sudden stroke. We are loth to believe that the talents and affections which glowed so brightly and diffused so genial an influence have been necessarily extinguished by the mere circumstance of death. We are familiar with nothing of the sort. Every other being in nature seems to find in time the proper sphere for the exhaustion of all its energies. Why should there be a waste of power in man? His earthly sphere does not exhaust his facultiesthese seem to point to another and a higher state of existence. The analogy of nature encourages our spiritual longings; the sterility of winter yields to the genial influence of spring; from the seed hidden in the soil which has perished in corruption, the elements of life are imparted to other generations of the same species. From the chrysalis which seemed the tomb of its inhabitant there emerges the insect, adapted to a higher and a nobler state of existence than before. There is thus the high probability for a future state being in reserve for man, but this probability never can become a certainty. Natural theology in this respect suggests inquiries which she cannot answer. It was reserved for a more glorious revelation to dispel the gloom of the grave, and to "roll away the stone from the door of the sepulchre." It is the peculiar glory of the Gospel, that by it "life and immortality have been brought to light."

IV. Natural theology, while it indicates the necessities of man's spiritual being, makes no provision for these necessities.

Man's relations to God and to eternity are suggested rather by his fears than by his hopes, by his apprehension of punishment rather than his expectation of reward. There is in man the consciousness of sin, indicating the displeasure of the Being who made him. The thought of God's holiness is associated with the fear of God's wrath, while the fact of God's benevolence only deepens the sense of demerit and calls for a graver condemnation. Natural theology teaches man his distance from God, but it tells him not how he may be brought nigh. It may have excited his awe, his admiration, his reverence, but it has not removed his sense of guilt or silenced the accusations of his conscience. It may have brought him within sight of the Palace of the great King, but it cannot introduce him; he is there as a stranger, not as a son. Those very attributes of the Divine Being it most impressively illustrates only serve to increase his perplexity and deepen his spiritual woe. Its defect is here most strikingly apparent, that it neither indicates nor itself provides the remedy for man's sense of guilt. "Wherewithal shall a man come before the Lord and bow himself before the High God?" is a question it may prompt but it cannot answer; and thus on that very topic which most of all concerns man as an immortal and responsible being nature is silent. To his question, "How shall a sinner be just before God?" natural theology furnishes no response but the echo of his own inquiry. The faint glimmerings of light it emits serve but to render the darkness more terribly apparent. We gladly turn from a theology which thus forsakes us where we most require it, to take refuge in that better and nobler which at once meets our spiritual necessities and certifies our fondest hopes.

DR RALEIGH ON THE TEMPERANCE QUESTION.

If the temperance reformation were carried to the length of inducing total abstinence in the entire community, except for very small and infrequent necessities, I make no doubt that there might be some unexpected dangers connecting themselves with such a grand movement and results so deep and wide. Every movement needs to be watched; and our vices, greater and less, often seem to keep close company with our virtues. But I must say that it seems to me the height of prejudice to suppose that such possible evils, whatever they might be, could be reasonably imagined as likely to be in any way equal to the black and stupendous evil which, with all its progeny of

