principles, or to such a mode of stating them, as goes to show that "speech was given for the purpose of concealing thoughts"-to the adoption of the counsels of the unwise rich, instead of the long-sighted plans of the prophetic and the poor. The word of God does indeed descend like the rain and snow from heaven, and accomplish its mysterious and fruitful mission, but like them, too, it realizes its designs through a secret and gradual process. There may be a cheering promise and prospect now, alluring to the hasty zeal of some, and yet so unconnected with grounds of permanent success, as to present no attraction to impartial and enlarged minds. How often has a Home Missionary station been begun for the sake of accidental reasons. A chapel was perhaps given, or a considerable sum promised to one, or a liberal and affluent man lived in the neighbourhood; and because of this, or some such circumstance, without any peculiar claim of population, or general argument for hope, it became the scene of missionary labour, but in the course of a few years it was seen to be what it should have been foreseen to be, unsuitable and unlikely almost every way. How often has an agent been employed for reasons which ought not to have weighed at all, because of reasons of superior force. Perhaps great piety and simplicity of motive-a considerable measure of apparent success in some particular locality, many persons being converted, or thinking themselves, or being thought by others to be so-has led to his engagement. But in a short time, one after another of the hearers vanished, and one after another of the converts apostatized, and the conviction spread until it became universal, the conviction which should have been produced by the consideration of the man, not the failure of his measures, that he was unqualified for the work, and all the unpleasantness had to be experienced of removing him, all, all the injury remained of having employed him.

We have remarked upon a general error, to which may be traced most other errors of religious societies. We must mention more particular ones, and of these a chief and principal is, the penny-wise and pound-foolish principle. This regulates the appropriation of vast sums of money given to God. The church cries for economy, and it is well, it is a duty not to waste any, the smallest portion; but economy, like every other good thing, is capable of being counterfeited, and much that passes under the name, is in truth lavish prodigality. This is not by the number of agents employed, but their character and qualifications; it is not by the extent of surface covered, but the manner in which it is covered, that the efficiency of an institution is evinced. The error is, that a large number of petty interests is preferred to a small number of important ones, well chosen with a view to their relative worth, centres of influence to great and increasing populations. We may be singular in our preferences, but we would rather have one well-fur

nished man, receiving an adequate and respectable income, and officiciating in a chaste and commodious chapel, in the midst of a great and growing district, than half a dozen men, miserably furnished, miserably supported, and occupying a sanctuary in perfect harmony with his soul and his salary; and this our preference is based on the thorough conviction, considering the character of the times, and contemplating the welfare of coming generations, that the one man would altogether, and in the whole extent and duration of his influence, do vastly more good than the half a dozen. We are aware that to bring about a change in accordance with these views, is a thing of considerable difficulty. It would involve a seeming contraction of sphere and service, many would regard it as a sinful extravagance, a fluent flow of cant would be poured out in its reprobation, and it is not unlikely that the pecuniary resources of the societies effecting it might suffer. But there are wise and strong men to do it; and it must be done. The most liberal is the cheapest way of doing good. We are continually admonished that nothing is gained by a parsimonious distribution of money. The failure of many efforts, the trifling efficacy of many more-admonish us that a large and generous outlay is necessary in religious, as well as in secular enterprises. Let our societies then restrict their operations that they may extend them; let them abandon some spheres that they may worthily and efficiently keep and fill others; let them be more careful and costly in the selection and support of their stations, that they may secure a speedier cessation of their aid, and a more abundant success to their work; let them give more that they may sooner need to give nothing, thus they will most fully serve the truth of Christ, and maintain and increase their denominational respect.

We must touch upon tender ground, but shall try to do it tenderly. The efficiency of County Unions is often prevented by too great a respect being had to unsound notions of what is due to churches. It would be ridiculous, were it not a serious subject, to hear the strange sayings of some Congregationalists respecting the rights and claims of every thing in the shape of a church. Churches take their stand upon certain conceptions they have got of Independency, and woe be to the man or the Union that whispers the thought of interference, in any way, with their fancied prerogatives. They ask for pecuniary help, but resent every attempt or proposal to join in procuring the proper agency. They will invite their own pastor, though they cannot support him; they will give him a "call," though they have nothing else to give. Now we are as strict Congregationalists as may be, but some churches may be ill-qualified to select the fittest pastor for themselves, and fittest missionary for their neighbourhood. They may lack the faith, or judgment, or intellect to do it. What then? Would we deprive such churches of the right to chose their own spiritual

