THIS is a very important and valuable production, important and valuable as to its intrinsic merits, but still more as to the promise it holds out for the future. Our readers are well aware that we are not of the number of those who indulge gloomy forebodings, and desponding apprehensions on account of our country, but we have long been impressed with an idea, that the honour of re-establishing a fallen state, and repairing the breaches in our valuable constitution, would not be granted to those by whom the wounds have been inflicted; and we have therefore never indulged the hope that any administration in which the Duke of Wellington, Sir Robert Peel, or any other of the leading actors in the tragedy of 1829 sustained a prominent part, would either be permanent or prosperous; but we have somewhat confidently expected, that new men would eventually be brought forward, to whom, under Divine Providence, the church might look with the assurance, that they would be enabled to repair those mischiefs which the theological ignorance, and the worldly policy of those from whom better things might have been expected had inflicted. We are much mistaken, if Mr. Gladstone is not a person of this description. The debates of the last Session brought some other talented and highly-promising senators into public notice, and we cannot but hope and pray, that their number and influence may, in the approaching session, be exceedingly increased.

The work before us is with filial attachment inscribed to the Uni

versity of Oxford; tried, and not found wanting, through the vicissitudes of a thousand years; in the belief that she is designed to be a fountain of blessings, spiritual, social, and intellectual, to this and to other countries, to the present and future times; and in the hope that the temper of these pages may be found not alien from her own. It consists of eight chapters, the first of which contains introductory explanations and statements of several published theories on the Connection between the Church

and the State, in which the positions of Hooker, Warburton, Paley, Coleridge, Chalmers, Hobbes, &c. are quoted and commented on. Mr. G. closes his introduction in the following terms.

The reader will probably agree that it is unnecessary, with a view to the practical purposes before us, to enter upon any detailed investigation of two other

theories of the connection between church and state, which embody the respective extremes of opinion adopted on the one hand by Hobbes, and on the other by Bellarmine and ultramontane Romanists. They are theories of derivation, rather than of connection, properly so called. According to the first, the church and her religion are mere creatures of the state. According to the second, the temporal power is wholly dependent and subordinate. These views are not avowed amongst ourselves. A third extreme opinion of a different kind, namely, that the magistrate has no concern with religion, is that against which the general argument of the succeeding chapter is directed.

It remains to observe, before proceeding to the formal investigation of our subject, that, when we speak of the Church of England as having actually entered into connection with the State, we use a phrase which has more of historical truth, undoubtedly, than belongs to the celebrated original compact with which Bishop Warburton compares it. But the alliance probably was made by Ethelbert rather under an impression of personal conscience, than in any deliberate view

of what we may term scientific results, or upon any formal specifications of terms. In speaking, therefore, of its having been made on such and such conditions, we use the language of convenience, not of historical precision: and the meaning merely is, that we are stating the terms which justify the connection in respect of their fulfilling the duties and the purposes of both the bodies concerned.

It is not easy to find any single word which accurately describes the relation subsisting between the two societies, in respect of the degree of its intimacy. Alliance means too little: it puts too much out of view the Christian conscience of the state, and seems to suppose too great an original distance between the parties; whereas, in their personal composition, they very greatly mix; and when Warburton says the state will ally with the largest communion, because that will have most influence in the legislature, this should mean that the majority of persons composing the legislature will have such a conscience as will approve and establish that communion. The word incorporation would evidently be as much too strong. Even union, though it is on many accounts convenient, may convey too much if it be understood as making two into one. Connection is too indeterminate, but is, perhaps, on the whole, for some reasons, the most convenient, as mosfree from the risk of misapprehension; while, by the term "relations," our language enables us to express in the most comprehensive form whatever functions or qualities of the two societies admit of mental association.

Lastly, the argument which follows is not specifically addressed to infidels; hardly, indeed, to persons in a state of systematic separation from our national church; nor, on the other hand, to those who have deliberately considered all its conditions, and their own obligations as its members; but to those who form the mass of the educated community, and whose minds have imbibed a general belief of the lawfulness and duty of public support of religion, yet without any clear and reasoned conclusions either upon the grounds or the limits of that duty. I presume, therefore, on but a very small portion of favourable predispositions in the mind of the reader, while I shall hope to show him, that a sincere believer in no more than the general principle of Theism will, upon looking attentively at the nature and the necessities of the state, and its capabilities in respect of religion, be led on, by regular and progressive inferences, to the full adoption of the principle which demands the continual union of the church with the constitution of the country.

