or two substantially unaltered. Had we enjoyed the benefit of the instructions of such a master ten years ago, we should probably have had fewer of those unsightly abortions under the name of Free churches those miniature Canonmills, or enormously exagge rated porter-lodges, which disfigure the face of the country, and which threaten to mark to future times one of the greatest moral eras as the very leaden age of taste.* The "Notes on the Construction of Sheepfolds," relate, not to the outer fabric, but to the inward life and constitution of the church, and comprise the author's views on some of the more important and exciting questions of the day. Any thing, however, from the pen of such a writer, is sure to command a certain amount of attention. Other circumstances, too, conspire to invest his views on the matters in question with peculiar interest. It would appear, from the tone of some of the Tractarian critiques on his former works, that high hopes were entertained by that party of having to hail the author as a powerful coadjutor in furthering what they call "the religious ends of art"-in other words, in their efforts to make the reviving enthusiasm for mediæval art, the instrument for resuscitating the spirit and superstitions of mediæval times. It was anticipated, we presume, that he would lend his brilliant and glowing pen to the illustration of the mysteries of symbolism, and the glorification of stone-altars, and rood-screens. If so, we rejoice to say they have been miserably disappointed. In his last work there is, combined with the enthusiasm of artistic sympathy, a sound Christian feeling, and a manly English sense every where apparent, which, while rejoicing the heart of every true Protestant, must effectually confound all such expectations. be said fairly to have taken possession of the public | a few exceptional cases, will remain for a generation mind, as one of the master spirits of that region of thought which he had chosen for himself. With some of the usual faults of youthful enthusiasm, there was yet, it was generally felt, in the whole spirit of his criticism, a breadth, a depth, a keen insight, and sympathy with the very soul of art, which, allied with the fascination of a style of singular power and splendour, at once commanded attention; and the conviction rapidly gained ground, that a great light had arisen in the world of art and of taste. His subsequent works have not belied this expectation. His splendid brochure on architecture, published soon after, is at once incomparably the most popular, and amongst the most profound of treatises on the department of art to which it refers; and spite of some murmurs at first on the part of some of the narrower bigots of technical system, it is now, we believe, very generally admitted, that his "Seven" mystic "Lamps" have shed more real light on the essential principles of architectural beauty and power, than all the accumulated writings of professional men for a century together. His last work, which has just issued from the press, in a dress, we fear, too superb to admit of its reaching the hands of many of our readers, will fully sustain and even extend this reputation. It may be regarded as a detailed and scientific development of the principles enunciated in his former work-the reduction of his broad speculative generalizations to the strictness and completeness of a system. So far as he has yet gone (only the first volume has yet appeared), we can imagine nothing more admirable and satisfactory. Beginning with the foundation of a building, and proceeding upwards, as it were, stone by stone, and tier by tier, through walls, columns, buttresses, cornices, airy arches, and foliated windows, to the vaulted roof, the crowning turret, and the mounting spire, he applies to each part in succession the essential principles of constructive and aesthetic fitness, at once with a luminous simplicity and a force of truth, which charm while they command assent. There is throughout a singular combination of powers, which must commend the work to the most opposite classes of readers-philosophic breadth with practical sagacity -the eye of the artist allied to the hand of the workInan. For the comfort of our readers, we must mention another excellence, as delightful as it is rare -he eschews technical terms; employing them only when absolutely necessary, and then never without explanation. Withal, there is throughout this work the same fascination of language, the same richness of colouring, the same fine enthusiasm, the same grasp of great principles, and the same high and earnest tone, which have constituted at once the charm and the power of all the author's writings. The following passage from the "Stones of Venice," as masculine in sentiment, as it is piquant in style, is a specimen of the tone to which we refer : "It is of the highest importance in these days that Romanism should be deprived of the miserable influence which its pomp and its picturesqueness have given it over the weak sentimentalism of the English people. I call it a miserable influence, for of all motives to sympathy with the Church of Rome, this I unhesitatingly class as the basest. I can in some measure respect the other feelings which have been the beginning of apostasy; I can respect the desire for unity which would reclaim the Romanist by love, and the distrust of his own heart which subjects