ARTICLE II.

DENOMINATIONAL HISTORIES.

1. Contributions to the Ecclesiastical History of the United States. Vol. I. The Episcopal Church in VirginiaVol. II. In Maryland. By F. L. HAWKS, D. D. Harpers.

2. History of the Friends. By WM. R. WAGSTAFF, M. D. Wiley & Putnam.

3. The Baptist, The Church, [Episcopal,] The Congregational, The Methodist, and The Unitarian Almanacs, for the year 1848.

4. Benedict's History of the Baptists. CоLEY & CO. N. York. 1848.

HE who shall gird himself for the worthy endeavor of writing the full history of our country in an impartial, comprehensive, and philosophical manner, will be entitled to a large share of public approbation. Of course, such a writer would not leave out of regard the highest, the spiritual interests of men. But obviously "the history of religion in America," while more important and influential than in the annals of almost any other people, presents some points of unusual difficulty. In other countries where Protestantism prevails, there is usually an established church; and if any others are at all tolerated, the whole religious history is embraced in the well defined ranks of the establishment and the dissenters. Into however many classes these last may be subdivided, their minor shades of difference comparatively blend into one hue, as contrasted with the state religion. And this aspect of distinction generally furnishes the artistic line, the prominent angle from which the lights and shades diverge in giving completeness to the whole picture. Here, however, we have no such distinction. In several of the older states there was an established form of religion, a state church, at the original settlement, and which for a considerable

VOL. XIII.NO. L.

15*

period afterwards gave peculiar character to the religious history of those states. But one after another all of them have at last repudiated such establishments. Our thirty United States have become homogeneous in this feature of their Constitutions; all have entirely eschewed the evil, as it is here regarded, of any such union of church and state as should set up one form of religious worship or church polity, as having any superior claim, or greater sacredness than another. All, so far as human laws are concerned, stand on a common level, and men of every persuasion enjoy most perfect liberty of conscience :-not like the perversions of the charter of France, witnessed under the late dynasty,-liberty of worship, regulated, licensed, controlled and constantly interfered with by courts of law, but that liberty which is the soul's birthright, above all forms of human legislation, "freedom to worship God."

In the actual enjoyment of such unrestrained freedom, it is by no means strange that one of the first manifestations should be an unwise and injurious license. Either the love of novelty, or some more worthy motive, has given an almost endless variety of type and form and hue to our religious development. Our religious history, if truthfully portrayed, will indeed be like Joseph's coat of many colors.

With all the difficulty of the task, there is, however, not a little which is healthfully stimulating and attractive in the enterprise of compiling such a history. The mutual relations, the affinities and repulsions of the several sects, the practicability of ranging them in groups, with regard to some important principle of classification found in their sentiments or practice; and especially the harmony or incongruity of these different forms of church polity, considered in relation to the free, democratic institutions of civil government under which we live,-will all present topics prolific of suggestive interest, to one capable of rightly appreciating them.

Such a general history of our religious character as we have hinted at, embracing all its diversified manifestations, cannot be immediately expected. The ample and veritable materials for it must first be secured, arranged and digested. Then too, in order to give the proper degree of impartiality, and a right relative position in regard

to all the denominations to be described, the writer should be removed to a greater distance from the objects of his delineation. It would be requiring too much of frail, erring human nature to expect the requisite impartiality in recording the scenes and acts where its personal feelings and judgments have been greatly moved by an actual and recent participation. Moreover the experiment has not yet been thoroughly tried, the principles and practices of the different sects have as yet but barely sown their seed in this broad field, and patiently must we wait its ripening maturity, ere we undertake to gather and count up the harvest.

But while such reasons forbid the hope of at once securing a general history of religion in our country, written with a proper regard to all these mutual and permanent relations; the preparation of the requisite materials, the preservation and embodyment of whatever will be essential to the future annalist in recording the origin, progress and results of at least all the larger and more important sects, becomes a matter of obvious duty for the passing generation. In this view of the subject we are happy to see the laudable endeavors now making by nearly all these denominations, to glean up the scattered materials of their own histories. Very likely each one of them may somewhat over-estimate their own relative importance and intrinsic worth. But the proper adjustment of the conflicting claims thus set up, must wait for the ordeal of time, and the candid verdict of some impartial umpire. Such an arbiter, if competent to hold the scales with an even hand, will know how to make the proper allowances and deductions from the overweening complacency of those who have told their own story; and in adjusting antagonistic statements, criminations and claims, will be all the more sure to reach the righteous award, after a full hearing of what each one can advance in his own behalf.

