Hi Pilgrim. Thanks for the welcome. Carson was referring to Warfield’s view of the “angels” in Matthew 18:10. Notice the following quote from the article you cited by Warfield: “Thus multitudes of Christians seem to be accustomed to read Matt. xviii. 10: ‘See that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you that in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven,’ quite simply as a declaration that the ‘angels of little children’ (whatever these ‘angels’ may be) hold a peculiarly exalted place in heaven.”

I don’t think the article that you cited (“Christ’s ‘Little Ones’) is the one to which Carson was referring. Carson referred to the following work by Warfield: "The Angels of God's 'Little Ones,'" Selected Shorter Writings of Benjamin B. Warfield, edited by John E. Meeter (Nutley, New Jersey: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1970), I:253-66. The article you cited comes from The Bible Student and Teacher, Vol. I (new issue), 1904, pp. 515-525. Most of the article you cited was spent advocating the position that the phrase “little ones” in Matthew 18:10 referred to the disciples, not to children in the sense of chronological age.

Notice the following quote from a web site that referenced Warfield’s “The Angels of God’s ‘Little Ones’ ”:

“Benjamin B. Warfield has argued against the notion that the ‘angels’ in these verses refer to guardian angels, contending that the phrase, ‘these little ones,’ in the Matthew passage speak not of children as such but more properly of his disciples in general and that their ‘angels’ in this context seem more appropriately to refer to these disciples' disembodied souls considered as a class. He declares that the real difficulty of explaining these passages by the aid of the notion of ‘guardian angels’ is that this notion does not in the least fit their requirements. Where should a ‘guardian angel’ be, except with his ward? That is the essential idea of a ‘guardian angel’; he is supposed to be in unbroken attendance upon the saint committed to his charge. But neither in Matt. xviii. 10, nor in Acts xii. 15 are the angels spoken of found with their wards; but distinctly elsewhere. After cogently arguing for the translation of ‘disembodied soul’ for the Greek a[ggelo", angelos, in these two passages, Warfield asserts:

‘What could so enhance the reverence with which "these little ones"...should be treated than the assurance that it is specifically their souls [as a class] which in heaven stand closest to the Father's throne? . . . Surely nothing could so heighten the sense of the real dignity that belongs to these little ones, whether the specially humble or the specially young be intended, than such a declaration.’

And he concludes:

‘There has been suggested no explanation of these two unique phrases—"the angels of these little ones" and "Peter's angel" — which has not difficulties in its way. Possibly it may be found, however, that the interpretation which sees in them designations of disembodied souls, despite the scorn with which this suggestion has ordinarily been treated, has more to say for itself and fewer difficulties to face than any other. It satisfies all the conditions of the passages themselves — which cannot be said of any of its rivals. It is rooted in a natural extension of the common meaning of the term employed. And it presupposes no conceptions which cannot be shown to have existed in circles out of which Christianity arose—which again cannot be said of its rivals. Perhaps that is as much as we should ask before we give it our preference.’ http://www.knoxseminary.org/Prospective/Faculty/KnoxPulpit/rreymond_angels.html