evils, would be thus removed. A sober nation has possession of all its faculties and senses to watch against the entrance and domination of the evils that may come. It must, however, I think, be granted that there is not the least likelihood of the nation, or even of the Church in general, coming into the faith and practice of total abstinence. We may deplore this fact, or we may not, according to our views. But surely no one looking at the broad case with calmness would be disposed seriously to question it. Those who think total abstinence a duty binding on all, and, of course, with special urgency upon religious people, or those who think that no cure less stringent is likely to be effectual, will, of course, feel bound to labour towards this end, whether it be likely to come or not, on the principle that duty is ours, and that results must be left with Him who knows and rules all. But to those whose views are less rigorous and more elastic, who do not think it sin to touch and taste, and moderately use what others altogether abjure and condemn, and who, therefore, can think of remedial measures, amply effectual, although short of complete abstinence—the circumstance of the almost absolute hopelessness of attaining it will furnish some additional motive for putting forward and pressing into notice their own plans. Now, we have acknowledged that there is one complete cure, if the nation could be persuaded to adopt it. Is there any other, also complete? for, of course, we can imagine all degrees of amelioration. We can imagine less and less drunkenness; but is there a perfect cure for the intemperance of the country short of the entire abstinence of the whole community from intoxicating drinks? Certainly there is. The theoretically most perfect cure for intemperance is temperance. (Laughter.) If all men were strictly temperate, whatever that may mean―(Laughter)—then the evils we have spoken of as flowing from intemperance would cease. No doubt of it. If the evils continued to exist even in a modified degree, that would be a sure sign that the intemperance continued in the same degree. If it could be made out, e.g., that what has been quite honestly regarded as moderation by the individual, yet is having some injurious effect on his health, then it may fairly be averred that he is to that extent intemperate. Or if it can be shown that by such a moderate indulgence his faculties are beclouded, or his affections cooled and deadened, again it may be truly said he is intemperate. Or again, if it can be shown that without injuring himself in body or mind he is yet injuring others by his example, although the charge of intemperance would not lie against him in any strict use of language, the charge of heedlessness or even heartlessness might perhaps be preferred, and it would be for him to consider seriously how far he thought the charge valid; and then to act as well and truly as he might be able in all the circumstances of the case, and taking the wide and far look as well as the close and near one. Let it be understood that temperance means one thing to one person and another thing to another. To many a one the word temperance, scripturally, fairly interpreted is simply synonymous with abstinence. If it is not needed it should not be taken, or if there be any special dangers, personal or relative, in the use of it, then true temperance will require its complete disuse. In no case, I should say, can a very free habitual indulgence, although falling short of inebriation, consist with strict temperance. But, within limits, each must be the interpreter of his own duty. The temperate man ought also to be the free man. He is the judge of his own motives; he is the ruler of his own life; and it is certainly quite conceivable that there should be a state of society in which, without anything approaching to uniformity of habit in this regard, there shall yet be a universal temperance, each conforming himself freely, in his own way, to the great laws of order and moderation in the spirit of loyalty and obedience. Now, it seems to me that we ought to be able—not as though we had reached an absolute inner agreement on all points, because on some points of opinion and principle there are strong differences, which are not likely to be less for a while, but as wise and practical men, who are accustomed to take instalments in things, and to prefer half loaves to no bread

we ought to be able at once to recognise and mutually honour in each other diversities in sentiment, and yet make our way to those practical agreements by which we may hope to do something to promote this great and muchneeded reformation.` (Applause). It would not become me to forecast or indicate particularly what the findings of the proposed committee will be, if you think meet to appoint it, on the different aspects and points of this great and complicated question. We may perhaps think it right to join with others of our fellow-Christians and fellow-countrymen who are seeking the same end, in asking for some fresh legislation, if for no other reason than this— that there has been already a good deal of legislation, leaving the matter in a state now that can hardly be regarded as satisfactory to any of the parties concerned. If it shall appear that recent legislation has furnished far too much facility in different ways for the sale and consumption of intoxicating drinks so much facility, in fact, as to make constant inducement and strong temptation to great numbers of our people—we may very well ask the Legislature to retrace its steps. We may ask that the number of public-houses shall be gradually but effectually reduced. We may ask that, like other places of trade, they shall be closed on the day of rest-(applause)—or during the greater part of it; and if we don't assent to the entire demand of the Permissive Bill, we may yet think it most reasonable that in some way of local control a particular neighbourhood should have just influence in seeking to preserve its own peace and quietness and sobriety. But whatever may be our specific findings in the matter, I cannot but hope that good will come of having the subject brought distinctly and clearly before us. We cannot in faithfulness evade the consideration of it. It is beset with difficulties. But in a complicated state of society like ours, all high duty is delicate and difficult. In this, as in other things, difficulties will grow less as we really touch them, while they will probably increase if we only look at them, or do no more than talk about them. Whatever changes may be brought about in the law of the land, two immediate changes may come to us as preachers and Christian men. One will affect our preaching and the other our practice. I do not in the least insinuate that our teaching is not true and faithful as far as it goes, or that we connive by silence at what we know to be excess of sin. But I do believe (if I am wrong you will forgive me) that our pulpit teaching ought to be more firm and more frequent, especially in the way of warning, than it usually is. (Applause.) It may be that our comparative silence is partly owing to the activity and the fearlessness of those who hold the most advanced views. We persuade ourselves that enough is said on the subject, even more than enough by some, and that our people and our neighbours know and hear, one way or another, all that is needful. This is a mistake, and it is very unfair to make our brethren who go beyond us responsible for any remissness and failure on our own part. Every shepherd should do all he can to keep in safety at least his own sheep, and the fences they may overleap are the perils that may be lurking near. Nor will the sheep that have no shepherd be much less regarded if we can beat back the wolves from them, and lead them into the one fold, and under the care of the one Shepherd. We bark loudly enough at the Ritualistic and Rationalistic wolves, while the dark demon of intemperance is scarcely challenged, and works his silent and deadlier mischief unseen. (Applause.) "Cry aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show My people their transgression and the house of Jacob their sins." Then I cannot but think that this firmer teaching will naturally lead to increased carefulness--at least, in practice. Let no one misinterpret. We (I mean especially the ministers) are, whatever our theoretical views may be, temperate and sober men, and we should resent, with quick and hot indignation, any imputation or insinuation to the contrary. We consider, too, that we are in no greater exposure to the power of this sin than we are to the power of many other sins, and that the grace which preserves us from any of them will preserve us from all of them, in proportion as we seek it, and walk in humility and