We have just been examining the several works named at the head of this article, with some such reference as is above indicated; and may be permitted, in this connection, to offer a few suggestions upon each of them, and the denominations which they represent, before giving to the last one, which has more special claims on us, the full consideration which its importance and relative interest demands. Gladly would we strive, for the moment,

to carry ourselves forward a century, and look at these works as the future impartial compiler of permanent history will probably regard them. May we not hope, also, that what we write will be regarded by our readers with the like impartial spirit?

The volumes of Rev. Dr. Hawks are eminently respectable in every view. One of the first thoughts which strikes the mind on their examination, is the modesty of their pretensions. Though composed in a scholar-like and somewhat elaborate manner, very ingeniously weaving into a well-arranged narrative all the important facts and incidents connected with the subject,-and not offering us the medley group of materials which he had collected in their undigested state,-the author still calls his production only "Contributions to the Ecclesiastical History," "a narrative of events connected with the rise and progress of the Episcopal church." Such rare forbearance of an assuming claim is at once a commendation of no ambiguous character, and can scarce fail to prepossess the reader favorably. Then, though the chronicler of the most assuming and exclusive branch of the family of Christ in this country-the Romanists excepted -he writes always without arrogance, and with evident consciousness that others have claims and rights as well as his favorites. Beautifully and truthfully too, we think, he declares in his preface, that he has uniformly spoken of other religious denominations with respect; and proceeds to assign this good reason for it,-that the love of his own religious system does not impose on him the necessity of hating either the persons or the creeds of others. He would rather burn his book-with characteristic ardor he avers-than wilfully inflict a wanton injury upon the personal feelings of any sincere Christian.

This is emphatically the spirit in which such a service should be performed. It cannot fail to conciliate esteem, and disarm the captiousness of all but inveterate prejudice. Another feature closely allied to this last, is the unscrupulous fidelity with which he condemns the wrong conduct, the untenable positions, and the unlovely spirit of his own church. His wish, he tells us, has been to give the truth, as far as he could discover it; and if in doing this, a blow fell, it mattered but little to him where it alighted. In a somewhat critical perusal of his volume

on Virginia, we have found but slight departures or fallings off from these high and worthy aims. Where he evinces some warmth of displacency towards dissenters from his church in Virginia, and especially the Baptists, for their steady perseverance in the endeavor, not only to wrest from Episcopalians their exclusive and persecuting religious state establishment, but also, at a subsequent period, to reclaim for the public use and benefit, such pecuniary and landed endowment, as this same public had been induced to vote for the maintenance of Episcopal clergymen, there is certainly a little leaning from the uprightness of the author's usual position. For surely it was but equitable that his church, now reduced by their own faultiness, as he concedes, to a very small minority, should be put on the same footing of voluntary support with all other denominations. We doubt not, too, that the more zealous and spiritual-minded among the Presbyterians and Baptists regarded the residence in the midst of their several communities of such priests as were chiefly lured to remain by the extensive glebes which they occupied, as a disgraceful nuisance. The state, while yet a colony, had introduced that nuisance, and it was but reasonable they should be asked to abate and even to remove it. This question of permanent endowments from the state, to a religious establishment, after the diffusion of clearer light and a worthier appreciation of the selfsustaining power of religion, best to secure its diffusion, its purity and perpetuity, without entangling alliance with the secular government, is confessedly an important one. Events may soon transpire, in Great Britain, if not in other countries, which will bring up for review this aspect of the case--to whom do the rich governmental endowments made to the church, on the conviction that benefices to it from the state were necessary for the former, and the right of the latter to bestow-to whom do these of right belong, when a clear conviction is entertained, that neither this necessity nor obligation existed?

The progress of truth and the full development of equity, we have no doubt, will ultimately establish the principle that such grants having been made under a double mistake, must be subject to reclamation by the state, and of course their devotement to any legitimate. object in which the public have an equal interest, will be