of Dissent and to raise a considerable aların within the bosom of the National Church. The consequence has been, that the clergy in some places have put forth more zeal and industry; whilst others, less prudent and less enlightened, have betrayed symptoms of that intolerance which always attaches itself to a richly-endowed and lordly hierarchy. Their apprehensions, how ever, may be stayed; for the tolerated sects are too much disunited both in principle and in affection to admit of any coalition for the purpose of procuring the downfal of the Established Church. Whenever such an event may take place, it will be the work of society at large.

From the foregoing remarks, it may be inferred that a reference to the number of edifices devoted to religious worship, and to the crowded congre gations that attend them, will afford but little clue to the real state of the Dissenting interest. If we extract from the general mass those who conscientiously dissent from the doctrines, discipline or constitution of the Church of England, the number of such per sons will probably be found much smaller than is generally apprehended; probably much more so than at the period of the Revolution. If the question be viewed with reference to the increased population of the country, the gain has been decidedly in favour of the Church of England. But the declension of Nonconformity has been most visible in the quality of its adherents, it having been deserted by almost every family of rank or influence in society. It is true, that in cities and large manufacturing towns the cause is still supported by a few opulent merchants and tradesmen, and here and there by a professional man; but it is undeniable that dissenting congregations are generally composed of persons in humble life, and this is almost wholly the case in small towns and villages.

It has been often remarked as a subject of regret, that when Dissenters grow rich or succeed to an inheritance, they commonly go over to the Church. To whatever cause it may be owing, it is certainly a curious fact, that a wealthy dissenting family is but rarely known to continue stedfast in the principles of Nonconformity for more than two generations. Singular, how

ever, as this may appear, and injurious as it is to the prosperity of the Dissenting interest, a little acquaintance with mankind will furnish us with sufficient reasons to account for it. Here, let it be remembered, that Dissenters are made of the same sort of materials as other people, and that there is nothing so peculiar in the nature of their principles as to detach them from the rest of society, or to prevent them from taking that station in it which the accidents of life may have assigned to them. When Dissenters acquire property, their intercourse with the world most usually becomes enlarged. If they have children, they feel a laudable desire to introduce them into society, and they naturally select that class of it which is best adapted to their improvement. Having received an ornamental as well as a useful education, they find but few associates to their taste in dissenting congregations, and are soon disgusted by the familiarity and rudeness of lowbred persons, who presume upon their supposed spiritual attainments. This aversion is farther strengthened by the unnecessary austerity assumed by many religious persons, especially when advanced in years; so that, upon the earliest opportunity they throw aside the fetters that restricted their youthful enjoyments. It being the fashion amongst wealthy persons to train their children to learned professions, similar pursuits bring them in contact with persons belonging to the Establishment; and rising in life they are called to fill stations which are incompatible with the profession of dissent, or which, at any rate, render them unfit associates for the bulk of persons who compose dissenting congregations. Others are brought together by the concerns of business, which occasion the formation of private friendships; and the desire which people usually manifest to form alliances in the same station of life, only aggravates the evil.

A farther obstruction to the profession of Nonconformity may be referred to the qualifications of its teachers, to the mode of their teaching, and to the quality of the religion that is taught in many congregations. Upon a subject surrounded by so much combustible matter, I shall be very brief; but the importance which it bears upon

to seek for religious instruction elsewhere.

The decline of the Dissenting interest may be farther traced to the advancement of science and literature, which has rendered men indifferent to the forms of religion, and in some cases doubtful of its reality altogether. This disposition has been encouraged by the enthusiastic pretences which have been mixed up too much with the profession of Christianity, as well as by the little attention that has been paid by Dissenters in general to such subjects as are calculated to improve the intellectual and political condition of mankind. By neglecting to take advantage of the improvements of the age, and thus to render the profession of Nonconformity respectable in the world, they have been left with the dregs of society, whilst their enemies have carried away the palm of superiority.

