other such ornaments that they exhibit. This may arise from the want of time and money required for such things. The priests, too, dress like other citizens when not engaged in their official duties. Nor will it escape a stranger from any part of Roman Catholic Europe, that processions and religious services in the streets are hardly ever seen in the United States.

By the rapid multiplication of their priests in the United States the Roman Catholics have, no doubt, checked those conversions from their Church to Protestantism which were frequent in former times. Bishop England, in one of his letters to the Propaganda, stated, a few years ago, that "the Church" had lost no fewer than fifty thousand of her legitimate children in his diocese by such conversions, for want of shepherds to look after them.

But whatever may be the fact in regard to the increase of the Roman Catholics in the United States, or whatever may be the zeal and activity of the Protestants to prevent that increase, there is no wellinformed American who does not rejoice in the perfect religious liberty which exists for all; nor is there wanting a good degree of kindness and social intercourse among men of all religious opinions; while as to the government, it fulfills the declaration of the Carthaginian queen:

"Tros Tyriusque mihi nullo discrimine agetur.”

Of all forms of error in the United States, Romanism is by far the most formidable, because of the number of its adherents, the organization, wealth, influence, and worldly and unscrupulous policy of its hierarchy. That Romanism is increasing in the United States can not be denied; but that increase is not from conversion, but from the natural increase of the population on the one hand, and from the immigration of Roman Catholics from Europe on the other. The Roman Catholic population may be reckoned at three millions or three millions two hundred and fifty thousand; but nothing very definite can be asserted, for high authorities among the Romanists themselves vary in their estimates from two to four millions. Although Archbishop Hughes and some of the other members of the hierarchy often boast of the progress of their Church in the United States, it is well known that some others of that hierarchy make very remarkable admissions when writing to their friends in Ireland-admissions which they have not had the prudence to conceal. These admissions are to the effect that large numbers of the young men, especially in the great cities and in the rural districts, are quitting the Church of their fathers, sometimes to embrace Protestantism, and still oftener, at least for a time, to fall into infidelity. There is a

vast amount of truth in all this. Father Mullen, an Irish priest, who visited the country extensively three or four years ago, believed and published that this awful "falling away," as he termed it, had cost Rome the loss of two millions of her children. What he means is, that Rome now has two millions less of followers in the United States than she would have had if this declension did not exist. But this is an over-estimate. Still there can be no doubt that her loss has been immense from this source. The freedom of the press in the United States, the freedom of speech, the constant contact with Protestants to which young Romanists are exposed, the manifest superiority of the Protestant population in intelligence, enterprise, wealth, and general influence, all conspire to make Roman Catholic young men inquire into the nature and claims of the two systems; and inquiry leads to great results. The infidelity into which they often fall is not likely to be lasting where favorable opportunities exist for learning the truth. Thanks be to God, much is now doing by the Protestants, in a kindly way, to cause the truth to reach the minds of their Roman Catholic fellow-citizens.

Two or three things have occurred to arouse the American people in relation to Rome and her movements. 1. The simultaneous efforts which have been of late made by her hierarchy in many of the States to obtain a portion of the funds destined to the support of public schools, and employ them for the support of their own sectarian schools, in which neither the Sacred Scriptures, nor any portions of them, are read, but avowedly sectarian instruction is given; and this, not so much for the benefit of their own children, as to prosecute effectually the work of proselyting the children of Protestants. This movement has been most signally defeated in all quarters. 2. The efforts making by the hierarchy to bring all the property of the Roman Catholic Church-church edifices especially, priests' houses, cemeteries, schools, colleges, hospitals, etc., into the possession of the bishops. It is but a few years since this movement, in which Archbishop Hughes has been very prominent, commenced; and already some of their bishops are possessors of an immense amount of property. But this movement has awakened an extended and triumphant opposition; and already several States have enacted laws which require that all Church property shall be held by lay-trustees appointed by each congregation, and accountable to them for the proper use of it; the great States of New York and Pennsylvania taking the lead. This is a most important step; and we can not doubt that similar laws will be enacted in all our States. 3. The disposition, long well known, of some of the leaders of the great political parties, to court the Romanists for their votes at the elections, and the willingness of

the hierarchy to be regarded as a "great power in the State," and as, in fact, holding the "balance of power," as has been often saidthis obsequious meanness on the one hand, and unbounded arrogance on the other, have led to the formation of a political party called the "American Party," which has, for the time being, exerted a powerful influence on our political institutions. All this has been eminently injurious to the interests and pretensions of the Roman Catholic Church among us.

CHAPTER III.

UNITARIANISM.

To understand the history of Unitarianism in New England, the reader must have a clear idea of the leading ecclesiastical usages of the Puritans, and of the principles on which they were founded.