wisdom. Making full allowance for considerations of this kind, I somehow feel that in so far as any change is desirable or may come in our practice, it ought to be along the line of a still greater abstemiousness. You may say, some of you, that you never could take a public and solemn pledge to avoid any one sin, or to practise any one virtue; that you pledge yourself virtually, once for all, and in all things, by naming the name of Christ. So say I. You may say that you must preserve your unfettered freedom, not according to a registered vow, but according to the voices that speak, and the lights that shine in the hours, and in the duties as they come. So say I. You may say that, while most anxious to consider the weak, and to do your part in helping to lift up the fallen, you cannot, therefore, regard it as a safe principle that the lapsed part of a community, those who by acknowledgment have lost self-control, or would immediately lose it in certain circumstances, must be allowed to dictate, in one particular at least, what shall be the code, or the form and habit, of morals to a whole community, a large proportion of whom are, humanly speaking, in no danger. And so say I. You may say finally, that you cannot allow a brother in the ministry or in the faith-a weak brother or a strong one-to settle by his ipse dixit that any just offence is given to him or to any, or cause of stumbling put in the way of another, by walking in the light of your own conscience rather than in the light of his, and carrying out in freedom your own well-formed convictions. So say I. But after all such guardings and fencings, it will remain true that any improvement that may be possible in our practice will be found along the line of a still greater abstemiousness. And if one and another, as the process goes on, shall find, not safety alone, but health and freedom and the highest influence in complete abstinence--so be it, and God be thanked.-From English Independent.

THE ENGLISH AUTUMNAL MEETINGS.

THE SCOTTISH DELEGATE'S SPEECH.

WE are indebted to the English Independent for the following report of Dr Pulsford's speech, which he delivered as our Deputy :

66

:

Mr Chairman and Christian brethren, I bring to you in the name of the Scottish Congregational churches their hearty congratulations and cordial sympathy; though for this I do not suppose a deputy is at all necessary, for I am persuaded you need no assurance on our part to be convinced that everything that concerns you concerns us, and that we take the liveliest interest in all your interests. I am expected, I believe, to give what our secretary in the North gave me as his instructions, a bird's-eye view" of our state and condition. But that altogether depends upon the bird, I suppose, as to what the eye sees; therefore the secretary added, "This, of course, must be from your own point of view." But, under the pressure of business which I see you involved in, I think I shall be consulting your interest best by following what you may still see as the directions in some of the old playbooks to the actors, that they are to go on running off." (Laughter.) Though I do not follow these directions literally, I shall certainly observe them in spirit; and, therefore, as I have just one or two words to say, I shall be very brief. It is when we have nothing to say, we find it very difficult to come to a conclusion. (Laughter.) With respect to our position in Scotland, we are as much as ever, if not more than ever, hemmed in by Presbyterianism. The three great bodies appear now to be running a very earnest race one with the other. It will be very difficult to determine which has the advantage in all forms of Church extension and general activity of the Christian life. In the city in which I labour, undoubtedly the Established Church is second to none in its efforts as to church extension; and all the other

