of ill-advised changes, while at the same time not refusing to make any legitimate alterations of the justness of which we are well advised; to beware of trusting to so-called force, while at the same time excluding our minds from the force of rational considerations; to beware of refusing to minorities the fullest opportunity to make obvious the reasonableness of their views; and, above all, to beware of using in the things of Christ's kingdom that dangerous and despicable indirection. which belongs, indeed, to the chicanery of politics, but which is unworthy and forbidden for followers of our Lord.

ever.

And what, we will inquire as the last topic of this Course of Lectures, what is the outlook for Congregationalism? To play the part of prophet in the predictive function of the prophetic office should surely be the last role of all. As to the power of any human judgment to foresee the details of the future of our church polity, or to provide beforehand for the exigencies which will surely arise, we have no confidence whatThis polity freely admits of changes in its rules and practices, if such changes do not contravene its fundamental principles, and can be made serviceable to a real advancement of its legitimate ends. We may not boast of its present development, that it is, like the crowing of Chaucer's chaunteclere, so fine "it might not ben amended." But we can expect but little from changes in form which are not prompted and filled by a larger measure of the spirit of Christ. If the demand for uniformity pushes on until it detrudes charity, and evokes that old enemy of unity which is the spirit of schism, the compacter system of church order which results will itself break into new fragments, and the history of church government will repeat itself again.

We may possibly come to have a new creed, which will be, in fact, regarded by the churches of the future as the Westminster and Savoy Confessions were by the churches of two centuries since. If this result could come about, it would, perhaps, be well. But if the effort for creed and catechism result in the semblance of uniformity where real unity of belief does not exist, or in the division of churches upon the old ground of conformity and nonconformity to a written symbol, then, too, the means designed to secure a greater unity will prove to be only the instrument of schism. The student of the history of the Church cannot forget what her teachings upon this point have been. The influence of a variety of creeds, if they are developed in the unity of one essential faith, and of one pervading atmosphere of fraternal love, is not toward the fostering of either infidelity or schism. It is not minute mental analysis, resulting in differing phases of religious thought and of expression to that thought, which divides the church of Christ. The influence of variety may rather be, and indeed normally is, toward the quickening and stimulating of minds in the contemplation of religious truth. The benefit of this process of analysis can no more be gained by the individual or the particular church, without self-participation, than food can be assimilated by one person which has been eaten by another. And, furthermore, it is just this complex and vast process, in which many thinkers participate, and to which they contribute varied elements, that has brought into being the great creeds of Christendom. It is not within the power of each thinker, or of every age in the church, to produce a great historic creed. The nobler Declarations of Faith were not merely manufactured to order on demand. Myriads of indi

vidual minds and hearts have been drawn upon to furnish material and form for that product which is a symbol, sign, and flag, to a great division of the Church of Jesus Christ. The life-blood of the genuine creed is expressed by the strong arm of Providence, and generally under the pressure of great persecution or other weighty necessities.

We may possibly have in the near future another era of systematizing Christian truth: this era may possibly result in the production of one or more great creeds. But, whenever the truly great creed shall appear, it will be no product of merely human industry, a somewhat of merchantable sort, a coin with which to buy and sell the reputation for orthodoxy. And meanwhile we may perhaps most safely content ourselves in the imitation of our forefathers, who, when they found themselves afflicted with moral degeneracy or doctrinal unsoundness, sometimes renewed publicly, not their creed, but their covenant with one another and with God.

Again we may possibly come, through the thrift of the National Council, or otherwise, to have a more visibly compact and centralized form of church government: we may possibly come to have this without violating the principles of Christ's exclusive rulership, of the equality and self-control of the individual, and of the autonomy of the local church. We may possibly find some set and formal means for really cultivating and honestly expressing an improved spirit of communion amongst the churches. If such an end through such means can be reached, the end may justify the means. More probably we shall find that all efforts in this direction will have resulted as of old; for again and again have these efforts been repeated in our church order, again and again has the result been that either

of failure or of increased division of feeling and life. Surely history may have taught us how easy it is to make the most stringent and elaborate forms of ecclesiastical arrangement subserve the interests of the dominant party, whether this be the party of conservatism or of progress, of the "old lights" or the new lights," of so-called orthodoxy or of so-called heresy. We may remind ourselves how New-England theology one day turned the tables upon the men who had opposed it, when, by the silent advances of thought and the conquests of reflection and argument, it had attained the upper hand. The consociation in Connecticut, which had formerly been, in some instances, to the men of the "new light," an instrument of almost unbearable ecclesiastical tyranny and oppression, afterward became their own instrument for vexing their opponents. They then beat the swords which had pierced their own breasts into ploughshares for turning up the hearts of their variant brethren.

Yet we look into the future confidently expecting to see the true doctrine of the church, and the realizing of that true doctrine in the life of all believers, accomplished upon earth. In a noteworthy article upon Congregationalism, written by Dr. Leavitt nearly fifty years ago, he quotes these remarkable words from the writings of Thomas Hooker: "These two things seem to be great reserves of inquiry for this last age of the world. 1. Wherein the spirituall will of Christ's kingdome consists, the manner how it is revealed and dispensed to the souls of his servants inwardly. 2. The order and manner how the government of his kingdome is managed outwardly in the churches. Upon these two hinges the tedious agitations that are stirring in

1 See the Christian Spectator for 1831, p. 362.

the earth turn, to set forwards the shakings of heaven and earth which are to be seen even at this day." These words evince the premonition that the doctrine of the Holy Spirit and the doctrine of the Church are the two chief inquiries which the Christian mind will undertake in its future progress, and that the practical adjustment and exemplification of these two doctrines will be the great end of the future practical activities of the church. In connection with these thoughts let us consider this additional fact. The doctrine of Sacred Scripture is also, and almost pre-eminently, moving the thoughts of men. The practical side of this doctrine inquires how the Bible may be, in the light of modern science and criticism, vindicated as the sole objective rule of faith and discipline, and how it may be used for the conversion of the world and the edifying of the church. The doctrine of the Holy Spirit, the doctrine of the Bible, and the doctrine of the Church, will undoubtedly in coming time seek urgently for full philosophical consideration, and for practical exemplification by the disciples of Jesus Christ. But the former two doctrines are precisely those, which, in one form of their development, compose the fundamental and distinctive principles of Congregationalism. The Congregational doctrine of the Holy Spirit affirms that He, with the fulness of all his gifts, communicates directly, and without the mediation of the individual clergyman or the tradition of churchly authority, with the soul of every believer and with the congregation of believers in every particular visible church. The believer and the local church may, then, for enlightenment both as to doctrine and as to conduct, turn immediately to the Spirit of Christ. The Congregational doctrine of Sacred Scripture affirms it to be the sole objective authority