The Puritans held that all men are by nature destitute of true piety; that they naturally grow up in the practice of sin; and that no one becomes religious except by a change in his habits of thought, feeling, and conduct, which they ascribed to the special operation of the Holy Spirit as its supernatural cause. They believed that the truly pious are ordinarly conscious of this change in the action of their own minds when it takes place, and are able to describe it, though they may not then know that the change of which they are conscious is regeneration. In some cases, they admitted, the man is not aware of any change at the time of his conversion; yet he will be conscious of exercises afterward, such as no unregenerate man ever has, and he can describe them. Some may be regenerated in infancy, which it is lawful for us to hope is the case with all who die before they are old enough to profit by the external means of grace. If any of them live to maturity, they will not be able to remember the time of their change, but they will be conscious of sensible love to God and holiness, penitence for sin, and other pious exercises, and can give an account of them. They believed, therefore, that every converted person who has arrived at the age of discretion, has a religious "experience" which he can tell, and by hearing which other pious persons may judge of his piety. The evidence thus afforded, however, was to be compared with his conduct in all the relations of life, and if this also was "such as becometh saints," he was to be accounted a pious man.

A church they held to be "a company of faithful persons," that is, persons who have saving faith, regenerate persons, agreeing and consenting "to meet constantly together in one congregation for the public worship of God and their mutual edification; which real agreement and consent they do express by their constant practice in coming together for the worship of God, and by their religious subjection," that is, by subjecting themselves voluntarily, from religious motives, "to the ordinances of God therein."*

To become a member of a church, according to these principles, a person must voluntarily apply for admission. But if the admission were open to all applicants, bad men would come in, who neither knew their duty, nor were willing to perform it. With such members, Congregationalism would not be a safe system of Church government. The applicant must, therefore, furnish evidence of his fitness for membership. He must give an account of his religious experience. This being satisfactory, he must be "propounded;" that is, his application for membership must be announced from the pulpit, and his admission must be deferred for a given time, that all the members might have opportunity to acquaint themselves with his life and conversation. These being found such as the Gospel requires, he was allowed to become a member, by publicly entering into covenant with the Church and with God.

It must be particularly observed, that the burden of proof rested on the applicant. Every man, the Puritans held, is born in sin; and if no evidence of a change appears, the presumption is, that he is still in his sins. They regarded and treated all in whom no evidence of regeneration appeared as unregenerated; as persons who must yet be converted or finally perish.

Throughout Christendom, in that age, neither Jews, Turks, pagans, infidels, nor excommunicated persons could enjoy the full privileges of citizenship. These privileges belonged only to persons who were in communion with the churches established by law. The same rule was adopted in New England. None but members of the churches could hold offices or vote at elections. Here, however, it operated as it did nowhere else. As the churches contained only those who were, in the judgment of charity, regenerate persons, a large portion of the people, among whom were many persons of intelligence, of good moral character, and orthodox in their creed, were excluded from valuable civil privileges.

The principles on which this system was founded, the Puritans brought with them from England; but the system was first brought to maturity here; and New England Congregationalists, when on * Cambridge Platform, 1648, chap. iv., sec. 4.

visits to their fatherland, did much toward giving its form and character to the Congregationalism that afterward prevailed there. The system appears to have been adopted in 1648 with a good degree of unanimity; but as the number of unconverted adults increased, both by immigration and by the growing up of children without piety, there was an increasing dissatisfaction with it. By the year 1662, such a change of opinions had been wrought that what was called the "half-way covenant" was introduced, by a recommendation of a General Synod. According to this new system, persons baptized in infancy were to be considered members of the church to which their parents belonged; though they were not to be admitted to the Lord's table without evidence of regeneration. Such persons, on arriving at maturity, "understanding the doctrine of faith, and publicly professing their assent thereto, not scandalous in life, and solemnly owning the covenant before the church, wherein they give up themselves and their children to the Lord, and subject themselves to the government of Christ in the church," had a right to Baptism for their children. This was an important change. It relieved the applicant for church membership from the necessity of furnishing evidence of his piety, and obliged the church, if it would exclude him, to prove that he was heretical in his opinions or scandalous in his life. This change was strenuously opposed; and as the synod had only advisory power, and many churches disapproved its decisions, it never became universal.

One step more remained to be taken. In 1704, "the venerable Stoddard," of Northampton, avowed his belief that unregenerate persons ought to partake of the Lord's Supper; and in 1708, he published a sermon in defence of that doctrine. He maintained that the Lord's Supper is a means of regeneration, and that unrenewed men, regarding themselves, and being regarded by the Church as such, ought to partake of it as a means of procuring that desirable change in their own hearts. One of his arguments was, that it is impossible to distinguish the regenerate from the unregenerate, so as to admit the former and exclude the latter. After some controversy, this doctrine gained an extensive prevalence among the churches which had adopted the "half-way covenant" system. Among these churches, the principles and rules of admission were now completely reversed. The church was now obliged to convict the applicant of a scandalous life, or of heresy, or admit him to full communion; and one reason for it was, the supposed impossibility of judging whether he was regenerate or not.

Stoddard was a decided Calvinist; but his system fostered the growth of Arminianism. It taught the impenitent that they had