for the time being-the renters of pews are tenants; and, as G. P. H. has said, 66 a mandamus may at any time be obtained to compel the Trustees to do their duty, of to keep within it." But I must set G. P. H. right as to the form in which the Trust Deeds of Dissenting Chapels have been drawn up. In some places Trustees have the sole right of appointment, as to the Minister, without the congrega tion. In others, they are compelled to induct him-him who has a majo rity of subscribers, or renters of pews (in most cases the amount is fixed, a lower sum not giving the right to vote). In other places, the constitution is, that the election shall be determined by the majority of the communicants; and in others, in the way which your correspondent has stated. Thus the forms are varied ;but whatever be the forms according to which the Trust Deeds have been drawn up, the pastor has all the rights which follow in G. P. H.'s statement; and whenever those rights have been invaded and the tyranny resisted, the minister has obtained redress in law, and others, as well as those referred as in the cases of Godwin, Meanley to in the Reports; and should similar Society for protecting the Civil Rights cases again occur, the support of the of Dissenters would not be wanting, or that of SIR, A BARRISTER. Edinburgh, October 11, 1822. Unitarian worship at present HERE are so many places of projected or in actual progress, that the manner in which they are, or are to be, invested, appears to ine to be a subject deserving of discussion in your pages. The contributors to such particular in informing themselves as erections cannot, I conceive, be too which is essential to render their be to a matter, the right arrangement of nevolent intentions available for the objects which they contemplate. With the proposed Unitarian Chapel here, a view to satisfy the contributors to and to excite a little attention to the nature of such Trusts, as a subject of trouble you with the following re general interest and importance, I marks. In making such investments it is a principle of the greatest importance, * This initial was incorrectly printed that the Trustees and the body for J., p. 411. ED. whose benefit the trust is held, should Attempt to illustrate Jude, ver. 9. Letter II. - be completely identified, that the former should have no separate interests from the latter, but should at all times be ready to give effect to the wishes of their fellow-members. But here a difficulty occurs at the outset, for in Scotland, and I believe in England also, an unchartered society cannot legally hold such property in the name of its office-bearers, who are an elected body, and liable to perpetual changes, but must have its property invested in persons permanently appointed. It is proposed that our chapel shall be invested in eleven such persons, and in the survivor or survivors of their number; and in order to connect them with the society at large, and so to avoid the difficulty above stated, these eleven persons have signed a declaration, that they accept their office solely for the benefit of the rest, that they will give effect at all times to the decisions of their fellow. members, regarding the trust which they have received from them, and that they will be ready, when required by them, to convey the property by a future Trust Deed to any persons whom the congregation may choose to appoint. Having heard of many unpleasant disputes, and even litigations, which have occurred both in England and in Scotland between the trustees of chapels and the congregations assembling in them, we are very desirous that no such unpleasant and ruinous disputes should occur among us, and we hope that the above arrangement will effectually prevent them. There is another subject intimately connected with the former, viz. the method of acquiring the rights of a member in a Christian congregation, It is obvious that to confer these upon all who may be accustomed to assemble for public worship with that congregation, would be attended with very prejudicial consequences; while, on the other hand, it is necessary to avoid all such modes of admission as would involve the well-founded objections which have been so often made to subscriptions to articles of faith. At some future period I may trouble you with a communication on this subject. EDINBURGENSIS. Attempt to illustrate Jude, ver. 9. LETTER II. SIR, 673 inquire into the meaning of the NOW proceed, as I proposed, to ninth verse of the Epistle of Jude, "Yet Michael the Archangel, when contending with the Devil he disputed about the body of Moses, durst not bring against him a railing accusation, but said, The Lord rebuke thee." The main object of Jude in this Epistle was to warn the Christians to whom it was written, against certain evil men and seducers who had privily crept in among them, whom he styles ungodly men, who turned the grace of God into lasciviousness, denying the only sovereign