ance with God that rested upon Edwards, Wesley, Whitefield, and their contemporaries, like a perpetual sunshine, and imparted to their ministry and their presence a preternatural efficiency, and sublime, subduing dignity, which was felt by all ages and conditions. We want, it may be, more than all these, for the special object now under discussion, a new baptism of brotherly love, such as in the days of the Apostles made the whole multitude of the disciples "of one accord;" and whilst it disarmed enmity, and overawed authority, won the applause and admiration of the Pagan world. It is through these milder elements, which we have enumerated, that Christianity chiefly acts upon the world as an influence, and it is by its influence, rather than by positive, overt ministrations and inculcations, that it can hope to penetrate the heart and mould the character of childhood. Joy, peace, courage, and divine charity have power to propagate themselves. They act upon the young more especially by sympathy and contagion. They diffuse themselves spontaneously through the family circle, transforming and assimilating gentle natures and tender hearts, by the divine grace of which they are redolent. Christian sentiments are thus conveyed into the soul, and secure a lodgment there, as soon as the affections of the child are brought into play,-earlier, by many years, than the period when the understanding becomes competent, intelligently, to embrace doctrinal Christianity.

The last, and, as being the most prevalent and radical, perhaps the strongest, obstacle to the success of Christian training to which we call attention, is unbelief. Christian parents do not generally expect their children to grow up pious. They believe that a religious education will, very likely, be highly beneficial to them in various ways; that it will restrain them from vice, and furnish their minds with valuable knowledge, and facilitate their conversion at a later period: but we seldom find a father or mother who really looks upon Christian education as a divinely appointed means of grace, and as God's chosen agency for the salvation of their offspring. They pray that sanctifying, saving grace may be showered down upon their babes, even before they can walk or speak; but, with a strange inconsistency, postpone all hope of receiving answers of prayer to a future period, distant by many years. They follow a theory which allows, and almost requires, a career in sin and impenitence, before a gracious state is attained. When the subject shall have been thus prepared for bitter repentance, they trust he will be arrested in his folly, and, under the influence of some prevalent, powerful religious excitement, brought to bow to the cross. The revival is the agency often looked to for a result which God proposes to accomplish by

his blessing on Christian education. The theory will have years of transgression; the divine word would forestall all of this guilt and danger, by training up the child in the way he should go, not that he may come into it at a mature age, but that he may walk in it all along, and never depart from it. Upon this theory, then, which does not expect the result promised in the divine word, parents do not seek it nor work for it. The exertions which they actually put forth do by no means satisfy the idea of training. That involves the notion of patient, protracted, incessant effort; of earnest, trustful prayer; of effective, intelligible, appropriating faith; of a holy, emphatic example; of a gentle, winning, loving spirit; of an obedient, all-embracing, and intense piety, which should transform our homes into Bethels, and our hearths into holy, consecrated altars, upon which incense and peace-offerings shall blaze evermore. They err grievously who conclude that such results as are proposed by the theory here discussed, would supersede revivals. They would wrap the Church in a heavenly flame and triple its energies. They would beautify it with holiness. Influences, powerful as the Pentecostal spirit, would stream out on every side; and sinners, of whom charity itself has ceased to hope, would be penetrated by the moral power of a sanctified Church. The "unlearned and the unbeliever," on coming into the presence of such a Christian congregation, would be compelled to recognize, in the "still small voice" of its universal testimony, an authority more potent than the miracle of "tongues." "Convinced of all and judged of all," the secrets of their hearts would be made manifest, "and so, falling down on their faces, they would worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth."

Our argument is suggestive of many practical, impressive lessons, of which the limits prescribed to this article do not allow us to make application. In the bosoms of many Christian parents we are sure we shall have awakened deep and perhaps unavailing regrets, but also, we trust, high and holy purposes. To pastors our subject appeals in the thrice-repeated, earnest words addressed by the great Teacher to Peter," Feed my lambs." The Sunday-school teacher, who has been raised up in this age of changes to fulfil a class of duties much neglected by both parent and pastor, will discover, we think, in the doctrines here set forth, clear intimations of the dignity and usefulness of his benevolent and truly evangelical function. It is, however, foreign from our object to follow out these practical details. Content to have thrown out some important principles, which, as it has long seemed to us, are too little heeded in our evangelizing plans, we leave their fuller discussion and their application to some future occasion, and, as we hope, to other and abler hands.

