trained up many sons and daughters of the Lord Almighty. The Jansenists were a people eminently devout. They not only formed, in the language of Vinet, the "Alpine heights of Catholicism," but not a few of them furnished examples of piety seldom if ever surpassed among uninspired men. Protestantism need not fear this acknowledgment, for piety has been nourished within the Catholic church by the essential truths which they hold in common, and in spite of the griev ous errors which popery has added thereto, and which ruin so many souls. Hannah More was accustomed to read " a portion of Nicole, or some other good Jansenist, almost every day." Wesley spoke of the Port Royalists in high commendation. Haweis, of the Lady Huntington school of divines, has left in his "Church History" the following testimony to their worth:

When I read Jansenius, or his disciples Pascal or Quesnel, I bow before such distinguished excellencies and confess them my brethren. Their principles are pure and evangelical, their morals formed upon the apostles and prophets, and their zeal to amend and convert blest with eminent success. Leighton, in one age," says Dr. Williams (Miscellanies), "and Zinzendorf, in another, were supposed to have enkindled their piety, and formed in part their religious character, amidst the Jansenist Catholics of France, with whom each had mingled.'

Much of our current Protestantism might, we think, learn from them, Catholics though they were, a lesson of genuine humility, of self-denying devotion to Christ, of separation from the world, of prayerfulness, of sweet Christian charity, of patience under injuries, of veneration for the Bible, and zeal in the propagation and defence of its truths. Well for us, in these days of outward bustle, could we catch something of their sweet devotional spirit, love of meditation, and earnestness in the cultivation of heart religion. Monastic piety must, indeed, have its serious defects; must want some of the features of a healthy and robust character; but what, on the other hand, shall we say of a religion which draws not its life from intimate daily communion with Christ and the Word of Truth; and is not this the true picture of very much of our current piety? Many full draughts from the Port Royal fountain might revive our drooping Christianity. Thus much

let us say in charity, and let us learn to welcome all signs of spiritual life wheresoever they appear."*

But, in the third place, our review of Jansenism, while it reveals much genuine piety as having existed within the Romish Church, far more, we fear, than at present when Jesuitism has been indorsed anew, yet proves the essential corruption of Romanism. Jansenism was not the legitimate fruit of popery. It grew up in spite of it, and when its true nature as essentially anti-papistic was discovered, it was disowned, and violently dissevered from the stock into which it had been unnaturally grafted. Rome has always persisted in saying that Jansenism is not Catholicism. We take her at her word, and thereby prove her own contrariety with Christianity. Never did Rome manifest a more vengeful spirit against the Protestant Reformation than against those who, in her own bosom, have loved and proclaimed the truth as it is in Jesus. In the melancholy history of Port Royal, we learn the natural antagonism of Rome to the doctrines of grace, to the word of God, to spiritual religion, to religious liberty. She can harbor and honor conforming infidelity and obsequious profligacy, and atheism itself, but true piety is cast forth.

In the fourth place, we learn the hopelessness of any essential improvement of Romanism. It is radically, irremediably corrupt, past all cure. And, if we rightly understand prophecy and providence, we believe it is not God's design to reform

Hannah More, writing to one of her sisters, says: "He [Dr. Johnson] reproved me with pretended sharpness, for reading Les Pensees de Pascal, or any of the Port Royal authors, alleging, that as a good Protestant, I ought to abstain from books written by Catholics. I was beginning to stand upon my defence, when he took me with both hands, and with a tear running down his cheek,Child,' said he, with the most affecting earnestness, I am heartily glad that you read pious books, by whomsoever they may be written.'

The following incident which exhibits the king's [Louis XIV.] prejudices against the Jansenists, also illustrates the general feeling of the Romish Church towards them, and its disregard of religious sincerity if there be but outward conformity. When a certain gentleman was proposed to Louis as a proper travelling companion to the Dauphin, the king, mistaking him for another person, objected to him as a Jansenist: "Sire," said his informant, "he is so far from holding grace and election, that he doubts if there be even a God." "O," returned the king, "that is another affair; I really thought he had been a Jansenist; I have not the least objection."-Memoirs of Port Royal; Tour to Alét.

it into a spiritual church, but to let it develop its inherent elements of ruin, to let it go on from bad to worse, until divine vengeance consume it. Not that many individuals may not, meanwhile, grope their way amid its gloom to heaven; not that we may not hope for numerous conversions from its ranks; but as a body it is doomed to destruction. Its tendency has ever been downward, and its present aspects promise nothing favorable.

At various periods of her history, attempts at reform have been made, but never successfully. Luther at first thought only of amending the church. He was driven into a separation from it by finding it incurably wicked. It did not wish for improvement. And hence he did what alone an honest man under his circumstances could do-he abandoned it.

