of the population. There might be, and were, particular instances, e. g. in London, where the population had increased without any sufficient provision for church accommodation. But when the population of England and Wales was only eight millions, as it was fifty years ago, the clergy were not so unequal to their task as they now are in many parts. There was really no great demand for more clergy or churches, nothing that might not be reasonably expected to be supplied by the aid of the state. There were no attacks of any kind on the Church; her efforts were limited to resisting the attempts of Romanists and dissenters to obtain the repeal of Acts, which prevented them from attaining and exercising political powers.

We do not say that there were no questions then about which the Church ought to have exerted herself. On the contrary, we would instance the state of ecclesiastical discipline, the exercise of the legislative functions of the Church, and reforms in various internal arrangements. But, on the whole, we can see that the Church was in a state of comparative security, and that a course of proceeding, on her part, was then very fitting and expedient, which might become very much the reverse under altered circumstances.

Now, at the end of fifty years, we find ourselves with a population of probably not less than eighteen millions instead of eight! We find Romanism in the ascendant politically, instead of the Church. We find the old religious opponents of the Church prodigiously reinforced in all respects, and combined with political bodies, and parties, and principles which did not exist in the last generation. In every session of parliament bills of the most injurious tendency are pressed forward by individuals or by government. Year after year we see fresh inroads made on our position. Sometimes the efforts of our opponents are defeated for a time, but they are renewed again. It would be endless to record the multitudinous alterations and changes which have been in progress for thirty years, and to which there is no visible prospect of a termination. The memory rests on a few great questions which have been carried against the Church, but it would be impossible to specify all the instances in which the altered relative positions of the Church and its opponents have been manifested,

And how is it that the enemies of the Church have been able to make such dangerous progress? How is it that they have been enabled to alter their tone so widely, and to clamour and struggle for the removal of barriers which, fifty years ago, were regarded as immutable and eternal, until minister after minister has been compelled either by consistency or expediency to open the doors? It has been all accomplished by agitation of various

kinds-violent and armed agitation in Ireland, unceasing petition, remonstrance, and organization in England. By the steady and persevering application of these powers in both countries, the whole action of the state has been altered, and altered too in spite of the disapprobation and dislike of a majority of the people, of the whole body of the clergy, and of the great majority of the prelates, nobility, and gentry. The truth is, that the opponents of the Church are perfectly well aware that statesmen, who are not generally guided by any very strong or decided religious principle in their political career, are willing to do much for the sake of peace, and to obtain some remission from the heat of opposition. In the storms of political life, the addition of any strong and persevering set of petitioners and grumblers to the rest of the turmoil, is enough to weary out the patience of ministers and of the legislature; and it may be safely said, that all the concessions made to Romanism have arisen chiefly from the desire of getting rid for a time of importunity.

But, amidst the general effort of religionists of all kinds, and associations of every description, to urge their claims upon the legislature, the Church forms a remarkable exception. She remains in dignified silence-no voice of importunity from her reaches the ears of the troubled ministers. She is content to abide in her former position, and to depend upon the heads of the State for legislative measures in her favour pretty much as she did fifty years ago. We do not find prelates, or peers, or members of the House of Commons, taking up any great Church question, and pushing it forward perseveringly session after session. We do not find any organization with a view to bring the strength of the whole body of the Church to bear upon such a question. The Church is content with occasional expressions, on the part of individuals, either by the press or otherwise, in favour of her great objects; but, from whatever reason it be, she does nothing more as a body; and therefore her voice is unheard, her wishes are unattended to, her remonstrances are treated with contempt; and she has the mortifying conviction, that every petty sect, and every knot and organization for the attainment of the most purely selfish objects, is certain to command more attention, and to be more successful than that National Church to which the cause of the truth is entrusted amongst us. We submit, with all respect, to the consideration of churchmen in all stations, that the history of the past thirty years conveys a great lesson to the Church; that it points out the indispensable necessity for a different mode of proceeding on the part of the Church. There may be difference of opinion whether this or that particular measure has been injurious to the Church, but on the whole we

think that the downward progress of things is very manifest. As we have said before now, it seems to us that the Church acts unwisely in contenting herself merely with resistance and opposition to what is dangerous and bad, such for instance as the admission of Jews to the legislature; the renewal of relations between England and Rome; the interference with the law of marriage, or any other of the bad, mischievous, or immoral measures by which we are inundated. Opposition ought to be offered to every thing of this kind; but then there should be always before the Church the attainment of her own great positive objects. There are certain acknowledged wants and defects; why is not their removal sought systematically and incessantly? Why is not the Church pressing for them regularly year after year? We are fully aware that the mooting such questions would not be acceptable to ministers of state. If the heads of the Church, previously to any course of action of this kind, were to go to the government and to state their intention, we may be perfectly certain that they would be discouraged. No public men who are in office will encourage the Church in adopting any course which may be troublesome to themselves. Now, it is the general impression certainly, that the episcopate do not take any steps affecting the Church without securing the acquiescence or the support of the ministry of the day. They do not act independently of the ministry. ministry never will sanction any movement which is calculated to embarrass themselves. And therefore, unless there be a change of system on the part of the heads of the Church, we do not see any prospect of their being able to advance the cause of the Church materially by becoming a bond of union which may combine churchmen for their common objects.