the proselyte to priestly power. I say I can respect these feelings, though I cannot pardon unprincipled submission to them, nor enough wonder betrayed. at the infinite fatuity of the unhappy persons whom they have But of all fatuities, the basest is the being lured into the Romanist Church by the glitter of it, like larks into a trap by broken glass; to be blown into a change of religion by the whine of an organ pipe; stitched into a new creed by gold threads on priests' petticoats; jangled into a change of conscience by the chimes of a belfry. I know nothing in the shape of error so dark as this, no imbecility so absolute, no treachery so contemptible. I had hardly believed that it was a thing possible, though vague stories had been told me of the effect on some minds of mere scarlet and candles, until I came on this passage in Pugins' Remarks on Articles in the Rambler':-Those who have lived in want and privation are the best qualified to appreciate the blessings of bers of the separated portion of the English Church; who have plenty; thus to those who have been devout and sincere memprayed, and hoped, and loved, through all the poverty of the We do not intend at present dwelling longer on this work. We shall only say, that we shall rejoice to hear that Mr Ruskin's architectural writings are widely read and deeply pondered within our own ecclesiastical denomination, and in particular by the more intelligent and leading members of our deacons' courts. They will greatly tend to the formation of a pure standard of taste, as well as the establishment of principles of sound sense in such matters, which must ultimately tell on the character of our ecclesiastical fabrics. We only regret that, for the exigencies of the present era, his instructions come, so far as we are concerned, somewhat too late. Our church archi-"sheepfolds" had to be thrown up-amid the storm and hurry of a tecture, such as it is, is now nearly complete, and, with they are generally so deficient in architectural grace. *We gladly admit that such an inference were in a great measure ill-founded. When we consider the circumstances in which our great revolution-the wonder is that they are as they are, not that maimed rites which it has retained, to them does the realiza- | tion of all their longing desires appear truly ravishing.. Oh, then, what delight! what joy unspeakable! when one of the solemn piles is presented to them in all its pristine life and glory!-the stoups are filled to the brim; the rood is raised on high; the screen glows with sacred imagery and rich device; the niches are filled; the altar is replaced, sustained by sculptured shafts; the relics of the saints repose beneath; the body of our Lord is enshrined in its sculptured stone; the lamps of the sanctuary burn bright; the saintly portraitures in the glass windows shine all gloriously; and the albs hang in the oaken ambries, and the cope chests are filled with orphreyed bandekins, and pix and pax and chrismatory are there, and thurible and cross!" One might have put this man under a pix and left him, one should have thought: but that he has been brought forward and partly received as an example of the effect of ceremonial splendour on the mind of a great architect. It is very necessary, therefore, that all who have felt sorrow at this should know at once that he is not a great architect, but one of the smallest possible or conceivable architects. I do not know, as I have repeatedly stated, how far the splendour of architecture or other art is compatible with the honesty or usefulness of religious service. The longer I live, the more I incline to severe judgment in this matter, and the less I can trust the sentiments excited by painted glass and coloured tiles. But if there be indeed value in such things, our plain duty is to direct our strength against the superstition which has dishonoured them. There are thousands who might possibly be benefited by them, to whom they are now merely an offence, owing to their association with idolatrous ceremonies. I have but this exhortation for those who love them, not to regulate their creed by their taste in colours, but to hold calmly to the right at whatever present cost to their imaginative enjoyment, sure that they will one day find in heavenly truth a brighter charm than in earthly imagery, and striving to gather stones for the eternal building whose walls shall be salvation and whose gate shall be praise.' Emanating from such a writer, we took up the "Notes on Sheepfolds," we need scarcely say with no little interest, and have perused it with deep attention. We confess we have been in some degree disappointed. With much of the author's usual felicity of style, there is, we think, a want of that stamp of deep and cautious thought which the nature of the subject evidently called for. There are throughout marks of haste and immaturity of view, with occasionally an air of flippant confidence, which must materially detract from the weight and usefulness of the work. The author, indeed, tells us that though he has written those notes hastily, he has not thought hastily on the subjects to which they refer. It is, however, not easy to write hastily on any subject, without also, to some extent, thinking hastily; and we are afraid that those who have given their lives to the earnest examination of those momentous questions which our author dispatches