The second chapter is entitled,

the Theory of the Connection between the Church and the State: and here Mr. G. argues

That there should be a profession and maintenance of religion by the governing body. By its profession is meant the observance of its ordinances, on the part of those who compose that body, throughout their acts done in that particular capacity; by its maintenance, the upholding of its institutions through the instrumentality of influence and pecuniary support, in proportion as they may be at its disposal, with the ultimate view of offering that religion to every individual within the nation.

And he afterwards observes

Wherever there is power in the universe, that power is the property of God, the king of that universe-his property of right, however for a time withholden or abused. Now this property is as it were realised, is used according to the will of the owner, when it is used for the purposes he has ordained, and in the temper of mercy, justice, truth, and faith, which he has taught us. But those principles never can be truly, never can be permanently, entertained in the human breast, except by a continual reference to their source, and the supply of the Divine grace. The powers, therefore, that dwell in individuals acting as a government, as well as those that dwell in individuals acting for themselves, can only be secured for right uses by applying to them a religion.

The following extract contains Mr. Gladstone's views on a very common objection.

And here we may meet the objection which is often urged in a startling form. "Then, if it be the duty of a Christian government to advance Christianity, it is the duty of a Mahometan government to advance Mahometanism." Now let us take a distinction. There are men even among us who view religion, and especially state religion, as a deceit intended to tame and subdue the people. It is to be feared that among Mahometans this is more extensively the case. I do not say

that such a class of men are bound to propagate religion: but this I do not scruple to affirm, that, if a Mahometan conscientiously believes his religion to come from God and to teach Divine truth, he must believe that truth to be beneficial, and beneficial beyond all other things, to the soul of man; and he must, therefore, and ought to desire its extension, and to use for its extension all pro per and legitimate means: and that, if such a Mahometan be a prince, he ought to count among those means the application of whatever influence or funds he may lawfully have at his disposal for such purposes.

For suppose but a moment that the truth he holds to be revealed is the unity of God. I say that the sight of this por. tion of religious truth entails the obligation to pursue it. Nay further: that the errors which he holds along with it are errors which he sees as truths; that as such he is bound upon his own principles to seek their propagation; and that, if he does so, the fault lies in the original conception, in the manner by which he came to conviction, and not in the acting upon that conviction, supposing it fully formed: whereas, if he does not so, then he betrays what he believes falsely to be truth, as much as we by the like conduct should betray what we believe truly and know to be truth, and-our view being confined simply to the fact of convictions of equal strength in similar subject-matter entailing the same obligation upon the individuals. entertaining them-the fault in both cases would be the same.

Our dissenting brethren will be somewhat startled by the decision with which Mr. G. speaks of the inefficiency of the voluntary system.

Of all the parts of this subject, probably none have been so thoroughly wrought out as the insufficiency of what is termed the voluntary principle. It has been shown that, while demand under the circumstances of modern society commonly creates supply, and while therefore it is needless to use adventitious means in order to provide any commodity or good for which there is a natural desire, in the case of religion the desire is least when the want is greatest, and those who are most indifferent upon the subject require to be most solicited by the public institutions of religion, not less for the welfare of the state than for the salvation of their own souls. It has also been unanswerably shown, that there are very large portions of the community whose temporal means are insufficient to enable them to bear the expence of religious establishments: and perhaps no one, who looks at the competition for employment in an old and thickly-peopled country, will be of any other opinion than that such inability is likely to continue. And those who are at first merely unable to pay will, if neglected, in no long course of time, add to inability unwillingness.

The next step in the argument is, to point to the actual amount of voluntary exertion, and to require from the adversary, as we fairly may, the acknowledg ment of its total insufficiency. On this subject no details need be adduced. It is admitted on all hands that the religious provision of our town population is lamentably scanty. The conclusion is yet more inevitable if we observe the internal workings of all that sectarian machinery which depends upon the voluntary principle; for

we find that its general law is to provide for those who can pay for the provision, but that its whole structure is such as to leave no room for the argument that the agency of government paralyses its exertions; inasmuch as it evidently does not contemplate or tend towards supplying on a large scale the wants of the poor, leaving for them a decent margin as a subsidiary appendage, but applying its main efforts merely towards organising a system, of which value received shall be the law, and in which the wine and the milk are to be bought with money and with price. In quality too, as well as in quantity, the radical defects of the voluntary system might be shown.

