plaint is that they are all ineffective. From their having undergone more revision than any other, two inferences may be drawn: first, that they needed it more than others; secondly, that the revision has been such as to render them superior to others. Of the two inferences, “Marwood" draws the one less logical, and one that contains an assumption which requires proof-viz., that the revision has been carried to the point which makes them effective.

He tells us that "what is taken from our Lord's mouth surely none can term otherwise than effective" (p. 255), which confounds the prayer as uttered by Christ with the use that may be made of it by us. Though it be the Lord's Prayer, it may be made ineffective, and its senseless repetition in the Liturgy does make it most ineffective.

Precisely the same confusion of ideas occurs in the remainder of the sentence above quoted-" and concerning that on which mortals have exerted their utmost power" (which is begging the question in debate), "no blame can rest upon it,"-which is absurdity itself, for if, after we have done all things commanded us, we are to regard ourselves as unprofitable servants (Luke xvii. 10), after all our revision of the Liturgy it may still be an unprofitable service, and an ineffective form, for aught said to the contrary by "Marwood."

Had this important subject never engaged our thoughts before this debate was opened, and we were to form our opinion from the defence set up by the affirmative writers, we should pronounce the ineffectiveness of the prevalent forms of worship to be greater than we at present consider it. The question is plainly as new to them as their prejudices are old and inveterate. Instead of entering the discussion in the hope of arriving at some suggestions that would purify our forms of worship, enliven our devotions, and make the sabbath a delight," absurd suspicions of a covert attack upon denominational peculiarities and sectarian prejudices have been allowed to warp their judgment. Constitutional changes and natural progress towards the best possible forms are thus made impossible, and the time comes when that which was denied to wise and conscientious reformers is rudely enforced by violent revolutionists.

66

While believing that the prevalent forms of worship in Britain have much that is good in them, we are still of opinion that they are susceptible of great improvement. Our reasons for such an opinion are fully stated in the first and second articles, and our reason for maintaining this view is confirmed by the feeble attempt made by the affirmative writers to prove the effectiveness of the prevalent forms of worship.

M. H.

Philosophy.

IS THE PULPIT OR THE PRESS MORE POTENT IN THE PRESENT DAY?

THE PULPIT.-V.

WE had only once the pleasure to hear and see Mr. Samuel Neil, the highly cultured essayist of the British Controversialist. Upon that occasion he delivered a thoughtful address on the subject of "Controversy;" and although we have, with infinite pleasure and profit, read his many subsequent papers, always gracing and enriching this serial, yet we confess that his spoken words produced a much greater and more enduring effect upon our minds than any of his written prelections. A similar experience has come to us recently in regard to the Rev. Dr. Norman Macleod. His many excellent papers in Good Words, so full of life and nerve, sank in effect into comparative insignificance when contrasted with the life, the energy, of his orally delivered sermon. Perhaps our acquaintance with the written productions of the great men of our time is as general as that of most men not students by profession; and yet, if we were asked to give an impression of the style of their thought, we should refer to our remembrance of them as speakers and lecturers rather than as reasoners and thinkers on the printed page. We have cause to believe that our experience is not peculiar-that the same experience has been general, and that all have to acknowledge the power and the fascination of the speaker's presence, voice, and manner. This induces us to believe that if ten thousand printed warnings to youth, on the dangers and follies incidental to their state, were placed in their hands, they would have a much less result than the same address, delivered to the same young people, accompanied with the living earnestness of the voice. There is the element of sympathy, which is wanting on the printed page, which gives to the spoken discourse, it may be of the most commonplace character, a power and force which carries it home

to the hearts of the hearers.

And then, again, men do listen to sermons, and they do not read. It is supposed they do, but they do not. There are certainly an immense number of books and periodicals sent out from the press, of which Paternoster Row will bear testimony, but what are they in comparison to the population ? A drop in a bucket; nay, scarcely so much. There have been two or three books lately, of whichMeet for Heaven," and "Heaven our Home," may be taken as specimens, which have reached some fifteen or sixteen thousand,

thought to be an extraordinary success, but which really, looking from the side of the public, and not from the side of the publisher, is not even the drop in the bucket. And these are successes; but there have been large numbers of excellent books published during the present year which have not attained to a second edition, the first having been chiefly "wasted," and author or publisher having to bear the loss of production. As proof of the " shaky" character of 66 the trade in books, and, therefore, of the absence of their influence, the Bookseller last month was uttering a sad wail over the state of "the trade;" that bankruptcies were to be expected, not only in London, but all over the country, and that many had been delayed simply by the carte de visite mania, which had enabled the booksellers for a brief period to tide over their difficulties. The history of magazines and serial literature tells the same, if not a worse tale. The fact that one or two publications are successful is no evidence of the healthiness of general periodical literature. A magazine may be successful as a money speculation, and yet have but the smallest influence on society. To send into each English home a copy of Cornhill, Temple Bar, or Good Words, how many must be printed! But take another test. Count up every periodical that professes to be of an educational tendency, as removed from mere amusement, and then compare the aggregate number, not with the number of the population merely, but with the numbers who, on the census Sunday, attended divine worship. We can thus take this question out of the domain of speculation, and reduce it to the certainty of figures. We first show that the bookseller, from the want of book buyers, is generally almost on the verge of insolvency; and then that the number of periodicals issued from the press is in sad disproportion to the numbers of the worshipping population.