in those fifty brief pages, will scarcely think the present an exception. In the following sentences, for example, on the subject of the scriptural form of church government, few that have carefully studied the subject, whatever their own individual views, will be inclined to confine the manifest marks of haste entirely to the style: "The men who do these things (i. e., discharge the several spiritual functions in the church), are called, and call themselves, with absolute indifference, deacons, bishops, elders, evangelists, according to what they are doing at the time of speaking." "As to the rank or name of the officers, in whom the authorities either of teaching or discipline are to be vested, they are left undetermined by scripture. I have heard it said by men who know their Bible far better than I, that careful examination may detect evidence of the existence of three orders of clergy in the church. This may be; but one thing is very clear, without any laborious examination, that "bishop' * Stones of Venice, pp. 370-374. and 'elder' sometimes signify the same thing, as indisputably in Tit. i. 5 and 7, and 1 Peter v. 1, &c." Yet he tells us in another place "I leave, in the main text, the abstract question of the fitness of Episcopacy unapproached, not feeling any call to speak of it at present; but the argument from the practice of the primitive church appears to me to be of enormous weight; nor have I ever heard any rational plea alleged against Episcopacy, except that, like other things, it is capable of abuse, and had sometimes been abused; and as, altogether clearly and indisputably, there is described in the Bible an episcopal office distinct from the merely ministerial one, and apparently also an episcopal office attached to each church, and distinguished in the Revelations as an angel, I hold the resistance of the Scotch Presbyterian Church to Episcopacy to be unscriptural, futile, and schismatic." And, once more "The members of the Scottish Church have not a shadow of excuse for refusing Episcopacy; it has indeed been abused among them, grievously abused; but it is in the Bible; and that is all they have a right to ask." Well, how can Presbyterianism stand after this! But surely there is a little haste, not of phraseology only, but of thought, in our author's statements here; and we may be pardoned for delaying our final decision a little until he has leisure to set the subject somewhat more clearly and fully before us. the greatest modern authority on such subjects-the Meanwhile, the following sentences, from perhaps illustrious Neander-may perhaps afford us at least the shadow of an excuse in holding out a little longer, and waiting for further light: "The changes which the constitution of the Christian church quent to the apostolic age), related especially to the three folunderwent during this period (i. e., that immediately subselowing particulars:-1. The distinction of bishops from presbyters, and the gradual development of the monarchico-episcopal church government. 2. The distinction of the clergy from the laity, and the formation of a sacerdotal caste, as opposed to the evangelical idea of the priesthood. 3. The multiplication of church offices. "As to the first of these particulars, we are in want, it is true, of exact and full information respecting the manner in which the change took place in single cases; but a comprehensive view on grounds of analogy will set the matter in a very clear light. Since the presbyters constituted a deliberative assembly, it would, of course, soon become the practice for one of their number to preside over the rest. This might be the presidency would thus pass in turn from one to the other. so arranged as to take place by some law of rotation, so that Possibly in many places such was the original arrangement. Yet we find no trace, at least in history, of any thing of this kind. But neither, as we have already observed, do we, on the other hand, meet with any vestige of a fact which would lege was originally distinguished by a special name. lead us to infer that the presidency of the Presbyterial Colever the case may have been then, as to this point, what we find existing in the second century enables us to infer, respecting the preceding times, that soon after the apostolic age, the standing office of president of the presbytery must have been formed; which president, as having pre-eminently the oversight over all, was designated by the special name of episcopus, and thus distinguished from the other presbyters. Thus the name came at length to be applied exclusively to this presbyter, while the name presbyter continued at first to be common to all; for the bishops, as presiding presbyters, had no official character other than that of the presbyters generally. They were only Primi inter pares." How monarchico-episcopal form of government, and such Such, according to Neander, was the origin of the the comparatively harmless embryo form in which it first presented itself. Our author is sufficiently aware of the formidable nature and pernicious tendency of one of the changes which Neander traces to *Neander's General Church History, vol. i. p. 239. men: the second century-that of " the distinction of the | ings of thousands of sound-hearted English layclergy from the laity, and the formation of a sacerdotal caste, as opposed to the evangelical idea of the priesthood." It may