The Jansenists attempted another plan. They made an honest and earnest effort to purify the Romish Church. They saw and deplored and exposed many of its corruptions; they founded convents and schools; they preached; they wrote books; they translated and circulated the Scriptures; they set an example of eminent devotion and charity, and moreover, boldly, unmasked wickedness in places high and mighty, sparing no pains, shrinking from no perils, in what they deemed the cause of truth. And at one time, the Gallican Church seemed almost ready to advance many steps towards apostolic purity. A brighter day seemed ready to dawn. But no. These devoted men and women were not fighting for the truth according to the plan of Christ. Their nominal union with Rome was a sanction of her errors. Instead of planting themselves on the Word of God alone, and coming out from Rome, shaking off the dust of their feet as a witness against her sorceries and in despair of her recovery, they hesitated, feared, and attempted a vain compromise. They appealed to Augustine, when they should have appealed only to the Bible.

And thence we derive the more general lesson, not to expend our strength in efforts to reform and revivify old and corrupt churches, like the Armenian, Greek, and others, by endeavoring to infuse into them spiritual life, and to engraft

evangelical sentiments and feelings on the dead stock of formalism; but rather to plant alongside them true churches of Christ after the apostolical pattern, and to gather into them the Lord's chosen. And let those who, within the pale of the Papal or other apostate churches, whether in our own or foreign lands, have become spiritually enlightened and love the word of God, and trust in the grace of Christ, come out from such corrupt body, lest they become partakers of its plagues. Thus only can their Christian influence be free, untrammelled and powerful.

ARTICLE. II.-PROGRESS OF BAPTIST PRINCIPLES.*

FREEDOM of Conscience, of which we have spoken, is but a means of Religion, not an end. And yet, had Baptists nothing more to show as distinctive of their body, the success of this single principle might have fulfilled their Providential mission. It might have been said, "You have destroyed 'soul tyranny,' but you have not built up Truth and Holiness." Happily the Baptists were prepared to meet this imputation by pointing to the effects of their second distinctive principle—the precise and positive complement of the first-A Converted Church Membership.

Prof. Curtis traces with a firm yet discriminating hand the progress of opinion on this point within the last hundred years, both at home and abroad. He proves that general as its reception now is among most denominations in the United States, it was, with but rare and inconsistent exceptions, held only by the Baptists a century ago. The good influence of Whitfield, the two Tennents, and Edwards, in promoting a change for the better, is duly recognized and honored, as is also that of the Methodists in later years. Thus this great Baptist principle-the most vital of their entire organization -has triumphed, and has in fact, if not in creed, been incorporated by other communions. Our author says:

A review of Prof. Curtis' work on the Progress of Baptist Principles for the last hundred years. Concluded from last No.

So wide spread, indeed, is the conviction that unconverted persons should not be communicants, that very few of them would think it right to partake, if invited. Denominations seem to be unpopular in proportion as they favor an unconverted membership. All of them, including Roman Catholics, Unitarians, and even Episcopalians, are shown by the last census to embrace not above a sixth of the whole church-going population.

The author justly regards this fact as constituting the great superiority of American over European Christianity, and cites Dr. Baird as concurring in this view. It has been worth all the prayers, struggles, and sufferings which it has cost to effect what has been accomplished. The principle is spreading also on every side, despite the efforts in other lands, where National Churches exist, to oppose it. It is sapping the basis of every Church Establishment in Europe. It is diffused by evangelical missions in the four quarters of the globe. Sacramentalism and Infant Baptism only feebly resist it in the United States; but these are evidently doomed to fall before it. "Evangelical truth, so far as it prevails, leads the people to become," as Dr. Nevin and Dr. Bushnell both show, "Baptists in theory, even where they neglect to become so in practice," and honest men will soon reduce theory to practice. Professor Curtis might have added that a converted membership will insure a converted ministry—a principle equally sacred and dear to Baptists.

The third principle, conceded to Baptists, is-Sacraments inoperative without Choice and Faith. A hundred years ago there were few Pedobaptists probably who did not suppose that baptism, or what was so called, rendered an infant more safe. This opinion is now condemned as superstitious, even in Europe, by such men as Coleridge and Bunsen, the latter of whom distinctly says, "it must be put down forever." Prof. Curtis, while quoting this opinion, expresses a doubt whether it can be put down, so long as infant baptism is retained-a doubt which will be shared by millions. Again, to refuse unconverted persons the Lord's Supper, and yet admit them to the ordinance of baptism, is so palpable an inconsistency, that no theory yet devised by the wit of man can reconcile or conceal it; and as many as have attempted it, from Jonathan Mitchell, of Cambridge, in 1662, to Dr. McClintock, of New York, in 1855, though men of acknow