ship shall hold to this real inability, which the Confession makes 'utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good.' A real inability and a 'moral' inability are not causes of division, while the necessity of the work of the Holy Ghost is held by all.

"As a matter of fact, we had come to this years ago. We believe that our rapidly-increasing Missouri churches are practically organized on the 'common' section of the Declaration of 1865. We think that our Southern work is on the same basis. That is, we organize Christian churches on the old Congregational theory that the Christians of any locality should form the church of that locality. The new Kentucky churches were represented at Oberlin, and are Congregational in form, purely 'Christian' in doctrine. As to 'Old School' and 'New School,' this distinction was not at issue in the Oberlin Council; as obsolete, so far as fellowship is concerned, as it is in the Presbyterian church. The distinction was a different one; whether special Confessions of Faith should be reaffirmed as a basis of union, in such parts as distinguish them from the historic faith of the Christian church. The churches in Council decided to say, what they have been steadily doing.

"Possibly some may fear that this basis is too broad for safety. If they do, we can look at the intent of the words. 'former general Councils.' What did they consider to be the common evangelical faith? The Council of 1865 was one of the 'former General Councils.' What it says of the 'common faith' is therefore pertinent. We quote it:

With them we confess our faith in God, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, the only living and true God; in Jesus Christ, the incarnate Word, who is exalted to be our Redeemer and King; and in the Holy Comforter, who is present in the church to regenerate and sanctify the soul.

With the whole church, we confess the common sinfulness and ruin of our race, and acknowledge that it is only through the work accomplished by the life and expiatory death of Christ that believers in him are justified before God, receive the remission of sins, and through the presence and grace of the Holy Comforter, are delivered from the power of sin, and perfected in holiness.

We believe, also, in the organized and visible church, in the ministry of the Word, in the sacraments of baptism and the Lord's Supper; in the resurrection of the body, and in the final judgment, the issues of which are eternal life and everlasting punishment.

We receive these truths on the testimony of God, given through prophets and apostles, and in the life, the miracles, the death, the resurrection, of His Son, our divine Redeemer,-a testimony preserved for the church in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, which were composed by holy men as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

"For ourselves, we believe the basis is at once broad, safe, and prophetic of great good to the work of the Master. If it opens the door to all manner of crude notions, as some intimate, we fail to see it. It by no means intimates that our churches have no peculiarities. The distinction is still clear between an exhaustive statement of all our doctrinal views, and a statement of what we regard as a sufficient basis of union. As to ourselves, it does not say that the Declaration of 1865 was not a correct representation. It does not leave us without Confessions, nor as admitting a vague and indefinable sentiment of an 'Evangelical' residuum which appears after taking out all that any one objects to. The faith of the Christian church is a perfectly well-defined faith, from which heresies have been rejected. And we prefer, as a basis of union, the catholic faith, not modified by provincialism.

"It was in the line of catholicity that the Council set forth too the paper on the unity of the church, to accompany its constitution."-Congregational Quarterly, 1872.

VI. THE CREED OF 1883.

Good as the Burial Hill Confession was, its limitations were manifest. As the years went by it became increasingly evident that a new confession of faith was desirable. Few local churches felt like adopting the Burial Hill Confession with its vague allusions to the confessions of 1648 and 1680. New churches were rising, particularly in the West, and calling for brief and modern confessions of faith. The demand found voice in the Ohio Association, meeting at Wellington in May of 1879, setting forth the deficiency of previous declarations and calling upon the National Council to create "a formula that shall not be mainly a re-affirmation of former confessions, but that shall state in precise terms in our living tongue the doctrines which we hold to-day." The National Council which convened in St. Louis, November 15, 1880, appointed twenty-five commissioners to prepare a creed in accordance with this and similar demands. The Council chose the following: Pres. Julius H. Seelye, Prof. Charles M. Mead, Rev. Henry M. Dexter, Rev. Edmund K. Alden, Rev. Alexander McKenzie, Rev. James E. Johnson, Prof. George P. Fisher, Rev. George Leon Walker, Prof. William S. Karr, Prof. George T. Ladd, Rev. Samuel P. Leeds, Rev. David B. Coe, Rev. William M. Taylor, Rev. Lyman Abbott, Rev. Augustus F. Beard, Pres. William W. Patton, Pres. James H. Fairchild, Pres. Israel W. Andrews, Rev. Zachary Eddy, Prof. James T. Hyde, Rev. Edwin P. Goodwin, Rev. Alden B. Robbins, Rev. Constans L. Goodell, Rev. Richard Cordley, and Prof. George Mooar.

There is not in all the above list a mean or unworthy name; and the list as a whole is one of note both as regards the

scholarship and the high character of the men composing it. The Commission devoted itself to its task with earnestness and with a high sense of responsibility to the churches. The report was presented in 1883, and was signed by all but three of the commissioners. Rev. Dr. E. P. Goodwin, of the First Congregational Church of Chicago, declined on the ground that he had been unable to attend the meetings of the Commission, but it is probable also that he was not wholly satisfied with its results. Prof. W. S. Karr declined to sign the report because the Confession did not adequately represent his views. The third commissioner who withheld his signature was Rev. E. K. Alden, secretary of the American Board. His motives were high and worthy, but it is impossible to contemplate his attitude toward the work of the Commission and his subsequent relation to the American Board without a measure of genuine sorrow. Dr. Alden felt that the creed was wholly inadequate as an expression of the faith to be preached by missionaries of the American Board, and the time came when the divergence of his view from that of the denomination as a whole became indisputably apparent, and resulted in his retirement from his position as secretary of the American Board.

The Creed of 1883 contains twelve articles, following the general order of the articles in the historic creeds. Its statements are clear; its language is free from theological subtleties; its says what it was intended to say. It begins with no reference to earlier confessions, but stands on its own feet as a direct and comprehensive statement of doctrine. It is impossible to read it thoughtfully without increased respect for the men who wrote it and admiration for the way in which they performed their task. Its thought and language are modern without any attempt to incorporate transcient phases of current thought. It sets forth the great doctrines in high relief, and is singularly free from obscurities and trivialities. It is altogether admirable in its sincerity, its clarity and its balance.

The churches hailed this new confession with great satisfaction, and hundreds of them immediately adopted it. It was sharply criticised both for what it contained and what it omitted. It is almost impossible to understand why any one should have objected to it, as some good men did, on the ground that it was not sufficiently evangelical. Gradually the opposition died down, and its place already secure in the affections of the Congregational churches became unassailable.

The report which the Commission published was dated December 19, 1883, and with its publication, the work of the Commission ceased. It was hardly referred to in the Council of 1886, excepting possibly in terms of censure in one or two of the addresses. No official action was taken concerning it. It made its way by reason of its own inherent worth and the confidence of the churches in the men who had wrought it. And it made its way surely, in the face of adverse criticism which at this day it is difficult to understand.

But by the time people ceased objecting to the Creed of 1883, the time for a new creed had come. There was little call and less occasion for a confession to take the place of the Creed of 1883; but there was a growing demand for a confession of faith more brief and less formal, to be employed for a wide variety of uses, for which the Creed of 1883 was not entirely available. The Confession of Faith adopted by the National Council at Kansas City in 1913 came at a time when some such confession was needed. If it shall serve its purpose as long and as well as did the Creed of 1883, all who had any share in its preparation or adoption will have sufficient reason to be grateful.

The report of the Commission of 1883 contained what the Commission called a Confession of Faith, but which was a proposed form of admission of members to local churches. In that form of admission, the creedal statement was not the Creed of 1883, but the Apostles' Creed. This is an interesting fact, and shows how far the framers of the Creed of 1883 were from