At eighteen he finished his academic course, and returned home. His uncle Anthony, Marquis de Fénélon, an able statesman, invited him to Paris, where the young Abbé, only nineteen years old, preached several times with extraordinary acceptance. His prudent uncle, perceiving the temptation to which the youth was thus exposed, induced him to enter St. Sulpice, a seminary for edueating priests, where he earnestly and devoutly performed the duties assigned him by the superior, the Abbé Trouson, for five years. In his 24th year he was consecrated priest. Thenceforth he laboured with humble zeal in the parish of St. Sulpice. From this post, the Archbishop of Paris called him to the office of superior of the Nouvelles Catholiques, a society of young women of rank who devoted themselves to the instruction of the daughters of Protestants in Roman Catholic doctrines. He was admirably adapted for this service, and made many proselytes. The results of his experience here he published in his treatise, De l'Education des Filles, in which he ably develops the principles, &c., of a Christian education. During this period, Fénelon sought to improve his scientific attainments by making Bossuet's acquaintance. Though much younger than Bossuet, they became warm friends. Fénélon's activity as superior attracted notice, his catechetical lectures were largely attended, and his eloquence filled his hearers with admiration. Louis XIV. resolved to use his talents for the accomplishment of his scheme of uniting France in one faith. He offered him the mission of converting the Reformed of Poitou, with the aid of a military corps. Fénélon accepted the mission, but only on condition that he should go without the soldiers; he desired no other arms but the apostolic weapons, the sword of the Spirit, and the power of grace. This point was yielded; Fénélon, with four attendants, among whom was Fleury, went to Poitou, laboured indefatigably, though with mildness, and won the sincere respect of the Reformed, if he did not succeed in inducing many to renounce their faith.

Such is the account given of the early life of Fénélon.* His missionary labours as they are called-by which we are to understand his endeavours to reclaim Protestants, and restore them to the Church of Rome-are treated as exceptional, and as not partaking of the bigotry and intolerance which are characteristic of Romanism. Some new light has been thrown on this period of Fénélon's ministry, and we intend to give the result in a translation, somewhat abridged, of an interesting essay which has lately appeared in L'Esperance, a valuable French periodical.

One particular trait of Fénélon's character was his love of missionary activity, which was developed at the early age of sixteen, while he was a pupil at the school of St. Sulpice in Paris. This community maintained some missionaries in Upper Canada, on the island of Montréal; and it was to that spot that the thoughts of the young scholar were first turned, in the year 1667. So much did this idea occupy his mind, that he spoke seriously on the subject to his superiors, and with their consent made a journey to his uncle, the Bishop of Sarlat, expressly to ask for his approval of the project; but the bishop would not hear of it, fearing the influence which the cold northern climate might have on the delicate health of his nephew. Fénélon returned to finish his studies, and then took orders. He could not give up the idea of becoming a missionary, and turned his thoughts towards Greece and the Levant. His love for classic antiquity, added to his religious zeal, produced in him a perfect enthusiasm.

"The whole of Greece," he says, "is open to me; the Sultan has withdrawn in fear; already the Peleponnesus breathes freely, and the Church of Corinth begins to flourish again; and there the voice of the apostle shall make itself heard once more. I feel myself transported to those beautiful places, and amongst those precious ruins, there to revive, amidst the most curious monuments, the very spirit of antiquity. I search for the Areopagus,

This outline is taken from Herzog's Encyclopedia by Bomberger.

where Saint Paul announced the unknown God to the sages of the world. But the profane comes after the sacred, and I do not disdain to descend to the Piræus where Socrates formed the plan of his republic. I mount to the double summit of the Parnassus; I gather the laurels of Delphos, and I taste the delights of Tempé. When will the blood of the Turks be mingled with that of the Persians on the plains of Marathon, that the whole of Greece may be given up to religion, philosophy, and the fine arts, who regard it as their country? I will not forget thee, O island! consecrated by the visions of the beloved disciple. Oh, happy Patmos! I will go and kiss the footsteps of the apostle on thy soil, and believe that I see the heavens opened! There shall I feel myself seized with indignation against the false prophet, who professed to declare the oracles of Truth, and I will bless the All-powerful who, far from destroying the Church like Babylon, chains the lion, and renders her victorious. I already see schism abolished, the east and the west united, and Asia, who is sighing to the banks of the Euphrates, seeing the return of day after so long a night; the earth sanctified by the steps of the Saviour, and watered by His blood, delivered from those who profane it, and re-clothed with a new glory! Finally, the children of Abraham, scattered over the surface of the whole earth, and more numerous than the stars of the firmament, gathered together from the four winds of heaven, shall come in crowds, and recognise the Christ whom they have pierced, and show to the end of time a resurrection."

