on each other in a higher degree, than the different regions of our globe. The statesman and economist are not authorized any more, by the soundest principles of legislation, than they are by the spirit of Christianity, to devise plans for the aggrandizement of their own government, whose execution will be the detriment or ruin of other nations.

A scriptural education of all classes of the people ought to lie at the foundation of every theory of political economy. Other proposed remedies, while this is neglected, will be totally unavailing. A mere intellectual education is not competent to remove the evils which are suffered. A thorough scriptural education, (not a theological, much less a denominational one,) will, sooner or later, be found to be indispensable in arresting the degeneracy of nations.

The temperance reformation, also, in this connection, is of fundamental importance. We want words to express our conviction of the benign influence of this great reform on the repose and happiness of the civilized world. The blindest opponent of the enterprise cannot but see that the use of intoxicating liquors and drugs is sapping the foundations of national prosperity, and even depopulating some of the fairest portions of the globe. All travellers agree that the aboriginal population of South America is fast withering away under its baneful influence. Every judicious measure, therefore, in promoting this reform, is drying up the sources of national decay, is removing the causes of disease and debilitated constitutions, is lifting up the lower orders of the people in all countries to which access can be had, and is thus gradually accomplishing a salutary revolution in human society, with which scarcely any thing in the history of the race can be compared.

5. Criticism of books. The late Dr. Thomas Brown has written a paragraph on this subject, which we cannot forbear to adduce: "If all other circumstances be equal, he will undoubtedly be the best critic, who knows best the phenomena of human thought and feeling; and without this knowledge, criticism can be nothing but a measurement of words, or a repetition of the ever repeated and endless common-places of rhetoric. The knowledge of nature, of the necessity of which critics speak so much, and so justly, and which is as essential to the critic himself, as to the writer on whom he sits in judgment,-is only another name for the knowledge of the successive transitions of feeling of the mind, in all the innumerable diversities in

Ведет

which it is capable of being modified by the variety of circumstances in which it may be placed. It is for this reason, that, with so great an abundance of the mere art, or rather of the mere technical phrases of criticism, we have so very little of the science of it; because the science of criticism implies an acquaintance with the philosophy of thought and passion, which few can be expected to possess. Though nothing can be easier than to deliver opinions, such as pass current in the drawingroom, and even in the literary circle, which the frivolous may admire as profound, and the ignorant as erudite, and which many voices may be proud to repeat, yet, it is far from being equally easy to show, how the one passage is beautiful, from its truth of character, and the other, though perhaps rich in harmony of rhythm and rhetorical ornament, is yet faulty, by its violation of the more important harmony of thought and emotion, a harmony which nature observes as faithfully, in the progress of those vehement passions that appear most wild and irregular, as in the calmest succession of feeling of the most tranquil hours."

From these discriminating remarks of the philosopher, it may be justly inferred, that the proper criticism of books, is an undertaking of no little magnitude. It requires, in many cases, a thorough study of the author's mind, as well as of his book, and the kindred treatises which have been published on the same subject. It demands the ability to enter into the author's feelings, and habits of thought. It is in perfect variance with all dogmatical assertion, wholesale denunciation, indiscriminate eulogy, and superficial analysis. The critic must be firm, candid, patient, unprejudiced, willing to labor, clear-sighted. He must not, on the one hand, indulge any private pique or personal enmity, in forming an estimate of a book; nor, on the other hand, sacrifice the interests of taste, good learning, truth, and righteousness, in order to gratify personal friendships, promote a pecuniary speculation, or please an interested bookseller. Of a large proportion of the books diffused in our community, both of the original and imported classes, no literary judgment is required. Some are entirely harmless, — incapable of producing good or evil. Others are mere transcripts of volumes whose character and tendency have long been settled in the reading world. Some will perish at once, and deservedly, unless a too forward exhibition of their faults and weakness raise them to a temporary notoriety. Others require no analysis or notice, from the fact that their publication was owing, very properly it

may be, to the grateful impulses of sorrow, or to some other limited and transient cause.

In respect to the course to be pursued in this publication, on this subject, we make no promises; we enter into no engagements. Our experience has made us fully aware of the great and intrinsic difficulties connected with periodical criticism. The public mind is not entirely sound in relation to the matter. Fulsome eulogy has nearly usurped the place of candid and discriminating criticism. The want of a disposition to labor on the part of the critic, the vanity of authorship, or the danger of the pecuniary shipwreck of the capital invested in a book, renders an impartial examination of many books nearly impracticable. Men of sense, if they have written a volume, seem to have forgotten, that a considerate review of that volume, even if it deals somewhat in censure, will ultimately be of more service to the author, as well as to the community, than a mere mass of tasteless compliment, or stereotyped flattery.