But, perhaps, nothing tends more to the disparagement of the Dissenters than their political condition, the profession of Nonconformity rendering them liable to certain civil disabilities, from which the favoured sect is exempt. That they are usually identified with the opponents of government is not at all surprising, but it ought not to be charged upon them as a crime; for, setting aside reasons of conscience, it would be absurd to suppose they can entertain any kind feeling for a set of men who first trample upon their political rights, and then charge them with disaffection. The oppression to which they have been so long subject in this respect, has so far tinctured the prejudices of society, as to occasion an artificial circle to be drawn around them, excluding them very much from the intercourse of life with persons of a similar station in the Established Church. Having no political influence, they are an object of contempt with the government, any farther than they can become the instruments of its own purpose. It is to be lamented that the orthodox Dissenters have never been sufficiently alive to their political rights. The apathy they have discovered upon such subjects, from the ridiculous notion that they are to be occupied only by concerns of a religious nature, has tended to debase the quality, and

to sink the importance of their cause. If the profession of Nonconformity is destined again to flourish, it must be identified with civil liberty, and then the friends of the latter will be its firmest supporters.

A Dissenter, whatever may be his theological opinions, or however strongly he may feel the supreme importance of religion, is eminently a political character, being made so by the state. It is his duty, therefore, never to lose sight of his situation, nor to forego any fair opportunity for urging its amelioration. In order to inoculate society with just sentiments, he should frequently bring forward for discussion such topics as the injustice and impolicy of penal laws upon account of religion; the impropriety of connecting Christianity with the state, and thereby rendering it subservient to political purposes; the distinct objects of religion and of civil government; the irreligious tendency of test laws; the incongruity of a lordly hierarchy with the simplicity of a Christian church, to which it is an expensive incumbrance; the inutility, for purposes of instruction and pastoral inspection, of a system that patronizes pluralities and non-residences; the hypocrisy of educating men for a cure of souls, when the real purpose is to amass wealth, and to obtain political influence; the oppressive nature of tithes, and their injurious effect upon the clerical character; the absurd mixture of Jewish, Popish and Protestant worship in the English ritual; the sectarian nature and unchristian spirit of the publicly-authorized creeds; together with such other points as may suggest themselves, in order to shew the inefficacy of the present ecclesiastical system for the purposes for which it is so amply endowed.

The examples of Greece and Rome, and other ancient nations, have been cited as precedents to justify the civil patronage of religion, and the prosecution of opposite opinions. But, not to take notice of the impropriety of the parallel drawn between Pagan and Christian institutions, it would be difficult to shew any warrant for the thing in either case, beyond that of statepolicy. The existence of religion does not require it; for, supposing it to be of divine origin, and under the protec

tion of the same Being who governs the world by his providence, it may be safely intrusted to him for security. Besides, man has been often called a religious animal, which implies either the adaptation of religion to his nature and condition, or a certain pre-disposition in his mind to connect himself with its concerns; so that, as soon as he becomes convinced of its impor

truce, he will require no compulsion

from State to enforce observances. A political religion is equally inefficient as the guardian of public morals. For the proof of this, à reference may be made to the state of society, high and low, in large towns and cities, and also in country villages. In numberless parishes, there is no resident minister to inspect the conduct of the people, who see nothing of their legal instructor but when he visits them to collect his tithes. It is notorious that the tolerated sects, which are no expense to the public, are the most efficient instruments in reforming the manners of the common people, and that this is effected solely by the arts of persuasion. With the higher orders they have nothing to do, but whatever excesses are committed by them, these lie at the door of the Established Clergy.

Viewing the present state of public feeling, it is scarcely to be expected that the dissolution of National Church Establishments is very near at hand; but the progressive improvements that are taking place in society, by means of education and the circulation of knowledge, give us reason to expect that much may be done towards their amelioration. The Church of England, supported as it is by legal sanctions, in addition to the force of prescription, and defended by a numerous body of well-paid advocates, will always be opposed to the reformation of abuses either in Church or State. But the Church is dependent on the civil power, and the latter must be guided upon so important a subject by public opinion. It must be the wish, therefore, of every enlightened friend to religion and liberty, to see such a system of instruction brought forward as would be less objectionable in its construction, and more efficient in its result. In furtherance of this object, it is in the power of every one to contribute his mite; and however formi

You will I am sure, give me full credit for sincerity when I say, that no one who is acquainted with our valuable Missionary, Mr. Wright, and with his inany excellent and useful works, can hold either him or them in a higher degree of estimation than myself: and such is my opinion of his candour, that I think he will be far from disapproving my wish of telling him, through the medium of your pages, that I have always been disposed to view the character of the Elder Brother, in the beautiful parable of the Prodigal Son, in a light directly opposite to that in which it is represented in No. 46, the last publication of the Christian Tract Society.