God and our Lord Jesus Christ. He then goes on, in a variety of instances, to draw a comparison between their crimes and those of some of the most notorious sinners who, under the former dispensation, were the objects of the Divine displeasure and the subjects of the severest judgments, and predicts that the like judgments and condemnation awaited them, and would speedily be executed upon them. Both Peter and Jude describe the characters of these men very much at large. We shall only refer to that part of the description which is immediately connected with and introduces our present subject. Jude, referring to the crimes of the people of Sodom and Gomorrah, (which he had just mentioned,) says, ver. 8, "These filthy dreamers defile the flesh, despise dominion, and speak evil of (blaspheme) dignities," with which he contrasts the conduct of Michael the Archangel, who, when contending with the Devil, durst not bring against him a railing, a blas pheming accusation. Peter also describes them, second Epistle ii. 10, as those who walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government, as presumptuous, selfwilled, and not afraid to speak evil of (to blaspheme) dignities" he then contrasts with their conduct that of the angels, who, though greater in power and might, he says, ver. 11, bring not railing (blaspheming) accusation against them before the Lord." In considering the subject, we have then to inquire, 1. What is intended by the parties engaged in this contest,-Michael the Archangel and the Devil. 2. What is meant by the body of Moses, the subject of the contest. 1. Then, we are to inquire what is intended by the persons engaged in this contest,-Michael the Archangel and the Devil. One of these is Michael, but who is Michael, and what is he? Is he a celestial of a terrestrial or a symbolical being? We are told that he is the Archangel; but this, in itself, furnishes no answer to the above questions, because neither of the terms, angel or archangel, is a name of nature but of office. In order, therefore, to understand the subject, we must inquire into the meaning of these terms, and endeavour to trace out their application. The term angel, a♫yeλos, is a Greek word, from the verb afyλλw, to tell or deliver a message, formed into a noun by the masculine termination os. The English translation rejects the Greek termination, and retains angel only; but still the word is Greek, and requires to be explained. Its literal meaning is, one sent or employed by another, a messenger, a legate, an ugent, a minister, a servant; it is a relative term, implying one who is sent or commissioned by another. The word angels, therefore, does not necessarily mean (as it is generally supposed to mean) a species of incorporeal celestial beings superior to mankind, of different degrees of dignity, power and perfection, but simply messengers or agents. In the Scriptures it has a variety of applications. It is applied to John the Baptist, Matt. xi. 10: " Behold, I send my angel, messenger." It is applied to the two disciples of John, who were sent by him with a message to Jesus, Luke vii. 24: "When the angels, the messengers of John, were departed." When Jesus steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem we are told, chap. ix. 52, he sent angels, messengers, before his face and they went, and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready for him." It is said of Rahab, the harlot, that she received the angels, the spies, and sent them out another way, James ii. 25. We have the same application of the term angel in the Old Testament. 2 Sam. ii. 5, David sent angels unto : the men of Jabesh Gilead; Joab sent an angel to inform David of the death of Uriah, chap. xi. 19; see also vers. 22, 23, 25. The prophet Haggai is called an angel, ch. i. 13; it is applied to a priest, Mal. ii. 7. The prophet's name, Malachi, is my angel. The The term is applied to the elements, to storms, to pestilence, and to every agent in nature which God is pleased to make use of to accomplish his own purposes. The plagues which God sent among the Egyptians are said to be evil angels, Ps. lxxviii. 49. winds and the lightning are God's angels. And of these angels, messengers, the Scripture saith, (Ps. civ. 4,)" "Who maketh the winds his messengers, and the flames of lightning his ministers."