6. Voluntary Associations for the Spread of the Gospel and for the Promotion of Christian Morals. It is now between forty and fifty years since the various evangelical denominations of Christendom began to enter with some zeal on the great work of diffusing the gospel throughout the world. At first, the warm impulses of pious feeling seemed to prompt to the effort, and to supply the place of well-established principles and properly devised modes of operation. That spring time of hope and expectation is passed. The ardent feeling and the excited imagination, which threw so much interest over the commencement of these efforts, have given way to the sober reality of the work itself. With undimmed eye and with unexcited feeling, we can now look out on the vast and difficult enterprise before us. It is well for us to reconnoitre our position, and put up some landmarks for our guidance. A few simple, general principles are now to be settled. It is a fact admitted on all hands, that the gospel is to be diffused by human instrumentality. The question is: How shall this instrumentality be directed and employed? Who shall have the control and responsibility of the undertaking? By what agencies in christian lands can the great victory over sin and error be achieved? The question is not, whether all the denominations shall be consolidated into one vast association. Such a proposal would find few advocates. It has no concern with the discussion of the relative merits of different forms of church government. The high dignity and VOL. IX. No. 30.

3

immeasurable value of the christian church as an institution of the New Testament admit of no denial, or doubt. The subject has no bearing on the discussion of the mode in which persons shall be received into the christian church, or inducted into the offices of that church. All these questions must be entirely left to ecclesiastical bodies. With the peculiar responsibilities of those who hold the licensing or ordaining power, there is no intention on the part of any one to interfere. Prescription and dictation are also to be wholly set aside. The day is gone by when any measure or mode can be forced on a reluctant community, or a rebellious denomination. Finally, there is no ground for doubt in respect to the support which the agents, who may be employed in the work, shall receive. They are not called upon to labor gratuitously. The Bible has determined that the missionary laborer is worthy of his hire.

The question is: Whether benevolent efforts in any one denomination of Christians, or in any two denominations, or in any portions of them, which may choose to unite their strength, shall be voluntary, or be controlled by, and be accountable to, an ecclesiastical organization? Is the conversion of the world to be left, (with the blessing of the Holy Spirit, and under the guidance of his written will), to the voluntary, unrestricted efforts of individuals in the church; or is it to be accomplished by the church, in her distinctive capacity, as an organized, ecclesiastical body?

We have no intention to enter upon an extended reply to these questions at the present time. Our limits, as well as other circumstances, do not permit us. Our principal object will be accomplished, if we succeed in clearly presenting the main question at issue, and also in briefly indicating the line of argument which may be pursued.

At the very outset of the inquiry, we are met with the objection, that the church was constituted for the very purpose of extending the gospel through the world, and that voluntary associations, in assuming this work, are usurping the functions of the church, and depriving her of those privileges and responsibilities which were assigned to her by her Lord and Master. But this, it is conceived, is a mere verbal, unsubstantial objection. The churches are now on the voluntary mode, in effect, performing the work. The voluntary association is the agent, or the trustee of the churches. Its life is derived from them. If they withdraw their support, it dies of course. Its agency is

a derived and subordinate one. It is the mere creature of that public opinion which prevails in the churches. If they become dissatisfied with its proceedings, or lose their confidence in the importance of its object, it disappears immediately. The national society formed a few years since, for the benefit of the Jews, is an instance. True, the association is not formally, and directly responsible to any ecclesiastical organization. But it is responsible to the churches in fact, and in the highest sense. It cannot subsist without their countenance. Even the small permanent funds, which a few societies have collected, cannot be squandered or perverted, unless the great body of the church becomes corrupt; and if such a result should take place, could funds or any thing else, be more secure in the hands of the church itself? We do not learn from the New Testament, that our Lord assigned the work of propagating his gospel to the church in her distinctive, organized capacity. He commissioned his disciples to make known his revelation. There is not the least intimation, so far as we can discover, that he required his followers to proceed in this enterprise, in their church-capacity. He seems to have left them at liberty to adopt any mode, which, in the circumstances of Providence, and under the guidance of his Spirit, might be found to be the best. In a case of "offence," or discipline, Matthew, 18: 15-17, the church is to have cognizance. But in efforts to propagate the gospel, no reference to the church, in her distinctive form, is required. It yet remains to be proved that our Saviour in commissioning his disciples, Mark 16: 15-18, Acts 1: 4-8, to evangelize all nations, addressed them as an organized church, or as the representatives of any future ecclesiastical body. He rather sent them forth as simple missionaries, witnesses of his resurrection and of his mighty works, Luke 24: 48, pioneers, and in many respects, patterns of all who should thereafter labor in the same beneficial work. In the few directions, which he left them, they are required to remain in Jerusalem till endued with power from on high; then to go out every where, and make known the terms of salvation; being assured that he would furnish them with all necessary aid.

Accordingly, the apostles, "with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren," about one hundred and twenty in all, met in Jerusalem, and engaged in prayer and in conference, till the miraculous descent of the Holy Spirit. They then preached the gospel to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and