There is, indeed, an opinion sometimes held, that the consecration of funds by states to the support of religion, does not promote religion. Such an opiniou is the very acme of paradox, and is contradicted by the nearly universal practice of mankind. For endowments of every kind, and of infinite variety in amount as well as in form, have prevailed from the days of Abraham (at least) until our own, among Pagans and Christians, in sects and in the church. Singularly enough, it is maintained by Romanists and Dissenters in the United Kingdom, where state assistance is not accessible to them: but it is utterly contravened by their practice in our colonies wherever they have an option; nor is there, I believe, a single case in which they have declined a proffer of aid.

We are to observe, that the objections to a state religion, grounded on the abuse connected with the control of endowments, are not levelled, by those who use them, at endowments in general, but at state endowments in particular. But, upon looking coolly at the question, we find that the abuses themselves attach to the practice of endowment in general, not to that of state endowment in particular. Undoubtedly, wherever there is considerable property devoted to a particular purpose, it holds out temptation to worldly men to step in, with a view of enjoying the property and neglecting the purpose. But this temptation exists in full force, whether that property have been so dedicated by an individual or by the state. Rather, indeed, the argument herefrom is in favour of national establishments: because the state has much better means, by its own perpetuity, of securing the permanent administration of its gifts from abuse, and of enforcing responsibility, than the individual who dies and is forgotten, or at least more imperfectly and feebly represented in his descendants. Nor is this merely speculation. Can the world supply a case of funds more purely and effectively applied in support of an ecclesiastical system, than that of the Scotch church? a case where more results are produced from equal means, absolutely

or proportionably! a case where less of evil motive or conduct mingles in the system of management? And yet not only is this a state church, but one in which the government directly exercise an immense patronage.

And afterwards he adds the important truth.

The Divine Spirit alone could maintain the truth of Christianity in the world from hour to hour. Without Him it would have passed away, like primitive revelation from the greater part of the descendants of Noah. Still he works with human means. Human means seem insufficient for the whole of His work, even when they have received from him a capability for advancing it; but never does He fail to use that capability where it exists.

In alluding to the state of Ireland, we meet with the following striking observations.

A common form of faith binds the Irish Protestants to ourselves, while they, upon the other hand, are fast linked to Ireland; and thus they supply the most natural bond of connection between the countries. But if England, by overthrowing their church, should weaken their moral position, they would be no longer able, perhaps no longer willing, to counteract the desires of the majority, tending, under the direction of their leaders (however, by a wise policy, revocable from that fatal course), to what is termed national independence. Pride and fear on the one hand are, therefore, bearing up against more immediate apprehension and difficulty on the other. And with some men these may be the fundamental considerations; but it may be doubted whether such men will not flinch in some stage of the contest, should its aspect at any moment become unfavourable.

What if the truth be this; that among many acts of oppression, many of folly, others again of benevolence and justice, partial or not followed out to their consequences, we have done one, especially among these last, which was in itself thoroughly wise and good, had it been viewed as introductory, and not as final? Who can doubt, that in the position occupied by Elizabeth and her government, it was right on their part to carry into Ireland the restoration of the Christian faith (just as they had carried it through England) with the additional advantage of the almost unanimous acquiescence or concurrence of the bishops, and for this purpose to employ the appointed means of religious ministration to the people? But when the initiatory means had been thus adopted, the whole residue of the labour was relinquished. Those wise and salutary measures which brought the people of

England from rebelling in favour of the Roman Catholic church and her superstitions, to their present mood of steady attachment to a purified belief, were not extended to Ireland. The names of Bedel and of Boulter are bright upon the desolate retrospect; but the attempt has not been made until within a period comparatively recent, (thank God it has com menced,) to ascertain what results will follow from the general proclamation of scriptural religion throughout Ireland.

The Third chapter treats on the Influence of the connection between the Church and the State, upon the love of personal religion in the church. Mr. G. here meets the objection that personal religion is deteriorated by such a connexion, and maintains that Establishments have on the contrary a tendency to enlist secondary motives in favour of religion, while they do not exclude the efforts of the voluntary principle.

We are prepared, then, to assert it generally of a national church, that it brings human and secondary motives to bear upon mankind in favour of religion, with a power greater than that which would belong to it, cæteris paribus, when unestablished, because ordinarily it would not occupy the same station in public estimation. The fashion which might, in a wealthy and luxurious country, choose to reject attendance at church, is enlisted in its favour. A narrow and feeble provision, no doubt; but we must not despise the day of small things.

