demand that the seminaries do all that may be necessary to keep the ministry instructed and inspired. Only, the churches and the pastors whose resources render them independent of continued help should cheerfully equip the seminaries for this additional work. The personal strength and the finances of our theological faculties are at present strained almost to the breaking point. Demand, if you will, the multiplied ministration, but provide the means and men. The Commission believes that the seminaries, where not hindered by institutional alliances, can do nothing better for themselves than thus to extend their usefulness in love. It also believes that the Congregational Church in the United States can do nothing more strategic than to develop through the seminaries, whether separately or in union, some such scheme as is now under review for distributing the stimulus of the center to all parts of the vital field. proposed forms of study will not be offered as an approved or desirable substitute for the regular discipline of the schools. No man who can, at any justifiable sacrifice, reach our theological halls should be content with less. Nor need it be feared that such provision for pastors in their homes will lower our ministerial standards by multiplying the numbers of men who ignore the seminaries. Conference courses breed discontent and ambition. It is only the unworthiest who are satisfied with the least. Modern education should nowhere, doubt the principle that quickened life aspires. The THE CONGREGATIONAL EDUCATION SOCIETY AND SUNDAYSCHOOL AND PUBLISHING SOCIETY. The Commission has found these two societies increasingly prepared to coöperate. The Education Society has consented to make its office the working center for the distribution of literature and for correspondence with prospective students. It is believed that the Sunday-School Society will be interested in furnishing at special rates the necessary printed matter, books, and other supplies. Moreover, that society is systematically promoting, and is asking the Council to endorse and further, modern methods of religious education for Sunday-school teachers and other lay members of our churches. This new movement promises large endeavor and rich results. It lies very close to such ministerial training on the field as the Commission was set to inaugurate. It will use similar methods, such as correspondence courses, institutes, loan libraries, the circulation of ever fresh literature. With this more general movement our ministerial training should be intimately allied. The courses of instruction and other measures for both pastors and laymen, though kept distinct, should before long come to be administered, as now in some denominations, from the same center, thus insuring economy and a unified plan. The Commission believes that these several educational advances now before us call for cordial coöperation between the two national societies named, the theological seminaries, the Religious Education Committee of this Council, and the Commission, and that such coöperation looking toward such unification of labor is worthy of all the pains and patience required to achieve it. And the time may soon come when the Religious Education Committee and the Commission should be united into one agency of this Council. WHAT THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDS. Your Commission offers the following recommendations for consideration and adoption: 1. That the Council reappoint the Commission, with the same composition (laymen, pastors, seminary professors), purpose, and charter. 2. That the Council reaffirm the recommendations adopted at the Cleveland meeting and referred to the Commission (Minutes, pages 351, 425). 3. That the Council make special financial provision for this work, such money to be used unless and until the national societies and the seminaries shall find a way to assume and carry on the work. CLARENCE W. Bowen. DAN F. BRADLEY. M. L. BURTON. W. R. CAMPBELL. OZORA S. DAVIS. F. E. JENKINS. W. D. MACKENZIE. J. H. T. MAIN. C. S. NASH. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON POLITY. BRETHREN,At the meeting of the National Council of 1907, at Cleveland, Ohio, an important series of recommendations were adopted relating to an advance in our national polity. It was intended that they should be acted on by the different states at their pleasure. A Committee on Polity was appointed to serve during the present triennium, but it did not regard itself as being charged with the duty of urging the states to adopt the recommendations. In the present report it aims to make a helpful summary of the results which have been accomplished during this triennium, and to make a few recommendations which seem pertinent at the present time. In the opinion of your committee, there exists throughout the denomination a fairly general willingness to advance toward the closer organization of our Congregational forces. The figures given below will show that a number of the states which have not yet accepted the Cleveland recommendations are planning, more or less completely, to do so. The first recommendation was that each state body should be officially designated as a "conference." We have 47 organizations which cover the limits of one or more states. Of these only Alaska, Louisiana, South Carolina, and Tennessee are untabulated. Of the 43 organizations remaining, 36 haye voted to accept the title "conference." Two others, Connecticut and Georgia (white), have always had