« iepriekšējāTurpināt »
Christ in sincerity," but add, " and have made profession of their faith and love." This last clause limits the invitation to church-members; while some ministers deem the first clause a limitation to worthy church-members But if they will consider, they will perceive that so far as the phraseology goes, it might extend to those who had made a profession and been excommunicated, but still insist, in their own minds, that they are good Christians. In other words it is a loose invitation. On the other hand, while the first clause is good preaching or exhortation, it is nothing more. For a Congregational minister cannot usurp the authority of the Church and refuse the communion to those whom the Church has voted to receive, until the Church vote otherwise. Now those members who are not under discipline, the Church has deliberately accepted. The Church used its best judgment in the matter. It may be deceived; certain persons may never have loved the Lord Jesus; they may be cold and unspiritual now. But the Church has done nothing about it, chooses to do nothing, perhaps can do nothing. There they are regularly accepted. Now, how can the minister, in his sole right, undertake to refuse those whom his Church accepts? He cannot. Then let him not make any such pretense. It is a sad thing that any man should come unworthily. Let the preacher exhort against it. But since he is neither Christ nor the Church-neither Pope nor rector— why should he pretend in his invitation to a restricting power which he does not possess. The only invitation or limitation which he has any authority to give, comes at last simply to the good old fashioned unmistakable form, "members, in good standing, of Evangelical Churches.” Churches have rights which ministers are bound to respect. We cannot, for our part, see the wisdom of industriously setting aside statements, wellsettled, precise, and well understood, for those that possess neither of these qualities. Still we do not quarrel with mere casual variations, nor make a man offender for a word.
A CLERGYMAN ON SCIENCE.-The Rev. Charles Kingsley, recently elevated to the dignity of Canon of Chester, has distinguished himself in current literature in several ways. His early novels were brilliant, his pictures of ancient society, thought, and piety were vivid,-whether always accurate or not,-his political disquisitions have been intensely earnest showing sympathy for the masses and "the pressure of the time," and his attempts to interpret mythology and natural history to juvenile readers interesting and praiseworthy. Of his published sermons we need say nothing, for the pulpit discourses of an English placeman are not counted of any special importance in the make up of his general reputation as a man of power and culture. Canon Kingsley has lately read a paper on Natural Theology, at Sion College, in which he expressed the opinion that though he "might be considered dreaming," the time would come "when every
candidate for orders would be required to pass creditably in, at any rate, one branch of physical science." The implication in this enthusiastic anticipation as to the culture and preparation of the clergy "established” in that country makes an impression upon the mind as peculiar as that of the suggestion from the London Times a few years since, that before taking a parish, every clergyman should be absolutely required to undergo examination in one good book of divinity, say Pearson on the Creed! Mr. Kingsley uses the title Natural Theology in the sense of religious teachings, founded not on common or former knowledge, but on the advanced scientific knowledge of nature now prevailing; but he denies that it could be the business of scientific men to show a final cause in nature, "for final causes are moral causes," (moral being used in the comprehensive sense that is opposed to physical) and their testimony that they find no trace of them is, consequently, neither here nor there. The business of scientific philosophy does not extend beyond the "How," or have anything to do with the "Why" of ontological philosophy. To those who would urge that the "doctrine of evolution does away with creation," Mr. Kingsley would reply that, "even if they accepted all that Mr. Darwin and Mr. Herbert Spencer had written, they might still preserve their natural theology on the principles laid down by Butler. The doctrine of evolution has its analogy in the evolution of a human body from a germ; but we do not on that account deny that God is our Creator. If there is evolution there must be an evolver. Whether Darwin's theory of evolution proves true or false, his work on the fertilization of orchids would still remain a valuable addition to natural science. Suppose that all the species of orchids should prove to be the descendents of one, and that one allied to the snow-drop, would that show less of the wonder-working power of God than if they were all created at once? The believer in God would accept this as evidence that God's works were more wonderful than he had hitherto believed them, and the superintendence which is requisite for this process of "natural selection" would make the government of the universe still more an infinite complexity of special providences. If "natural selection" was proved to be true, it would only further establish the truth of Christ's saying: "My Father worketh hitherto, and I work." Scripture has taught us that God made all things. Shall we quarrel with science if it succeeds in establishing (rather furnishes the data of establishing) that God is so powerful that He can make all things make themselves? We must be cautious in defining that which Scripture has not defined. Scripture uses the term "created," but does not describe the process; it speaks of organizations "produced after their kind," but it does not define whether "their kind" includes the capacity of varying. Is not man produced after his kind, and how has he varied? Scientific men, while engaged in the study of bones and stones, every where find themselves met by a something nameless,
invisible, imponderable, the forma formatica of the schoolmen, and to which they gave the name of "vital force." When they had traced all to vibration, they were ever encountered with the question, What makes the vibration vibrate? What is curdling every cell of protoplasm? It is none other than that which Scripture calls "The breath of the living God.”
