ever walked hand in hand with religion, and throughout his career he had never struck one blow at revelation, nor uttered one word which could weaken the faith of the simplest believer. A purer, less selfish, more stainless existence has rarely been witnessed. At last came the voice which the dying alone can hear, and the hand which the living may not see beckoned him away; and then that noble intellect awakening from its lethargy, like some sleeper roused from a heavy dream, rose up and passed through the gates of light into the better land, where, doubtless, it is now immersed in the study of grander mysteries than any it ever attempted to explore on earth. A man to be loved-a Christian to be revered a philosopher to be had in perpetual memory-was, and is, and will be, Michael Faraday.* ART. VII.-Union of Christendom in its Home Aspects. By the DEAN 'Good WHILE seeking to realize in practice bold and high ideals, mankind has been fain to rest satisfied with meagre makeshifts. These makeshifts are often manifestly imperfect, and sometimes perilously inconsistent with that which they profess to enshrine, but having once borne the name of a great party and been identified with a noble cause, they have been clung to with pertinacious determination. Many time-honoured institutions and organizations afford illustration of this statement. What ideal can be more sublime than that of the union of Christendom? What can be a grander conception than out of the many discordant elements of fallen humanity, and in spite of innumerable colliding, national, hereditary, and specific interests to create a sublime unity and supernatural fellowship; a nation which shall speak one heavenly language; an empire which shall obey without hesitation one invisible and sovereign Lord; an organization which is perfectly centralized, having millions of wills fused into one, bringing even thought itself into miraculous accord, being perfectly joined together "in the same mind and in the same judgment?" Yet there has been no moment since the day of Pentecost, when the Church has not Since this article was written, a work on Faraday as a Discoverer has been published by Professor Tyndall. Coming from the pen of so sparkling a writer, and so accomplished a philosopher, it will doubtless be eagerly and extensively read. ardently desired to realize this union in regions where it was impossible to achieve it, and moreover by processes which were incompatible with, and even antagonistic to the end which it had at heart. We do not hesitate to affirm that neither in the specific regions where great ecclesiastics and formidable parties have been striving to find and realize the oneness and unity of the Church, nor in the departments of dogmatic and authoritative statement concerning the great facts of Divine revelation, nor even in those of organization, has there ever been anything approximating the success that is claimed. This is obvious, and will be admitted by all who do not unchristianize and unchurch the vast sectional communities, which from the time of the apostles to our own day, with varying names and ever-increasing numbers, have always repudiated portions of the dogma or refused some of the claims of the so-called Catholic Church. The Church has never been one in the sense of holding unanimously, without any deviation of thought or expression to one dogma. The Church has never been one in the sense of submitting to one ecclesiastical authority. We believe, however, that the true Church has always been one in its God, in its baptism, in the object of its worship, in its faith, in the ground and nature of its trust, in the source of its Divine life, in the manifestations of that life in humanity, in the sanctity of the new relations it has created, in the hope it has inspired. If the eye has meanwhile said to the hand or the foot, I have no need of thee,' it has not succeeded in dispossessing the body of Christ of that which was as needful as itself to its unity. The Union, the unity of the holy Catholic Church, has prevailed in spite of the frantic efforts made by men to force certain elements of it into visible expres Boasted unity of acknowledged dogma has led to and covered the most grievous hypocrisies, has fettered the mind of men, has resisted the free action of the Spirit of God. Enforced unity of organization has produced the most odious tyranny that the world has ever known, and all these evils have been committed in the hope of preserving a unity which their authors were doing their utmost to shatter and destroy. There was a deeper unity between Athanasius and Eusebius, between Nestorius and Cyril, than it seemed possible for them to put into formulæ. There was a deeper union between Cyprian and Novatian, between the Celtic bishops and Augustine of Canterbury, than they could reduce to a practical shape. Between Luther and Zwingle, Cranmer and Bellarmine, there were hidden sympathies and divine similitudes. The Puritans and so-called Catholics of England have fought a long and varied battle, but there have been always common affinities for Christ and for his truth, that have compelled even mutual recognition. If identity of dogma and community of organization be essential to the union of the Catholic Church, then the prayer of our Divine Lord seems farther than ever from accomplishment. If community of spirit, if analogous union to the Lord Jesus Christ, if the possession of a Divine life, if Catholic affections, and if holy living and loyalty to regenerated conscience do indeed constitute the union of Christendom, and behind all its outward shows of difference demonstrate the oneness of its life, then there are signs all around us that the day is drawing near, that the night is far spent. Amid the fierce snapping of old ties and the earthquake heaving of the solid ground of dogma, amid the party cries and strange changes of opinion and position, and the loud and angry roar of the icy covering of the great river of life, there are preludes of some impending change; the fantastic shapes into which its waters have been piled are trembling beneath the more genial atmosphere of a new spring-time, and there are signs and heralds of an hour, when the stream of life that issues from the throne of God and of the Lamb shall once more reflect the unveiled face of the Sun of Righteousness. We should enjoy tracing these signs at length, but we content ourselves just now with a single illustration. It is idle to assume that the Nonconformists of England are generally recognised by the divines