neglect, of course the tendencies which prevented any effort for the Presbyterial organization of the churches were confirmed. There were none trained to discharge the important duties of lay members of ecclesiastical bodies. The materials were wanting for a proper representation of the churches. The relation of elders to the general subject of discipline and the oversight of the churches by Presbyteries and Synods was such that as the office of elder fell into disuse, it carried with it some of the advantages which might otherwise have been possessed in order to a normal ecclesiastical development.

The result is seen to-day in the condition of the Congregational system, with the many defects which its most sagacious members clearly perceive, and which its warmest friends will not venture to deny. It can scarcely be doubted that now-disenthralled from the influence of the Theocracy, and aroused from the stupor of spiritual decay; possessing, more than ever before, the sense of a common interest, and the conviction that it must conjoin its forces for the work of Christian aggression ;-strenuous efforts will be put forth to perfect it for its work and remove its defects. This is absolutely necessary, if it is to be an homogeneous or aggressive body. Common aims must lead to new efforts of combination, and common efforts must induce more effective organization. It is easy to see in Triennial, the germ of Annual Conventions, and in the adoption of the principle of elected representatives, the acknowledgment of the need of authoritative utterance. Even Unitarianism is awaking to the sense of this need, and speaks of "Congregationalism, the association of individuals into a free church," as implying and also requiring "for complete efficiency, an association of churches in some general organization." It demands "a representative

1

t

น

ex

I

1

body," to "control the general interests by regularly elected delegates."*

It is true that doctrinal difficulties may operate to prevent a representative union of the Congregational churches. A lingering jealousy of ecclesiastical supervision-though growing more obsolete with each passing year-may retard its realization. But none the less true is it, that in spite of all disclaimers, the natural tendency of an aggressive Congregationalism, forced to look after common interests and institutions, is ever toward a more united and compact organization. Protesting against principles which imply this, it is continually moving toward their adoption; and if only a more perfect moral unity could be attained, we might expect to see in connection with it, an ecclesiastical development which for more than two centuries has been arrested by the influence of the New England Theocracy and kindred causes.

* Rev. Wm. T. Clarke, before the Unitarian Autumnal Convention at Salem, 1858.

ARTICLE IV.

Inquiries and Suggestions in Regard to the Foundation of Faith in the Word of God. By ALBERT BARNES. Philadelphia: Parry & McMillan, 1859.

FAITH in the word of God is of prime importance to every mortal. Man's aspirations after immortality cannot be satisfied, nor his apprehensions of the unknown future allayed, without the cheering revelations of the inspired volume. But of what avail this divine Oracle unless it be consulted, and unless confidence be reposed in the infallibility of its responses? Without this faith, the revelation will be of no advantage-without this, we are in the same bewilderment and uncertainty, in regard to our highest interests, as the heathen who have no revelation. We know not, in a moral point of view, what we are, or where we are, or what our destination. We are navigating the ocean of life without chart or compass, and tossed about with every wind of doctrine. Strange that a mortal whose knowledge is so limited and imperfect, and whose pathway is beset with innumerable dangers, should refuse to bow his intellect to the infallible guidance of the sacred record! Yet many are guilty of this folly. They exalt their own wisdom above the wisdom of God, and wander in the darkness of their own creation, which casts a deeper and more portentous gloom over their future.

Many, however, who discard the Bible as a divine revelation, protest against the application of this charge of irreverence to them. They profess to venerate God, and yet listen with reverence alone to the teachings of nature and of their rational and moral instincts. These, say they,

are our sacred book, our infallible teachers, whose instructions are clear and explicit. Here are no ambiguities, nothing to confound reason, or shock the moral sense, and by obedience to such authority we rise higher and higher in spiritual attainments, and in faith in an infinite God, and a reverential awe of his supreme Majesty. Such are the professions of some who reject with disdain a written revelation. They say with what impartiality we may question-We have examined the credentials of this book, and find them inadequate to substantiate its high claims. But when the theist rejects this volume, that has withstood the multifarious assaults of ages, and won the confidence of the wise and good of the most enlightened nations, and which is making wide-spread conquests throughout the world, may we not rightfully demand of him to furnish his infallible standard, and to submit its credentials for examination? Where is this wonderful book to be found-where the evidence of its sufficiency and infallibility-where the proof of its harmonious teachings, or of the confidence reposed in it by its avowed advocates? Till the fragmentary revelations floating in the reason or fancy of these latter-day prophets are collated, and placed in one volume, and its canonical authority determined by a world's theistical convention, and published with its imprimatur, we need hardly concern ourselves about this pretended revelation. When these reasonable demands are met, we will candidly examine its claims to our confidence and reverence; and if it present the same kind of credentials as the Bible, and stand the tests to which the word of God has been subjected for ages, we will embrace it as a revelation from heaven.

But we have no expectation that the future will help the rejecters of revelation, any more than the past. Many of them are looking with longings, and some with

confidence, but alas, in the wrong direction, to "that one far off divine event to which the whole creation moves," even to "the happier and holier future of the race;" while others, again, having the same yearnings after "a glorious future," muse on the subject with less confidence. "Whether," say these, "some form of Christianity is to guide the coming generations of men, as most think; whether the hope which a few high intellects among us still cherish of a transcendental method of evolving truth is yet to be realized; whether, as others say, we must rest content with the dim gleams of a remoter world to which poets and mystics refer us, learning a wise self-limitation, and finding a childlike satisfaction in the duty and enjoyments which human relations and natural developments suggest, we presume not to determine."* The Rev. Albert Barnes, in the volume placed at the head of this Article, with a triumphant faith in the celestial origin of the Scriptures, challenges philosophy and science to proceed with their investigations of the past and the future—to explore the hidden laws and forces of the intellectual and material worlds, for they can make no discoveries of any truths or facts that will not ultimately do homage to divine revelation. This is his eloquent language:

From the nature of the case, and from the results of all the progress that man has made thus far in science, the friend of the Bible may and should believe that all the disclosures yet to be made in science will be in accordance with the teachings of that book. As the teachings of the Bible commend themselves to our reason; to the instincts of our nature; to all just conceptions of right and wrong; to the eternal doctrines of truth; to all our wants, and to all our hopes-as they accord with what science has disclosed thus far, and as the results have shown that there may be just confidence in the Bible, so far as the knowledge of man has gone, the friend of the Bible is justified in supposing that it will

*Westminster Review, October, 1858.