Taking the parable as a plain relation of facts, simply as they are told, are not the feelings and conduct of the Elder Brother such as might naturally have been expected from a correct and virtuous character? Returning from the field, where, we may presume, he had been employed in overlooking and directing the concerns of his father's farm, he hears music and dancing, and calling one of the servants, inquires what these things meant. He is informed that his brother, that brother who, after having demanded his full share of the family possessions, departed into a distant country, and there wasted it in riotous living, was returned home, and that his father had killed the fatted calf, because he had received hin safe and sound.

Observe here, that no mention was made of the deeply-humbled and penitent state in which he came back, therefore the rejoicing which he heard, and the feast which he finds is preparing to celebrate the return of a profligate young man, might well excite a degree of virtuous indignation in his breast-might well cause him to be angry, and refuse to go in. Then came the father out and entreated him; but before he could explain the grounds upon which alone his conduct

could be justified, with the impetuosity which in youth frequently attends the worthiest characters, the son thus gives vent to the strong feelings of his heart: "Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither at any time transgressed I thy commandment, and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends; but as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf."

What now is the reply of the good and wise father? What is the displeasure that he expresses in return for this hasty remonstrance? Son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine!" Can language convey a more decided testimony of entire approbation? "All that I have is thine!" Does it not say, thou shalt thyself apportion the share that is bestowed upon this deeply humbled penitent ? "All that I have is thine;" but "it is meet that we should make merry and be glad; for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again, and was lost, and is found."

The whole of this relation appears to me beautifully to display the kind and merciful disposition of the father, without throwing the slightest imputation of blame upon the son, who had never departed from the path of rectitude, never transgressed his father's commandment; and to represent it in any other light, seems to encourage the false, dangerous and demoralizing opinion which is already too prevalent with many of our orthodox brethren, that a returning sinner is more acceptable, more precious in the sight of the benevolent Father of all, than the man who, as far as our frail nature will permit, has from his youth up, been perfect and holy before him.

"

If, as is most apparent, our great Teacher intends to represent the Almighty under the character of the father in the parable, can the son, who never at any time transgressed his commandment," be other than the most excellent of human beings? Therefore," says our Lord," therefore doth my Father love me, because I do always such things as please him.” To obey the commands of God, we must be well aware, not only includes an abstinence from every kind of evil, but the regular practice of all that is

good and excellent; and the heavenly Parent, the Searcher of hearts, could not have been deceived by outward appearances, nor is a shadow of suspicion respecting the sincerity of the elder brother even hinted at. Indeed, the father's address to him, upon which I must still further dwell, precludes all possibility of hypocrisy in his character. "The hope of the hypocrite shall perish," but the Lord of heaven and earth says to the man who transgresseth not his commandments, "All that I have is thine." "Well done, good and faithful servant, enter thou into the joy of thy Lord."

With respect to the Jews and Gentiles being figured by the two brothers, I cannot perceive the most distant ground of affinity between them. The Jews were throughout their whole course "a rebellious and stiff-necked people"-a people whose hearts no blessings could melt and soften into grateful obedience; into whose unfeeling bosoms, a series of the most astonishing miracles wrought before their eyes, and for their immediate benefit, could inspire no steady faith, no abiding confidence, in the mighty arm so manifestly stretched out for their guidance and protection. What point of resemblance can be found between this people and the elder son in the parable? Nor can I discover more between the Gentiles and his younger brother. The prodigal is supposed to have shared equally with his elder son in all the advantages which a wise and good father naturally bestows upon his children. But were the Gentiles favoured with a revelation inferior only to the Christian; and did they despise and throw it from them? And, afterwards, when in consequence of this rejection they were reduced to the lowest state of misery, repent and return to God? No shadow of likeness appears, and surely none can have been intended.

The plain and single object of the parable seems to me to be a just and beautiful display of the feelings of the Almighty Maker towards his creatures, and of his gracious dealings with them. To those who seek him early," who "keep innocency and take heed unto the thing that is right," who like

Noah, Daniel and Job," have been perfect and upright before him, he gives the glorious fiat of his full ap