ART X.-BAPTIST NOEL ON CHURCH AND STATE.

Essay on the Union of Church and State. By BAPTIST WRIOTHESLEY NOEL, M. A. Pp. 442. 1849. New-York: Harper & Brothers.

"THE Union of the Churches with the State is doomed," says Baptist Noel, and there seems to be good ground for the assertion. In Germany the separation has already been decreed; in France it has nearly been secured, and in Rome, the "Head of the Church" is no longer head of the State. But the struggle in England has for us more interest than any other. There this Union, unhallowed as it is, has been most securely founded: under it, or rather in spite of it, Christian men and Christian ministers have exhibited the loftiest virtues of the Christian character; and even the Union itself has been sanctified to many minds, by the exalted holiness and pre-eminent services of many of the sons of the English Church. But the "corrupt tree," notwithstanding, has borne its corrupt fruit; eyes that have been long blinded are beginning to see; and the sturdy English mind appears to be in a fair way to rid itself of the prejudices of ages, and apprehend the truth in regard to the Union of Church and State. Still, we do not see any indications (as some of our contemporaries do) of an immediate result. Sir Culling Eardley gives it as his opinion (letter of Jan. 4th) that "the public mind is not ripe for the separation of Church and State." 66 I wish," says he, "that I could believe it were otherwise; but I hold it to be next to impossible, that while the ministry of the Establishment continues to have a hold upon large congregations, the endowment of that ministry should be opposed by those who avail themselves of it." But the secession of Baptist Noel is an instance, and a most prominent one, of opposition to the endowment on the part of one who had enjoyed, or at least might have looked forward to, its highest advantages. The phenomenon is a remarkable one. With commanding popular talents, with an unstained reputation, a man of rank, education, and influence, and, more than all, the acknowledged leader of the Evangelical party in the Church of England, he has abandoned his position, his friends, his admirers, and his prospects, on the ground of conscience, and of conscience alone. Bitter as are the reproaches which his quondam friends are heaping upon him, not one of them has breathed a syllable of imputation upon his motives. All parties, high church and low, Puseyite and Evangelical, unite in testifying to his unimpeachable rectitude.

A remarkable feature of the case is, that "Mr. Noel is the first minister that has seceded from the Establishment on the question of union with the State. Others have left its communion on account of the corruptions which they found in it; but Mr. Noel seceded because he conceived the Union itself to be unscriptural, impolitic, and absurd. They left because they found evil fruit on what they conceived to be a good tree; but Mr. Noel left because the tree itself is corrupt. Other seceders retired on matters of detail; but he went forth in obedience to principle." It is this which has excited the ire of his evangelical friends so strongly. The Record speaks of his "weakness,” his "oscillation," his "want of sound and sober judgment," &c.; and sums up its

opinion of his new book as follows:-"On the whole, we must describe the book as composed of, 1. An argument from Scripture, which is nearly the weakest we have ever seen. 2. An argument from history, which is grotesquely inapplicable and irrelevant. 3. The usual criticisms on the questionable points in our liturgy, urged strongly and warmly, but not effectively, because all appearance of impartiality is wanting. 4. Some most exaggerated statements, as to the mischiefs of Establishments and the excellencies of free churches. While, 5. The bulk of the volume is made up of one huge fallacy." But we must forbear further remark upon Mr. Noel's secession, and give our readers some account of his book, which Messrs. Harpers have reprinted in a handsome duodecimo. In a brief preface, Mr. Noel testifies to the piety and excellence of many of the upholders of the Establishment, and begs forgiveness for any inadvertences or exaggerations in his work. The Introduction fixes the position, that the lawfulness of the union between Church and State must be determined by "reference to the Word of God;" and, after defining the words, "Church," "State," and "Union," lays down the question to be discussed in the following terms, namely:

"Whether it is the will of Christ, as deducible from the word of God, that the Christian congregations of this country should receive the salaries of their pastors from the State, and be consequently placed under its superintendence ?”—P. 20.