this designation. One state assumed it in 1907, 14 in 1908, 10 in 1909, and 9 in 1910. Of the remaining states, Minnesota, Montana, Texas, and Wisconsin will probably adopt the designation in the very near future. The Alabama Association and Georgia Convention are organizations of the colored churches under the leadership of the American Missionary Association. The same recommendation urged that local or district bodies of churches and ministers be uniformly termed "associations." Out of 272 such bodies reported, about 247 have adopted this name. In Maine, with 15 district organizations, 8 have adopted the term. Connecticut, with 17 local bodies and 4 consociations, has not acted as yet. Eight states are organized as one single district only. The second recommendation vested ministerial standing in district associations. We find that this plan is now followed to a very general extent throughout the country. Thirty-two states report it as their established custom. Colorado, Florida, and Massachusetts have adopted it in part; one state, Arizona, is about to adopt it; eight states, the Alabama Convention, Idaho, New Mexico, North Carolina, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, and Wyoming, do not follow the method, for the special reason that they have only one strong organization in the state. The third recommendation related to the transfer of ministers and churches from one district association to another, advising that the transfer be made specifically by the dismissing body and not delegated to officials to act on between meetings. Twentynine states have adopted this procedure. Six states, Northern California, Idaho, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, and New York, report a variety of usage within each state. Six states, the Alabama Conference, Montana, New Jersey, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Wyoming, are not yet convinced of the wisdom of making such a rule. On the important question of tenure of membership in the district association, for which some specific constitutional limitation was suggested, the action has been various. Wisconsin has a retired list, composed of all ministers who are unreported for two successive years. These names are transferable to the active list by vote of the association. Ten other states have imposed a limit, usually two successive years, after which a name automatically drops from the roll of membership. Twenty states refuse to sanction any limit. Eight states report varying usages among the associations, while four states fail to make any report. The fifth recommendation suggested that each district association be made the final authority for the approved list of ministerial members and of churches in good standing. The custodian of this approved list in each state is the registrar of the local association. It is the universal custom for the association to retain the right of review or revision. Twenty-nine states practically give the registrar of the association the status of a final authority. Northern California specifies that the registrar is merely the official witness of the public action of the association. Illinois makes the registrar a member of the standing advisory committee, to which is reported ministerial standing and credentials. Pennsylvania appoints a permanent credential committee, which acts with the registrar. New Hampshire appoints such a committee. Ten states have either failed to report their usage or have denied that the local registrar is a final authority. It may be said in general that the district association is recognized in Congregationalism as being the final authority on membership so far as state registrars and the Secretary of the National Council are concerned. The sixth recommendation related to statistical usages in the Year-Book, which have gone into use. The seventh recommendation urged that a larger recognition be given the district association as an administrative factor of prime importance in Congregational usage. It seems wise to call attention again to this phase of advancing Congregationalism. The association is closely representative of the churches, able to ascertain their will within the scope of the district and to execute it, competent to determine the standing of churches or ministers, to ordain as well as to license, to install or dismiss, and to perform other functions often performed by a council. Many are coming to see that the association with its regular meetings, its permanent records, and its standing committees is to be preferred to the council for dealing with these vital interests of the churches. What we also need to realize is that the effectiveness of our national and state organizations is largely dependent upon the coöperation of these district associations. We need to magnify their importance and to facilitate a ready reference of important questions to them through the state organization. A system of advisory or prudential committees, such as California, Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin have worked out, and which, under other terminology, exists less completely in some other states, deserves careful consideration by every state conference. The eighth recommendation, suggesting that the membership of a state conference include representatives of all churches and all ministers in good standing in the district association, has not been entirely adopted. Thirty-eight states report the existence or establishment of such a usage. In Connecticut each church |