The

We have found almost invariably, that even those prelates, from whose personal views and principles we might have expected encouragement to efforts made in furtherance of the great material and spiritual interests of the Church, are unwilling to encourage movements of any kind made by the body of the clergy, for the attainment of the most legitimate objects. It seems as if the episcopate, as a body, is so knit and bound up in its connexion with the government of the day, that it cannot exercise the freedom of action which the position of the Church requires. It is of no avail for one or two of the prelates to assume a tone of independence, when the great majority cannot move for Church objects without the sanction and concurrence of the ministry.

We do not attempt to express any thing more than regret at this state of things. The Church, in her times of peril, is not, as a matter of fact, led forward by those whom we might have not unreasonably looked to as our guides. And the effect of the

quiescent course pursued by the hierarchy has been, certainly, to check any attempts to gain Church objects. For instance, how difficult must it be for lay peers, or for commoners to initiate such measures, as Church extension, an increase in the episcopate, or other matters of the same kind, when the heads of the Church are unwilling to take the responsibility of making any move to advance the cause of the Church! It seems to us, we confess, on a careful survey of the course of events, that the episcopate, and through them the friends of the Church in parliament, are unable to initiate measures for the welfare of the Church. We do not say that the Church might be as well without any representatives in parliament, because there is a power, though it be dormant, and we trust it will not always be so; but we really think, that as far as the initiation of measures for the welfare of the Church is concerned as far as any attempt to advance the interests of the Church is in question-it would be difficult to see any advantage which is derived from the occupation of parliamentary seats by thirty bishops; and the thought will cross the mind, on instituting a comparison between the relative progress made by the Church, and by those religious bodies which are without representatives in parliament, that it is a serious question, whether the Church would not be more efficiently led, and whether her actual position would not be better now and hereafter, if her episcopate were not so very closely tied to the guidance of the minister by the occupation of seats in parliament. It is impossible to prevent the intrusion of such thoughts, when we compare the inaction of our hierarchy with the stirring activity of that of the Romish communion, or of the Wesleyans, or other dissenters. And while we contemplate this, we confess that we do not feel that intense anxiety for the presence of the hierarchy in parliament, which so many sound and good Churchmen do. We admit the beauty of the theory connected with the parliamentary seats of the episcopate, but we think its practical benefits have sometimes been overrated.

But whatever may be thought of this question, there can be no doubt that the episcopate, and the body favourable to the Church in parliament, have contented themselves with an imperfect and divided negative to measures injurious to the Church, but never attempt to advance her cause positively, by bringing forwards proposals and measures. And therefore it seems to us a matter of plain and evident necessity, that if any movement is to be made for the attainment of Church objects of any kind, the impulse must come from beneath. The petition must spring from the mass of the Church,-from its parochial clergy and its laity, -from its deaneries, and its parishes, and its hamlets; and when the sentiment of the Church has been sufficiently expressed,

it is morally certain of being attended to. Our episcopate, unequal to initiate measures themselves, will support those measures as far as they think they can with safety; and their voices, when backed by the general and unanimous urgency of the Church, have great weight. It is for this reason that we rejoice to see the formation of "Church Unions" of clergy and laity in various parts of the country, especially at Bristol. These Unions are formed with a view to the promotion of objects which the great majority of Churchmen concur in wishing for. They are objects of a simple and practical character, such as CHURCH EXTENSION, an INCREASE IN THE EPISCOPATE, the attainment of securities for the appointment of Bishops WELL QUALIFIED FOR THEIR SACRED OFFICE, some provision for LEGISLATION ON CHURCH MATTERS OF A SPIRITUAL NATURE,—which cannot properly be brought before Parliament as now including persons of all religious denominations,and the restoration of some CORRECTIVE DISCIPLINE. These are, in general, the objects of the local associations to which we refer they are intended to give form and expression to wishes generally felt by the educated and enlightened part of the community, and to bring their sentiments to bear upon the Legislature in the form of petition, and such other modes of application as are found efficacious in furthering the views of other parties. We believe that the members of the Church Unions concur generally in the above objects, though they are not pledged to any particular views of details, and some of them may possibly include fewer of these objects in their schemes than others may do.

The utility of "Church Unions" is very great. They will furnish just the kind of simple organization which is requisite to elicit the real feeling of the country, in the shape of parochial and other petitions, and meetings for specific objects. They will, we trust, bring together earnest-minded men in each locality, who will combine for the promotion of the most legitimate objects by the ordinary means and in the ordinary way,-will exercise the right of petition which the law of the land places entirely in their own power, and will ask for the concession of benefits or privileges which they have an unquestionable right to seek for.

We earnestly trust and hope that at the commencement of the next session of Parliament the Church Unions will be found to work efficiently for the promotion of the Church's interest, and that the ministry in future, of whatever politics, or under whatever political appellation, may have to deal with a new party— the party of THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. It may take some time to obtain general co-operation; but we feel assured that if