startle him to find the same profound historian tracing to the very same era and the very same circumstances the first dawnings of that Episcopal system, which, according to the "Notes on Sheepfolds," is so manifestly "in the Bible," as to leave the rejecters of it without "the shadow of an excuse." But we have done with criticism. Under the broad shield of Neander we may probably get a brief respite, and thus have time to collect ourselves a little before making our final surrender! This is all we want at present. We have no disposition just now to enter at large on the questio vexata of Presbytery and Episcopacy. We shall simply quote, for the instruction of our readers, the only other passage in the "Sheepfolds” in which we are especially concerned, and then proceed to other matters in which the author, as an English churchman, has a deeper interest, and of which he is more qualified to treat. "They (. ., the Scottish Church) have also no shadow of excuse for refusing to employ a written form of prayer. It may not be to their taste, it may not be the way in which they like to pray; but it is no question at present of likes or dislikes, but of duties; and the acceptance of such a form on their part would go half-way to reconcile them with their brethren." It is well to have such a point as this, which has been regarded by many, not as a question of taste, but of principle, decided once for all ex cathedra! "As for the unhappy retention of the term priest in our English prayer-book, so long as it was understood to mean nothing but an upper order of church officers licensed to tell they might, one would think, have known without being told the congregation from the reading-desk what (for the rest) -that God 'pardoneth all them that truly repent,'-there was little harm in it; but now that this order of clergy begins to presume upon a title, which, if it means any thing at all, is simply short for presbyter, and has no more to do with hiereus than with the word Levite, it is time that some order should be taken both with the book and the clergy. For instance, in that dangerous compound of halting poetry with hollow divinity, called the Lyra Apostolica,' we find much versification on the sin of Korah and his company; with suggested parallel between the Christian and Levitical churches, and threatening that there are 'judgment fires for high-voiced Korahs in their day.' There are indeed such fires. But when Moses said, 'A prophet shall the Lord raise up unto you, like unto me,' did he mean the writer who signs' Y.' in the Lyra Apostolica? The office of the lawgiver and the priest is now for ever gathered into one Mediator between God and man; and THEY are guilty of the sin of Korah who blasphemously would associate themselves in his Mediatorship. As for the passages in the ordering of priests,' and 'visitation of the sick,' respecting absolution, they are evidently pure Romanism, and might as well not be there for any practical effect which they have on the consciences of the laity, and had much better not be there as regards their effect on the minds of the clergy."* We can pardon the slightly flippant tone of some of the above expressions, for the sake of the clear and forcible enunciation of sound principle, and the full appreciation which they indicate of the real root and source of the evil which has grown into such portentous manifestation in our time. It is, indeed, difficult for us who use no liturgical forms, and with whom every thing, as regards the purity of divine service, depends, under God, on the soundness and vitality of the officiating ministry, ade Our author traverses in his fifty rapid pages the whole field of English Church matters-the definition of the church, the membership of the church, church authority, church discipline, church offices and officers, church reform, and the relation between the church and the state. We shall not attempt, inquately to estimate the immense importance for evil our present observations, to pass over so much ground. We were never very fond of express trains, and in the present case we are particularly timorous, as we more than suspect the security of some of our author's bridges and embankments. They seem of slight materials, and rather hastily thrown up. We prefer, therefore, a leisurely survey of a part of the way, and shall accordingly confine our attention to the two subjects last mentioned-undoubtedly those of the deepest and most practical moment at the present time. In regard to church reform, then, the question of greatest urgency is manifestly that of the revisal of the liturgy. With all their enthusiastic admiration, so constantly, and doubtless so sincerely expressed, for those venerable offices as a whole, it seems now generally felt by intelligent evangelical churchmen that there are seeds of mischief there, which, while they continue, must be ever and anon producing bitter fruit. The Reformers, indeed, manfully felled the trunk, and cut up, so far as time and opportunity were given them, the roots of the old antichristian system; but some of the fibres still remained beneath the soil, and these have manifested from age to age a strange vitality. Hence the incessant springing up, in subsequent generations, of fresh and vigorous shoots, instinct with the very life and sap of the old superstition-ideas of priestly power, church authority, the mystic efficacy of