and literary organs of a large party in the Church of England as Christians at all. We are daily consigned to uncovenanted mercies, and are so persistently bidden to study the rebellion and doom of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, that we ought to be familiar with that melancholy chapter of Israelitish history. Our conscientious convictions, our organizations for Christian work, and our profound desire to maintain the one Catholic truth about the God-Man are systematically ignored, and by episcopal lips are not unfrequently classed with agencies that are avowedly immoral and unchristian. It seems to be assumed by popular organs of opinion that Dissenters must be inaccurate, vulgar, and presumptuous; that their endeavours to establish ecclesiastical discipline must be dictated by sordid motives and directed by bigotry. It seems with many persons to be an accepted truth, that Nonconformist ministers cannot in the very nature of things be sincere, intelligent, self-sacrificing, or earnest, and that, having been denied opportunities of high culture, they are insensible to the spur which is so frequently driven into their cicatrised skin. It Dissenters and the Holy Catholic Church." 477 is almost impossible to exaggerate the degree to which social exclusion is inflicted on the Nonconformist minister or layman. in country districts by this popular teaching and habit of thought; nor is it easy to estimate the sense of wrong which thousands of well-informed and delicately-trained minds have suffered-even since the repeal of the Test Act-from this eause alone. In social intercourse with members of the Church of England who have formed their idea of English Nonconformity from this prevailing abuse and disparagement, we have been amazed at the profound ignorance which exists concerning the faith, the habits, the work, the worship, and the literature of Nonconformists. We, as Nonconformists, therefore, owe a debt of obligation to Dean Alford for the liberal and enlightened views that on several recent occasions he has dared to express concerning the Nonconformist communities around him. He at least sees through the arrogance and unreality of the terms with which they are often branded, and he has brought much of the cant of disparagement and exclusiveness to book. He has calmly uttered his protest against the grievous unrighteousness and cruel wrong committed by thoughts and words that sin against the sanctity of the Christian conscience. He is amazed at the lack of common sense and at the inconsistency of some of our detractors, as well as at the 'ignorance and pedantry' of the terms with which Dissenters are so constantly pelted. We highly appreciate the moral courage manifested by the learned and accomplished Dean in taking up this position, and we venture to deviate somewhat from our ordinary course in calling the attention of our readers to these interesting, liberal, and fine-spirited assaults on the citadel of exclusiveness. Before doing so, we would not forget the existence of those noble organizations, the British and Foreign Bible Society, the Religious Tract Society, the Evangelical Alliance, and others, which are the great witnesses to the fact of a common platform of sympathy, faith, and co-operation long since discovered by Evangelical Christians of all denominations. Professor Plumptre, in the last number of the Contemporary Review,' has justly credited the Evangelical, or Low Church party, with the honour of being ready thus to recognise the Christianity of Nonconformists, and to act upon it. Dean Alford has, in the article to which we refer, brought the principle of this co-operation into considerable prominence, and contrasted it with the principle as well as the practice of the High Churchman. The theme is, moreover, one of surpassing interest, and involves some of the deepest problems ever presented to the Christian consciousness. Seventeen years ago, he tells us that he proposed to a clerical meeting the query, whether an orthodox Dissenter is to be regarded as a member of Christ's Holy Catholic Church ?' And he assures us that, though an animated and adjourned debate ensued, the affirmative was at last unanimously carried by the meeting which consisted of clergymen, many of whom were what is called High Churchmen. He would not predict what would be the issue of such a conversation if raised now, but any other decision is, he 'submits, impossible to the fair-judging Christian mind.' Some of our readers may probably regard the simple positing of such a question as a grave insult, and will be unable to conceive the state of mind in which it could be discussed. They will say, is it possible that a company of clergymen could hesitate whether or not to include Thomas Chalmers and Murray M'Cheyne, Philip Doddridge and Edward Irving, William Carey and John Howard, James Montgomery and Jabez Bunting, in the Holy Catholic Church? But such do not appreciate the extent to which modern reverence for the Church as an institution has risen, nor the intensity of the Churchman's belief that a particular organization is the incorporation of all goodness, the body of the Son of God, the incarnation of the Holy Ghost; nor the feeling which ranges scepticism on this subject on a level with scepticism on other questions as fundamental as the revelation of God in Christ, the manifestation of God in Creation; nor the fanaticism which at the same time does not hesitate to make belief in a particular form of Church government an essential condition of salvation. We confess that a little obscurity hangs over Dean Alford's definition of the Holy Catholic Church.' Membership in it seems in one place to be essential to salvation, and its chief 'note' to be the spiritual relationship to Christ, out of which all life and growth and fruit really spring; but elsewhere he speaks of it as though he considered it synonymous with Christendom,' which includes bodies of Christians,' and the various communities of those who profess and call themselves 'Christians, being led into the way of truth.' This opens up an interesting theme, which we are almost tempted to pursue at length; suffice it to say, however, that we recognise an important distinction between the Holy Catholic Church' and 'Christendom,' and we may be excused if we here advert to it for a moment. It appears to us that these terms correspond to the two great conceptions of an 'invisible' and 'visible' Church. The former consists exclusively of those who are in personal union with Christ, the Catholic assembly |