66

bodies, I believe, are vieing one with another to occupy all the vacant ground they can find, and to lay hold of all they can influence. We stand in the midst, therefore, of those activities. I do not think we are hindered by them. (Hear, hear.) If we put Congregationalism versus Presbyterianism I do not think we are making any way. I do not think we ever did make much way; but wherever you find a man in Scotland who knows his own standing, and is possessed of anything like individuality of character, he won't long be left without a respectable and intelligent hearing. (Hear, hear.) The Scotch are far too wise to leave a man who has anything to say unheard. (Laughter.) The greatest difficulty we have to contend with is your brethren in the South. (Laughter.) The Southern pastures afford too great an attraction to our Northern shepherds; therefore our flocks are very often forsaken and left out in the cold. I should have liked to enumerate the instances, but I am afraid the list would be far too long, and it might be painful to the brethren to be so reminded of the fatherland. (Laughter.) As for yourselves, if we could only recover a tenth of them, your ranks would be considerably thinned, and some of them unofficered and perhaps unadorned. You know not your privileges in having such a training ground as the North. If you did, you would supply us with what you could supply without any detriment to yourselves, fundsthe only things that we want. (Laughter.) We can grow brains far faster than we can grow money; and as these southern parts seem greatly to exhaust that supply, it is to your advantage that you should put us in the best possible position for satisfying your needs. (Hear, hear, and laughter.) If you would only ask the churches what they would do without Scotland or the men who have come from Scotland, I am persuaded you would send us funds sufficient to put our Hall in Edinburgh on the best possible footing. But apart from this, I think I see in the future a pleasant prospect for the extension of Congregationalism. All the Presbyterian bodies, owing to the influence of the spirit of the age, are giving much attention to the degree of liberty which they shall give to individual congregations; and the liberty of individual congregations is growing very fast in Scotland, and I believe will grow faster. (Hear, hear.) On our part we do not feel that we need anything in that direction, but perhaps the reverse. (Laughter.) While we maintain that which is fundamental to our churches—the individuality of the congregation—we would be thankful sometimes if we could adjust some organisation which should unite us together, and hold us in concerted union for many objects which we now fail to obtain. In these directions I think Congregationalism and Presbyterianism in Scotland are coming near one another; and, after all, the Congregationalists of Scotland will not be found to say that Presbyterianism is a bad thing. I do not think that Presbyterianism is a bad thing. Congregationalism I believe to be better with it, yet if there was Congregationalism altogether without Presbyterianism, I do not know that it would be the best possible state. I think we are the better the one for the other—(hear, hear)—and I believe in the future we shall come nearer one to the other. The churches in the North feel that they are bound together in one common interest with those in the South, and they look forward to a not remote period when they will apply to you in such a form that you will not be able to resist their incorporation. In the immediate future I believe there will be found in Scotland the union between the Evangelical Union Churches and the Congregational Churches. A movement was begun in the spring of this year at our annual meeting, and I have seen many indications which tell me that the proposal stands a very fair chance of being accepted when it is brought forward in a manner to be accepted. The Evangelical Union Churches have just held their meetings, and have responded heartily to all the expressions uttered in the spring at our meetings. The leading ministers feel that there is no great barrier in the way. When that union takes place it will not be by a consultation or discussion as to any doctrinal points. We recognise each other as we are. (Hear, hear.) It will be brought about with no principle of compromise whatever, but on a principle of comprehension.