And the result of it is, that, instead of leaving the money received for this purpose in the unaccountable hands of the Priests, they have a chest made, with a hole bored in the lid of it, and set beside the altar; and the Priests are to put all the money which they receive into this chest; and then they have a civil auditor, the King’s scribe, a sort of Secretary of State, to act with the High Priest in counting and applying the sums thus accumulated, and so it passes direct into the hands of the carpenters and builders, and the work is done. My brethren, you will all perceive why I chose this text this evening, when we are making our first collection, under altered circumstances, for the more substantial part of our annual expenditure upon this Church. It is true, this House of Prayer is not in all respects like Solomon’s Temple: I mean that, in Christian times, it is not the fabric, it is the Congregation, which is the Temple or House of God. Nevertheless, without a fabric a congregation is a rope of sand: there must be a place if there is to be a worship: and therefore the distinction, though true, may be overstrained; and I am not afraid to apply to this Church, the building I mean, the expostulation of King Joash with Jehoiada and the Priests, _Why repair ye not the breaches of the House_? I have not, indeed, one moment’s anxiety as to your response. You love _the place_, this place at least, _where God’s honour dwelleth_. I believe that your periodical offerings on this monthly occasion will be almost, or perhaps quite, equal to those which you make for any work of piety or charity: and I may remind you that there is an especial reason why your offerings should be large at the outset, inasmuch as already four months are gone by of the current year, and we have to supply in eight months the resources (as they hereafter will be) of twelve. But on this point I feel an entire security. You will never allow those who undertake the office of your Churchwardens to incur any responsibility but such as you cheerfully guarantee to them. I will rather take the opportunity of saying one word upon the more general question. We have never in this place—certainly not for many years past—laid a compulsory church-rate. We have always allowed those who would to refuse payment. Even when the law was clearly with us, we have never taken advantage of it. So far, we might, if we would, have regarded the new Act as confirming and stereotyping our own local custom. But there were these two differences. We could no longer carry with us the influence, the persuasion, of an unenforced compulsion. We could no longer say, as heretofore, He _that may command_, _entreats_. Henceforth it was lawful to refuse. Again, we could no longer extend our payments over the whole Town; and, with whatever abatements from caprice or principle, hope to enlist, in the work of reparation or maintenance, the sympathies of an entire population.