The work is then divided into two parts, of which the FIRST treats of the "Principles of the Union between the Church and the State," and the SECOND, of "the Effects of the Union." The first chapter of Part I. exhibits certain general considerations which condemn the Union. First, the constitution of the State unfits it for authority over the Church;-its members are neither pious, nor united. His picture of the British Parliament would be thought a caricature, if an American had drawn it :

"The three things which introduce men into the legislature are rank, wealth, and superior capacity. The House of Lords is composed, without reference to character, of those who inherit rank and wealth. The descendants of able statesmen, of brave generals, of clever lawyers, or of successful money-makers; they are hereditary legislators, whatever may be their lack of intellect, their contempt for the Gospel, or their disregard of morals."-P. 23.

Again :

"The House of Commons is composed of the eldest sons of peers, of baronets and squires, of naval captains and of colonels in the army, of lawyers, of aldermen, of bankers, of merchants and manufacturers, of stockbrokers and railroad directors; and what is there in their education and pursuits to qualify them to be rulers of the Churches of Christ, to sit in judgment upon creeds and canons, or to determine for all the Christians of the land the election of their pastors and the administration of church discipline?"-P. 25.

The second section shows that the parental relation (under the analogy of which Churchmen are so fond of exhibiting the blessings of the Union) cannot possibly subsist between the State and the Church. The third section collects from history a long catalogue of crimes and abuses directly resulting from the Union. The remaining sections of this chapter show that the Union is condemned by the Law of Moses, by the Prophecies of the Old Testament, and by the spirit and express declarations of the New. After examining the

passages usually cited in favour of the Union, and showing their inapplicability, he deduces from our Lord's conversation with Pilate the strongest argument against the system.

"To defend himself from the charge of rivalry to the Roman emperor, it was necessary to inform Pilate that his dominion would be so entirely spiritual that it never could interfere with the rights of the emperor. And of this he did convince Pilate by saying, 'My kingdom is not of this world. This was therefore the legitimate meaning of his words; and in them he has solemnly taught us, that his dominion is entirely and forever distinct from secular dominion; that he rules over men's hearts and consciences; that he will ever establish and maintain his rule without the aid of the tax-gatherer and the soldier; that he employs no coercion, and will never resort to military force.

"But the union in England, being intended to advance his dominion by maintaining his ministers, seeks that end by the taxation of the realm for the support of his ministers, and then employs force to sustain that taxation. Christ declared to Pilate that his dominion should never be maintained by taxation and by force, and the churches of England declare that it shall be so maintained. He pronounced his kingdom to be purely spiritual, they declare that it shall be spiritual and secular; and their decision is in flagrant opposition to his will."-Pp. 103, 104.

The second chapter shows that the chief elements of the Establishment, namely, the support of Christian pastors by the State; the supremacy of the State in spiritual and ecclesiastical jurisdiction; the right of patronage, by which pastors may be, and are, appointed to churches without reference either to their personal fitness or to the will of the people; and the law of coercion, by which the support of pastors is made compulsory,-are utterly and irreconcilably inconsistent with the principles of the New Testament and the wellbeing of the churches.

"The support of the first of these principles of the union involves Anglican Christians in the guilt of a selfish and covetous disregard of positive duty. Their allowance of the State supremacy is infidelity to Christ, their King and Head. The third principle which they support is destructive of their spiritual welfare; and the fourth renders them schismatical toward their dissenting brethren, and uncharitable to every other recusant. All these four principles are unscriptural, corrupt, and noxious; and by placing the churches of Christ under the influence of men of the world, hinder their free action, destroy their spirituality, and perpetuate their corruptions."Pp. 183, 184.

The SECOND part of the work, as we have said, treats of the "Effects of the Union of Church and State." Under the head of "Effects on Persons," it is shown that the Union tends to make bishops worldly, ambitious, and proud; and to introduce incapable and even ungodly men into the service of the Church as pastors, and to corrupt the better minded. Here is a sad picture:

"The result of this system is too apparent in the undisguised worldliness of many of the clergy, who, by their presence at the ball and the race-course, by their assiduity in hunting and shooting, by their ignorance of the Scriptures, and their ministerial incapacity, do much dishonour to the religion of which they are professedly ministers."-P. 20.

'But what are the pastors of the Anglican Churches in fact? I grieve to write it. There are men among them of great virtues, to whom I gladly do homage. I know and love many faithful, energetic, and sincere servants of Christ; but when these exceptions are subtracted, what are the rest? I grieve to write it. Chosen by peers and squires, by colleges and church corporations, by chancellors and State-made prelates, many are made pastors by a corrupt favouritism, many are allured to an uncongenial employment by the income which it offers them, and many embrace the profession