* In these passages the term angel is a personification of that to which it is applied. In prophecy, angels are probably nothing more than symbolical or typical characters; for we know that none of the prophecies relate to the affairs and transactions of celestial and infernal spirits in the upper or lower world, but to the affairs of the inhabitants of this world, to the convulsions of nations, to the rise and fall of kingdoms and empires, and the various revolutions to which they are subject, and to the accomplishment of the purposes of God respecting the children of men. Angels, then, who are represented in these scenes as agents employed for the accomplishment of those great events which are the subject of prophecy, are not spiritual but human beings; for the fact is, that the prophecies which have been fulfilled have been accomplished by human agency. Thus in the Revelation of John, angels sounding trumpets represent those agents or messengers who gave the alarms of wars; and the first of these is supposed, by the best commentators, to predict the hostile invasions of Italy by the Goths and Huns: the second, by the emblem of a great mountain cast into the sea, the naval invasion of Italy by the Vandals, under the command of Genseric, whom Gibbon calls the tyrant of the sea. I shall only notice two other of the trumpets, the fifth * Imp. Version. ran. Attempt to illustrate Jude, ver. 9. Letter II. and sixth. The fifth is supposed to denote the invasion and diminution of the Eastern Roman Empire by the Arabian successors of Mahomed; and the sixth, the wars of the Turks against the same empire. Upon the sounding of the fifth angel, a star is said to fall from heaven unto the earth, and to him was given the key of the bottomless pit. This star is supposed to represent Mahomed, and the smoke of the pit, his falsehood and imposture, which obscured, at the same time that it overspread, the country of Arabia: out of this smoke proceeded the locusts, the rapid and destructive armies of the Saracens, who supplanted in every province they conquered, the religion established by Constantine, by the propagation of that of the KoMahomed is said to be the king over these locusts, and the angel of the bottomless pit. "The sounding of the sixth trumpet," (says a learned writer, to whom I have frequently referred,) "is justly interpreted as prophetic of the wars of the Turkish Mahomedans against the Eastern Roman empire. The four principal tribes of the Turks," he adds," had settled themselves in the countries east of the Euphrates." This is represented in the prophecy, (Rev. ix. 13, and following verses,) as brought about by loosing the four angels which were bound in the great river Euphrates (probably the same as the four winds said, chap. vii. 1, to be bound till the servants of God were sealed): "And the four angels were loosed, which were prepared for an hour, and a day, and a month, and a year, for to slay the third part of men; and the number of the army of the horsemen were two hundred thousand thousand." The four angels here, then, are the emblems of this great army of the Sara cens. But enough has been said to shew that the term angels does not necessarily mean celestial or infernal spirits; but that it is very generally applied to human agents. I now proceed to consider the other term, archangel, which is applied to Michael, and to inquire who this Michael is, and the reason why that appellation is applied to him? The term archangel occurs but twice in the Scriptures; in the passage under consideration, and in 1 Thess. iv. 16. The Greek word 675 apxalyehos, archangel, from apon, head, and aЛyɛλos, messenger, a head messenger, apxm, authority, rule, dominion, power; hence apxnyos, applied to Jesus Christ, a leader, author, prince, captain.* Archangel, then, is a ruling messenger, a messenger possessing authority, dominion and power, a sovereign messenger. Such, then, is Michael, who is as God, as the name signifies; one possessing supreme power in his own dominions, as God does over all but notwithstanding his sovereignty, he is the messenger, the agent and servant of God, to execute his purposes. The account we have of Michael is contained in five passages in the Sacred Scriptures, three in the prophecy of Daniel, one in the passage under consideration, and one in the Revelation of John. In the first of them, Dan. x. 13, Michael is denominated one of the chief princes. In the context, ver. 5, we are told that Daniel had a vision, in which he saw a certain man, clothed in linen, whose loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz, &c. That this man was not either a real, celestial or human being, but merely a visionary being, seems pretty clear from what Daniel says, ver. 9, that "when he heard the voice of his words, he was then in a deep sleep on his face, with his face to the ground." This man, then, was probably nothing more than the vision itself by which the divine communication was made to him, personified, and his appearing in the habit of a priest clothed in linen and girt with a gold girdle, and the splendour of his appearance, denoted that the vision was from heaven. In his address to Daniel, he says, ver. 12, "Fear not, Daniel; for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words," referring to Daniel's prayer, in the preceding chapter, which he put up to the Lord his God, in consequence of his understanding by books the nuinber of the year whereof the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jeru *Acts iii. 15, v. 31; Heb. ii. 10, xii. 2. |