sacred rites, and the whole round of those thoughts and feelings which constitute the very atmosphere of Romanism. The following passage expresses, we doubt not, the feel or for good of those devotional forms through which a nation, through successive generations, gives utterance to its deepest religious feelings. Their influence in moulding the religious views and sentiments of the people must obviously be indefinitely great. Continuing on from age to age, blending themselves with the earliest thoughts and tenderest memories of successive generations-associated alike with the lisped prayers of infancy, the vows of early devotion, and the most solemn scenes of riper years, those venerable words must, in the nature of things, colour with their distinctive spirit the whole stream of the nation's religious life. They must do so just in proportion to their own intrinsic excellence, and in proportion as they are loved, valued, and earnestly used by the people. To how great an extent this is actually the case in England, no one in the least degree conversant with the religious character of the sister kingdom needs to be informed. We see the predominating influence we have referred to, not only in the language and feelings of churchmen of all classes, and in the whole tone and spirit of Anglican religious literature, but also, and perhaps more strikingly, in the case of many dissenters, who, in abandoning the pale of the mother church, have often carried large portions of her devotional forms with them, and have continued still to pray in the words they had used from their infancy. The old language has still clung to them, and continued to their dying day the most natural and congenial expression of the deepest and holiest breathings of their hearts. "Notes," &c., pp. 24, 25. 66 The intrinsic character of the liturgy itself has greatly tended to strengthen this influence. Great and serious as are its defects, no one will deny to it a depth and sweetness of devotional language unequalled, perhaps, by any other religious form. Few who have even occasionally joined in its solemn service, but will find snatches of its sublime and memorable utterances clinging to them in after life, and spontaneously rising to their lips in prayer. The majesty of its Te Deum, with its "Thou art the King of glory, O Christ!"" when thou hadst overcome the sharpness of death, thou didst open the kingdom of heaven to all believers;" the depth of its penitential and suppliant breathings," the thought of our sins is grievous unto us, the burden of them is intolerable ;"" O God, make clean our hearts within us," &c.; its thrilling pleadings,—" by thine agony and bloody sweat, by thy cross and passion," &c.; and, above all, those short antithetic summaries that seem to include all in a single word, and which remain as it were resounding through the heart when the words have died away,-"in the hour of death and the day of judgment;"" the means of grace and the hope of glory;" "granting us in this life the knowledge of thy truth, and in the world to come life everlasting," "that we may so pass through the things temporal, that we finally lose not the things eternal," &c. &c.-there is something in all this, and in the stately march of the whole accustomed celebration, which is fitted to take strong possession of a nation's heart, and to imbue with its spirit the very inmost soul of those who have been born and trained under it. How immense, then, must be the influence of the whole system, and of what unspeakable importance to guard from the faintest element of impurity an instrument destined to mould the religious sentiments of a people from generation to generation! Yet, that there are such elements of evil in the English Church service as it stands-elements of great potency for the production of the most bitter and baneful fruits, no intelligent Protestant can any longer doubt. On the chief of these Dr Chalmers undoubtedly lays his finger, when he points to the language of the baptismal and burial services, as constituting in his view the two capital flaws in the whole structure. To these may be added the remaining traces of the priestly heresy noticed in the passage quoted above. Were these evils abated, much would have been done to purge the vicious leaven, and perhaps sound-hearted English Churchmen would act wisely at present, and contribute to the unity and strength of their position, by confining themselves to one or two such vital points. But how to get these urgent and momentous reforms effected? This is the great problem-a problem of difficulty in very proportion to the importance of the work, and the vastness of the interests at stake. Manifestly, it is not a matter to be touched with a rude or careless hand. Surely, those who clamour for a revision of the common-prayer under the auspices of Parliament or the Prime Minister, speak without considering the nature of the matter they speak of-a matter so unspeakably sacred, and so deeply touching the vitals of the church, as the very words in which her members shall pray. We think it manifest, on the face of this matter, that if any thing is to be done rightly in regard to it, it must be done by, or at least within, the church herself. It was so practically at first. The original compilers of the prayer-book, were the real representatives of the English Reformation-in other words, of the new living church