1772: John Mallard, Rector of Ducks-on-Ponds
Private papers
I am increasingly of the opinion that religion, properly understood, is the greatest work of social architecture since feudalism. The feudal order controlled a man’s body by enclosing it in walls; religion, with finer genius, encloses his mind. Indeed, the Church’s invention of pious regularity surpasses even the wit of the civil calendar. Society may reckon its days by the months, but the Christian—superior creature—has his life illuminated by the Book of Common Prayer, that sublime device which manages time with the coercive charm of eternity.
What an admirable contrivance it is! Each week appointed, each saint domesticated into sequence, each sin squarely scheduled. One may dine, believe, and repent in convenient rotation without ever needing to think afresh. As Dr. Archibald Greaves argues in his volume Devotion by Mechanism: An Inquiry into the Clockwork of Grace, “The soul, when properly wound, keeps faith without supervision.”
It is precisely for this reason that all right-thinking men prefer the Church to the Gospel. The Bible is an untidy compilation—a species of divine almanac assembled, I suspect, by gentlemen whose handwriting exceeded their comprehension. Its heroes contradict each other, its morals breed confusion, and its miracles contradict nature less than they contradict the narrative order. It is, if truth be told, a work of immense inconvenience: capable of inspiring zeal, schism, or poetry—the three most fatal diseases of order.
But the Book of Common Prayer! That is divine administration incarnate. No loose inspiration there, only regulation: the year inscribed like a ledger of obedience. Its genius lies not in its subject matter but in its immutability. From the Te Deum at Candlemas to the Collect at Advent, it commands the soul as a gardener commands hedges—without passion but with admirable symmetry.
Once caught within this liturgical whirligig, the parishioner lives not by blood but by rubric. He need neither invent virtue nor recall it; the Church does that for him, as one might wind a watch that stubbornly insists on eternity. They imagine themselves free while their consciences tick to my bell. I look out upon my parish each Sunday with the gratitude of a composer whose orchestra performs exactly as written and precisely four times a week.
Yet it is not mere routine that enchains them; it is reinforcement—the good Anglican art of dosing belief on schedule. The villagers are, as I tell my curate, “too spiritually dishevelled for independence.” A sermon on Wednesday and another on Sunday restore them to the equilibrium of the domesticated soul. Sundays without sermons breed speculation, and speculation is the mother of Nonconformity—that dreadful heresy of thinking aloud.
I sometimes wonder if they comprehend the elegance of their captivity. They rise, they kneel, they mouth their parts; their very breathing keeps time with the Nicene Creed. In these moments, they become harmoniously inhuman—a spectacle that almost reconciles me to democracy. Each man fancying he prays for his own salvation, yet all of them conducted by me, much as a gardener prunes the will of a rosebush.
It has been charged against our profession that such regulation stifles enthusiasm. I answer that this is precisely its beauty. Religion is the only system by which humanity may be made peaceful without intelligence. The Bible, being ungovernable, produces variety of belief; the Prayer Book, being uniform, produces tranquillity. For the sake of the State—and my own complexion—I prefer tranquillity.
The more one studies this arrangement, the more ingenious it grows. Society requires a measure of sacred awe, yet cannot tolerate the inconvenience of prophets. Thus the Church, with matchless diplomacy, has preserved the trappings of revelation while quietly abandoning its substance. No new miracles need occur; the old ones recur in liturgical quotation, like polite ghosts invited to dinner. The Almighty, once volatile, has found employment as a respectable principle.
I am, therefore, increasingly satisfied in my dual vocation: keeper of ritual and manager of illusion. There is, between ourselves, something almost artistic in ensuring that eternity resembles routine. I think I could turn this observation into a tract—perhaps On the Proper Management of Perpetual Devotion; or, How to Worship by the Calendar. I would dedicate it to my brother the Duke, whose only religion is punctuality.
As for the villagers, their obedience charms me. They enter the Church straight-backed with sin, and leave slumped in dull contentment—the mark of successful worship. One old farmer told me last Sunday, “Your prayers are always the same, sir; I like that.” He meant it as compliment; I received it as revelation.
I pass the days reading Bishop Trant’s newly published Orthodoxy Without Imagination, an invaluable treatise proving that divine favour is directly proportional to repetition. Between its pages I feel the comfort of being correct by design. Perhaps one day the Church will canonise not saints but clerical systems, those mechanical pieties that have so artfully replaced inspiration.
For my part, I intend to preserve the balance: not too godly to be reasonable, not too reasonable to be rich. The villagers toil, the bells toll, and I—their rector and regulator—mark time with the patience of Providence itself.
Religion endures not because it enlightens, but because it organises. And what nobler service can a man perform than to supervise the regular habits of those who should never think to question them?
You are here: States of Grace > Biography