There is no intelligible argument for the position, that the number of actively pious persons would be increased were the national church destroyed. The ques tion at issue is not fairly represented, where it is said that it is between the voluntary principle and that of an establishment. In truth, it is between the voluntary principle alone, on the one hand, and that principle in association with the co-ordinate principle of an establishment on the other. There is ample scope for the voluntary principle, when the state has done as much as it is ever likely to do. There is as yet a great void, filled neither by the state, nor by the voluntary principle. But the state, as a directing and superior power, has means of eliciting, and of systematising, exertion, which no individual or association can command.

union, is nevertheless full of interest, because it touches vital considerations, which are decisive, if determined against us, of the whole matter at issue. For if religion be injured by the national establishment of the church, it must forthwith and at whatever hazard be disestablished. But if not, we need be little moved by the taunts of those who reproach us with alaw church." It is a law church: we rejoice in the fact: but how? Just as by the sovereign's proclamation against vice, the morals of the nation are crown morals. The law in one case, the crown in the other, adopts and attests the truths of God, and does them homage.

For we have found the supposition, that religion is secularised by contact with the state, to be fallacious. We have found that the most devoted piety enjoys in the church a climate not less genial than elsewhere; we might perhaps say, more so: that in respect of liberal views of smaller peculiarities, and of discouragement to individual egotism, a national church has, as such, especial advantages for elevating and purifying personal religion: that she has a great and appropriate work, particularly in exercising a partial dominion over the indifferent and even the ungodly, bringing to bear upon them, in favour of the gospel, and their own happiness, a great force of human and secondary motives; and that, from the comparative independence of her position, she is also peculiarly adapted for the permanent conservation of divine truth. If these things be so, we must get rid of that superficial impression, unfavourable to the nationality of the church, which arises upon the first view of the very mixed character of her component parts, and must remember that, in containing together the good and the bad, she is fulfilling, for the time of her dispensation, the clear intentions of that Lord whose coming she awaits with joy.

Mr. G. treats in his fourth chapter of the Ecclesiastical supremacy of the sovereign in England, which he points out is chiefly of a negative character, and adverts to what would be the result of any attempt at its undue enlargement.

The fifth chapter treats of the Reformation as connected with the use and abuse of private judgment. On these topics a considerable diversity of opinion has recently been expressed; and we are not quite sure whether our author's views are so clearly expressed as on some other topics. The chapter however contains

some very striking and forcible passages, especially while delineating the errors of Rome.

Yet it is here that the peculiar genius of Romanism is most wonderful and conspicuous. Everywhere it seems to interpose itself between the man and his God, a dimly transparent medium, allowing only a measured and limited quantity of His light to pierce through the curtain which it spreads.

First, then to this world tend the crowd of mediators, wrongfully interposed between man and the one Mediator. The view of Christ as a mediator does not tend to suppress the activity of inward religion, because our final salvation depends upon union with Him, union with Him upon assimilation to Him, assimilation to Him upon the reality and effect of our daily discipline on earth. But mediators who are men or angels only, and with whom we have no special relations, do but come in as substitutes, falsely proclaimed to do for us what we are bound to do for ourselves, when their intercession comes to be contemplated, which practically it too often does, as our proper channel of access to our Lord. This is widely different from contemplating them as examples, which does really and legitimately tend to quicken our spiritual discipline. And the mediation of which we speak means much more than intercession such as man may practise: only partially avowed, perhaps, in the theory of the Romish church, but even now too generally legible in her practice.

Towards the same end would operate the doctrine of purgatory: adjourning till after death that work of purification through suffering, which, alone with the work of probation through love, enjoyment, hope, fear, and other affections and emotions, God has appointed to be done before death.

But the grand exemplification of the influence of Romanism upon individual agency in religion is to be perceived in a combined view of the doctrines of supererogatory works-indulgences-auricular

confession-penance--and absolution. The branches are to bear fruit unto the vine; but the first of these doctrine supplies us with an excuse for fruitlessness, if the love of other men to Christ has already so far exceeded measure, that it is ready to supply our short comings-what a temptation to creatures, whose besetting danger is not excess of zeal ! Then of indulgences; they are, it is said, remissions of temporal penalties due to sin. Now, we know of no temporal penalty which is not also corrective, and employed for discipline; indulgences are, then, a remis. sion or abrogation of our discipline, of the lessons by which we are to be educated