structed in the Romish religion, which the greater number of them embraced against their will. Bossuet, to whom the Abbé Fénélon was after some time introduced, and who appreciated his character and talents, proposed to the king to engage him in the missions amongst the newly converted. The king expressed a desire to see him; Fénélon told him flatly that he would not associate himself with an armed force. The king doubtless concluded from this that he had to do with a young man of a fanciful disposition, and bade him observe that he must take measures to preserve himself from danger; the Protestants were ready to fall upon every priest who was sent amongst them. The troops, in fact, were still in the country which Fénélon was about to visit. They were said to be necessary to prevent the emigration of Protestants, a measure which Fénélon was far from opposing, as we shall presently see. It was in the month of November or December of the year 1685,-some months after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes,-that Fénélon entered upon his new field of activity.

As there was no distinction between civil and religious society, Fénélon had one of the king's ministers as his superior. He attended to his commands with perfect submission, to him he addressed his reports, and proposed the measures to be taken in the interest of the mission. This person was the Marquis of Seignelay, Secretary of State, attached to the ministry of the department of Poitou. He was, to all appearance, less violent than many others, and willing to listen to reasonable proposals, but his character was rather debauched; for which he afterwards felt remorse, and Fénélon then became his spiritual adviser, as is proved by the letters which he afterwards wrote to him. But we are here most interested in the letters which he addressed to him, while he was a missionary, for they are the principal source from which we have drawn this narration of facts. The original letters were found in the possession of the Count of Séze, a peer of France, when Cardinal Bausset wrote the bio

In a large town or city, the necessities are different. There must be a plurality of congregations. But need there be a plurality of "interests?" That conventional phrase amongst us, which I exceedingly dislike, too often conveys a selfish meaning, as true as it is objectionable. The question arises whether these congregations ought to be grouped into one church, having a community of interest and a plurality of pastors, and occasionally meeting all together, forming in itself a united and complete ecclesiastical body, quite distinct from other ecclesiastical bodies in other towns, and therefore strictly Independent (using that epithet as distinguished from Presbyterian); or whether each of these congregations, remaining as large as possible, should constitute a separate and isolated organization. It is interesting to notice how the fathers of modern Congregationalism regarded such matters. In the Savoy Declaration they say, "For the avoiding of differences which may otherwise arise, for the greater solemnity in the celebration of the ordinances of Christ, and the opening a way for the larger usefulness of the gifts and graces of the Holy Ghost, saints living in one city or town, or within such distances as that they may conveniently assemble for divine worship, ought rather to join in one church, for their mutual strengthening and edification, than to set up many distinct societies." Nothing is more remarkable, in the early history of our denomination, than the tenacity with. which Congregationalists in the same

By most of you it will be conceded that the primitive rule was one church in a city; and with that rule there seems coupled another--a whole church in one place. When Christians greatly multiply, then comes up the problem, since the observance of both rules in every case has become impossible, which rule is to take the lead? Is the oneness of the body or the oneness of the locality most important? Is unity of place to have precedence over union of fellowship and action? A learned Congregationalist of the last century-a sort of constitutional lawyer on such points-the Rev. Thomas Harmer of Wattisfield, went so far, in commenting upon the Savoy rule already quoted, as to question whether, in his day, there ought to have been in the metropolis more than one Independent church for the City, one for Westminster, one for Southwark, and one for each of the Tower Hamlets. He counted the number which then existed a deviation from scriptural Congregationalism.*

Dr. Davidson, in his Congregational Lecture, expounding the nature of Scripture precedents, maintains that "we are wrong in splitting up what ought to be one church-the company of believers in modern towns-into several churches, each with its own pastor, which in their independent individuality are patches and shreds, often incapable of a right self-government, because they have lost sight of the unity and kind of government existing in the earliest churches. By so doing, they have thrown away much of their strength; and what is more, their views have been narrowed; each man thinking, moving, and acting in the midst of his little society, becomes contracted in his ideas of men and things. It is very difficult for him to avoid being sectarian, selfish, and unsocial in spirit, because his sphere is so narrow. Comprehensive and liberal views of Christianity are not readily nurtured in the small canton which the preacher looks on as peculiarly his own."

Harmer's "Miscellaneous Works," p. 154.