which was coming forth from amid the ruins of the passing system. They were, in short, true representative men-the best and the natural exponents of the real religious life of the country, and therefore in an eminent degree qualified to express in words its devotional feelings. So far as they were free-and to a large extent, of course, they were sothey substantially did so. Who is to do the same now-to take up and carry forward in our day the work so well begun in theirs? This is the great question, and one, doubtless, of immense difficulty. In reality, as things exist at present, the only parties to whom the work appears in the least degree appropriate, are the bishops of the united church, acting, of course, under a Royal commission, assisted, perhaps, by the professors of divinity in the several universities. How lamentably defective such a body would be, in energy and spiritual tone, for such a work, and how little likely to command the confidence of the church, and especially of the living portion of it, it is needless to say. Still, they are the only parties, as things now exist, that admit of being mentioned in connection with such an undertaking; and if any reform is to be carried out now, it must, we think it obvious, be through their instrumentality. In these circumstances, we confess our hopes of any radical and thorough change are far from sanguine. Should the alarm of the Episcopate on the subject of Romanist secessions continue, and were they stimulated by a sufficient pressure of earnest lay feeling from without, we can conceive of a reform carried out by them somewhat in the spirit of the late joint letter on the subject of Puseyite innovations-striking out perhaps one or two questionable expressions, and giving additional precision to the rubric, so as effectually to preclude the offensive practices complained of ;-nor should we altogether despise such a day of small things; but any thing like a thorough and searching revisal of the whole system, must, we are persuaded, come from other hands and in other times. In regard to the baptismal question, we fear it does not at present admit of any likely adjustment. By far the majority both of the bishops and clergy hold baptismal regeneration, at least in a sense which would probably make them prefer the words of the liturgy as it is, to any others that could be devised. At all events, the bishops never would consent to any change here; and if effected at all, it must be through the action of a synod composed both of clergy and laity, and representing fairly the whee mind of the church, and that probably after a long and severe struggle between the contending elements within its bosom. This, however, of course implies a synod, and a certain degree of self-government, and brings us in view of the other great question we proposed to glance at-that of the due relation between the Church and the State. We are sorry to say that our author's views on this subject are singularly crude and unsatisfactory. He begins his discussion of the matter with the following astounding announcement : "The last subject which we had to investigate was, it will be remembered, what is usually called the connection between the church and the state. But, by our definition or the term church, throughout the whole of Christendom, the church (or society of professing Christians) is the state; and our subject is, therefore, properly speaking, the connection of the lay and clerical officers of the church; that is to say, the degree in which the civil and ecclesiastical governments ought to interfere with or influence each other." With such premises, it is easy to conceive that the author makes very short work with the question at issue. The church and the state being really the same body, having two different sets of officers-the civil and the ecclesiastical-the question comes simply to be, the connection in which these two classes of functionaries should stand to one another, or to what extent they should interfere with or influence one another in the discharge of their respective offices; and as of the two, he considers the civil ruler to be, on the whole, immensely the safer party to be intrusted with large power and authority, he would allow him a very considerable influence and control over the ecclesiastical power. These views, we need scarcely say, are not new. The fundamental postulate of the identity of the church and the state, is familiar enough to all the readers of the late Dr Arnold. But how our author should have thought that notion consistent with his own definition of the church previously given, we find it exceedingly difficult to understand. Our readers will probably be surprised when we tell them, that in an early part of the pamphlet the church is defined, with substantial soundness, as the body of men in any country who profess the Christian faith, and whose character and life is such as not to belie their profession-in short, those who make acreditable profession of Christianity; and thereupon, he proceeds to sketch out a scheme of vigorous church discipline, as absolutely necessary for discriminating and separating the professing Christian flock from the common herd around. "We know," says he, "that Christ's people are not thieves, not liars, not busy-bodies, not dishonest, not avaricious, not wasteful, not cruel. Let us then get ourselves well clear of thieves, liars, wasteful