But we do not take any account of the Fourth Estate-the news papers? Yes, we do; but we assign them a much smaller influence than is generally claimed. As an illustration, who reads the Times for its leaders? Who cares for its opinions? Its leaders, in the matter of style, are always worth reading, because they are always admirable; but the matter of the leader is of small consideration, because the matter of the morrow's leader on the same subject may be directly the opposite, as it often has been. The Times is read, like most other newspapers, for its facts, not for its opinions. The opinions of irresponsible persons, who utter their thoughts-or rather the thoughts which they are paid to utter,are of small account. The other day, as an instance, the Times contained a scurrilous thunderer against the Rev. Henry Ward Beecher, which was reprinted in the Manchester Guardian on the day when that reverend gentleman was advertised to speak in the Free Trade Hall. Instead of some eight thousand persons caring one jot what the Times had written, and the Guardian had repeated, they gave the speaker an ovation that was positively overwhelming. The prestige of the Times departed when Richard Cobden and John Bright exposed its interested fallacies on the subject of the corn

laws. Their sermons affected the thought and action of England, the force of which, and the truth of which, the Times was compelled to acknowledge.

Now look at the influence of the pulpit. In the first place, it is everywhere. The most distant hamlet or village has its chapels and churches, and however ignorant the population may be of "what the world is doing," they are to be found in some proportion attending the ministrations of the preacher. Then the minister becomes the friend and adviser of his congregation, and he thus exercises a most potent power upon those who come within his influence. It is, perhaps, not too much to say that, directly or indirectly, this is so with every family in England;-not that every family, or every member of every family, comes immediately under the influence of the preacher, but indirectly, through those who do, the teaching of the pulpit, to an incredible extent, finds its way to the national conscience.

This, indeed, is the only way to account for the decided and palpable progress which has been made in habits and ideas amongst the common people of late years. Of course the question under debate has reference to the morals of the people, the inculcation of which necessarily forms the chief work for which the minister is set apart, but which, as we all know, is by no means the sole or the best part of the work of the press. It is acknowledged that the press has an immense power, unfortunately for evil as for good. Take, as an illustration, those wretched imaginings of Reynolds, which can only fittingly be described as the wallowing of a diseased imagination in filth and dirt. That we are not overrun with that class of unhealthy spawning is owing, as we think, to the sober restraints of the pulpit. We have seen this restraint in our day exercised in a most remarkable manner in those things in which the interests of the people were much concerned. Two or three instances come to our remembrance. On one occasion it was thought well, by a society called "The National Public School Association," to obtain an Act of Parliament for the opening of public schools, to be paid out of the rates, in which nothing but secular education should be taught, or only so much of the Bible as all-Catholic, Jew, or even infidel-might approve. The scheme was supported by the press, almost unanimously; but the ministers assembled, and they said, No; the Bible must be read in the schools: and the Public School Association soon became a thing of the past. Then we also remember the immense conference of ministers of every denomination during the existence of the corn laws. When the sitting was closed, the ministers went back to their congregations, and very soon the voice of the people, of course with exceptions, demanded the "repeal," which Sir Robert Peel was soon compelled to give. And we also remember the efforts that were made to open museums, free libraries, and to introduce music in the public parks on the Sunday. This was almost unanimously supported by the press; but the power and potency

of the pulpit put down the effort, and the Sunday is still preserved in its quiet. Great efforts have been made of late years to revive the infidelity of Paine, and the Deism of the Deists. The press has not been silent, it is true, in its condemnation and exposure of such opinions, but its utterances have, for the most part, been addressed to the cultivated and the cultured rather than to the uneducated and illiterate. The work of throwing back the influence of infidelity has been the work of the ministers, which they have so effectually accomplished that infidelity has a terrible struggle to get itself heard; in the country, especially, it has neither "local habitation nor name.' And what of its propounders ?-in two instances its chief teachers have recently acknowledged the potency of the pulpit, and thrown down their infidelity, and embraced Christianity. We do not care to ask more for the pulpit than it is fairly entitled to, and are not, therefore, quite so foolish as S. T. F.-in the October British Controversialist—would have us to be in supposing that we claim the discoveries of Galileo as the discoveries of the pulpit, or the discoveries of Pascal, Newton, Dr. Livingstone, Grant, and Speke; although S. T. F. ought to know that it was through the pulpit, speaking generally, that Columbus made his great discovery, that Newton was influenced by the divines of his time, and that Dr. Livingstone is a minister, and goes out to distant countries to carry the Gospel, and with it civilization. The pulpit, in its influence upon foreign lands, has a power of extraordinary magnitude, which is not limited to the delivery of secular sermons, but which, if it does anything, turns men from gross darkness to marvellous light. We do not claim for the pulpit everything done and doing in the world, but we do claim for it an influence for time, which is not even approached by any agency whatever. And its influence for eternity is not less, but more. It addresses itself, sabbath after sabbath, to man's eternal interest; it points out to him, however valuable discoveries and possessions may be, that there is a delight which may be attained, and which must be obtained for the enjoyment of the highest happiness in this life, and for the fruition of man's glory in the life to come. Will it, in this respect, be contended for one moment that the press can be placed in comparison with the pulpit? The press, as we have shown, is much more limited in its appliances than the needs of the people; but if it sent an earnest appeal on the subject of a godly life into every home, it would still have less influence than the pulpit, for the simple reason that the appeals would not be read, and the pulpit would be first required to stir up to an interest in spiritual things before the dry and uninteresting address would be read with profit and pleasure. It is true that the Tract Society has many interesting incidents on record of the remarkable value of their publications in turning men from an evil to a godly life, but in the majority of instances it will be found that the persons so awakened have in early life listened to the teaching of the pulpit, and that the chief value of the tract has been in calling up forgotten truths and early