Mr. Kingsley here overlooks the more recent attempts to get rid of “vital force altogether. If life can be generated by evolution, or any other hocus pocus, we had almost said, from that which has no life, and absolutely without the agency of anything else that has it, then what becomes of "vital force." And Mr. Kingsley's question," what makes vibration vibrate?" does not necessarily imply a cause, since we use the same form of speech when asking for a reason, which is not a cause; e. g., "what makes you think so?" But we cite and record his word as showing a phase or tendency of thought in Christain men who have earnestly cultivated science, and are not afraid of its conclusions, nor led, in the interest of religion, into any manner of foreboding. He expects science to return in due time to her becoming phase at the feet of piety. We heartily accept and emphasize his closing word to the students of Sion College: "Let those who hold to the Scriptures be patient, and wait. It is not necessary for them to cast themselves down from the pinnacle of the temple."
COLLEGE MARKS.-The following appeared not long ago in the Congregationalist:
"The advantages of the ranking system have been presented in this paper, in an article by President Smith of Dartmouth College. Here is a briefer presentation of the other side of the question, from an alumnus of that institution:
"That is not an apt preparation for the scenes of coming life, which dwarfs the ambition of its subject to the paltry attainment of a high mark. This system makes the merest accident of study its ultimate end, and by it many have been brought to think that, having stood high in their classes, their life work was accomplished.
"Among college students, there are those who study to master the subjects presented, and those who have no higher aim than to make a good recitation. Doubtless many of the second class have been stimulated to make great exertions. But what an insignificant purpose, and the object, if attained, how useless and unsatisfying! With a student bent on understanding a science, or investigating a subject, his mark would not have a feather's weight. We do not think the system has a good moral influence. It encourages deception, and puts a premium on ponying,'cribbing,' and Icarding. In those werking for marks it excites bitter feelings, emulation is destroyed, and at the end of four years they are 'supremely selfish. And what is worse, it induces hypocrisy and sanctimoniousness-prayer-meetings are attended for effect on the president and professors.
"In speaking of the evils of the system, we do not dwell on the fact that the son of Dives receives a mark ten or twenty per cent, above his deserts. Deference to wealth is universal, and the college has long since ceased to be the pure democracy it was in the days of our fathers.
How men overshoot their mark! The last two of these charges, ranking rich men's sons higher than others, and giving attendance on prayer-meetings a recognition in the class-standing, any man who has ever been a member of a College Faculty, anywhere, knows to be too ridiculous to deny. The "bitter feelings" and supreme selfishness, according to our observation, are the exception; the very best scholars in a class are often the best friends, and it is not uncommon in classes to accuse the best scholars of clannishness. Ponying," "cribbing" and "carding "-if we understand their mysteries-can go but very little way. No intelligent instructor is ever imposed upon by them. The student simply imposes on himself. As to the insignificance of the aim-it is on a level with other efforts after honor, but in a peculiarly honorable sphere. It would be a pleasing thing to look upon the men " who have no higher aim than to make a good recitation;" although the ability to make such a recitation might be supposed by the simple to be no bad way" to master the subject presented." It would be equally pleasing to look upon that vast multitude, the "many [who] have been brought to think that, having stood high in their classes, their life work was accomplished." Instead of "making the merest accident of study its ultimate end," it certainly is possible to view the appointment system as applying simply an additional and immediate stimulus towards the attainment of that end, by the reaping now some of the same kind of fruits which will be borne in the future.
From the mode of thinking exhibited in the above extract, it was evidently written by one whose mental equipoise was never disturbed by any "high mark." It is a dispassionate statement of the great verities, probably by one who in college largely indulged in "general literature."
We simply seize the occasion to remark how absurdly any young man deports himself in college who does not give his first best energy to the studies he is there to pursue, while he has the aid of instructors whose special business is to help and guide him in them, and surrounded, as he is, by all the stimulus of other wakeful minds. After all, the" bummers "cannot altogether afford to despise "recitation scholarship;" nor, historically viewed, has the vast race of bad scholars in this world had any special reason to glory over its good ones.
OUR REVIEW.-Our readers need not be informed why the November number of the REVIEW is delayed and incomplete. The bulk of its contents was in the printers' hands, and in type. We had fortunately a single proof of each of the first three articles now presented, returned to us for final revision. Everything else, including Round Table matter and main articles, (one of them by Professor Bartlett), was burnt up, and no copy left. We present the best we can under the circumstances. We expect to make satisfactory arrangements for the future. The present number is printed at Madison, Wis.
Academy, The, in its Relations to the Col-
An Eventful Decade, article by Rev. J. C.
Bartholomew's Handy Atlas, noticed, 308.
Beecher, H. W., Sermons, noticed, 86.
Beecher's Our Seven Churches, noticed, 79.
Blakie's Bible History with General His-
Blunt's Undesigned Coincidences in the
Frank Austin's Diamonds and Eagle Crag,
Fresh Leaves in the Book and its Story,
Froude's Calvinism, noticed. 408.
Froude's Short Studies on Great Subjects,