people, avaricious people, cheating people, people who do not pay their debts. Let us assure them that they at least do not belong to the visible church, and having thus got that church into decent shape and cohesion, it will be time to think of drawing the stake-nets closer." Plainly, then, upon his own definition, the church is not the state, nor the state the church. Put in operation his plan of church discipline, and you sweep away hundreds and thousands of all ranks and classes of those who form the state beyond the pale of the church— infidels, socialists, dishonest and profane persons, careless and godless men of every description. Roman Catholics, as our author expressly tells us, are to go in a body as idolaters, so that it is exceedingly difficult to see how, in Roman Catholic countries at least, the state and the church can be practically one. The church then, and the state, even on Mr Ruskin's own principles, must form bodies immensely different from one another-unless, indeed, as we are almost inclined to think, from some expressions that fall from him, he would exclude from the rights of citizenship all who, by his searching church discipline, are excommunicated from the spiritual privileges of the church. But even granting his postulate, that the people forming the church are in reality the same with those that form the state, still we cannot admit that the question assumes the form which he assigns to it. Even then, it is not a question of the relation between the civil and ecclesiastical officers, but between the people associated under civil rulers for civil purposes, and the people associated for religious purposes, or in a church capacity under spiritual officers. Put the question thus, and the whole aspect of the subject is changed. There is no need, obviously, in this case, that either power should interfere with or control the other. Each will act at once most safely and efficiently while keeping within its own province, and confining itself to its own work. Let the convocation of the church be so composed as fairly to represent the mind of the whole body of the Christian people, and it may obviously be intrusted with the full and independent administration of ecclesiastical affairs, with as much safety and with as much advantage to the | highest interests of the country, as Parliament with the management of temporal affairs. As to the risk of collision between the two powers, were the church to consist, as our author supposes, substantially of the same parties with the state, there can of course be no danger on this score. The people acting in one capacity, will not run very seriously into conflict with the people acting in another. If again, as would plainly be the case, the church, with its membership purified by a system of godly discipline, shall consist only of a part, and that the best and most religious part of the community, then, indeed, the actings and decisions of its great representative assembly might, and probably would, in their whole spirit and complexion, widely differ from the views and feelings of a body representing the whole people indiscriminately. It is to be hoped, at least, that a spirit would reign there, in the handling of holy things, unspeakably different from that which presides in the House of Commons-that an enlightened zeal and holy energy within the church would then be substituted for the chilling influence of a secularizing erastianism from without; but surely no one who knows what religion is, and what the church of the living God ought to be, can doubt that the difference would be infinitely for the better, and that the decisions of such an assembly, in religious matters, would carry a weight with the Christian conscience of the community, which a body of mere men of the world, chosen at the hustings, and sent up to Parliament for the dispatch of the nation's general business, never could have. But we are proceeding, our readers may think, somewhat too quickly. Where is this great representative assembly of the English Church which we have been supposing, or to what means or combination of circumstances do we look for calling such a body into being? We at once confess ourselves utterly unable to answer these questions. It is impossible to conceal from ourselves the immense, the almost insuperable difficulties that must stand in the way of any such change. Fortified as the present status quo is on every side, by interests and influences the most manifold and powerful, the bare contemplation of an organic change of any kind seems little less than a visionary dream. Most men, however favourable in principle to such a measure, shrink from the assembling of a synod, as the probable signal for a scene of struggle and convulsion of which no one can predict the end, and timid spirits of every class and party prefer to "bear the ills they have, than fly to others that they know not of." For our own part, we confess we should rejoice in a reforming movement based on sound and enlightened principles, less in the hope of seeing a thorough renovation of the present system, as of witnessing the exodus of a new, and free, and living Church of England from the bosom of the old. In either case, however, the path of principle is the path of safety; and it is something if we have put our hand on the grand desideratum which must lie at the foundation of every true and |