officers? By no means. They have that right from Christ. We draw a wide distinction between right and ability. Individuals have authority to do many things, and it is their duty to do them, who are nevertheless unqualified to do them. Parental authority does not depend on parental godliness, or judgment, or temper; the political franchise is not invariably attended with the power or will to use it aright. And ecclesiastical functions, in whatever light they may be viewed, and whatever notions may be entertained of their nature or number, are often discharged by persons who discharge them ill. A churchman maintains the authority of a bishop to ordain ministers, though he may, through ignorance, or carelessness, or sin, ordain improper men; and Congregationalist may maintain the right of a church to choose its ministers, though it may choose improper men. Let the church have its right, and exercise it; but it does not follow that the Union should employ its funds in fulfilment of that choice. It is the right of the Union to expend its income according to its conscience, as it is the right of the church to to choose its minister according to its conscience. The Union is responsible for the employment of appropriate and efficient agents, and if the pastor in any particular district is not what it would like, let it not adopt him as its agent. There is no necessity for identifying the missionary station with a previously existing church and chapel; in some places it would be most desirable not to identify it; there may be so much prejudice and ill moral odour in consequence of past folly, or immorality, or strife as to render it every way expedient for the church to die, and the chapel to be abandoned. Where it is not so, and the church does not choose to allow any voice to the Union in the selection of the minister, if an agent were sent into the neighbourhood, with permission to serve that church, should it desire his services, and contribute toward his support; the result would generally be found, in our opinion, beneficial to the cause of truth and godliness.

It is to be wished that a more regular and general system of oversight and superintendence were adopted by County Unions, of their several stations. We are no advocates of a paid agency for this purpose. It has not been found to work well where tried, nor do we think it ever likely to do so. Something less formal and more fraternal might produce good results. If the county were divided into several districts, and one or two of the leading pastors in each district visited all the stations within it once or twice a year, inquired into the state of things on the spot, suggested points, gave advice, administered consolation, &c., as the case might require, we are convinced it might be useful. It might prevent the need of questioning and cross-questioning at the meetings of the Union, which is often most painful to every generous and noble nature; afford a healthful stimulant to the minds of the

agents; and promote a good feeling of brotherhood and sympathy among the ministers.

It

We make but one more suggestion. Let there be more prayer. is a fact, that divine influence is necessary to convert and sanctify men. The agency may be perfect, the plan of operations may be perfect, but without the power of the Spirit of God, it will resemble the forms of bone and sinew, and flesh and skin, in the valley of vision, before the breathing into them of the breath of life. And as there will be no success without divine influence, so there will be no divine influence without prayer. The prayer of saints is just as necessary as the Spirit of God, because it is the appointed means of obtaining his bestowment. Do we not fail here? The church may put on her strength, but if the arm of the Lord put not on its strength, no good will follow. It is not by might nor power still, but by God's Spirit, that bad men are made good, and good better. Let every one then that contributes towards an institution pray for it. And let prayer be offered at its anniversaries. Why should not County Unions devote a day, or half a day, to this exercise alone? Surely it would be meet and useful when we assemble to plead God's cause, to beseech him to arise and plead his own.

We remind our readers that there is an inducement to more vigorous and devout labours not only in the claims of our common Christianity upon us as saints, but as dissenters. Congregationalism is dissent. It differs from something, something established, something which enjoys a thousand accidental and earthly advantages. It is opposed by strong and mighty influences. It can only spread or be sustained by the knowledge of its grounds. The time was when the want of the Gospel in different localities made dissenters. This time is almost gone. Either the increase of evangelical clergymen prevents the necessity of going elsewhere for the Gospel, or the increase of church assumption and bigotry makes men willing to have no Gospel, rather than go any where else for it. It is becoming clearer and clearer, that dissent must stand by the reasons of dissent. Congregationalism cannot depend on the imperfections and inconsistencies of other systems, it must rely on its own excellence and truth. And this must be published. It is suicidal policy, it is injustice to the truth through injustice to our own convicvictions of it, to conceal our light. If our distinctive principles are Scriptural, we are bound by our religion to promote them, and it is only by their promotion that we can hope to keep, much more extend, our ground.

M.

QUESTIONS ON THE DEACONSHIP.

MR. EDITOR, I believe the deaconship of our churches is to come under the consideration of the Congregational Union at its approaching assembly. May I, in the mean time, throw out a few questions upon that important subject? I have no favourite theory to establish. My wish is, to ascertain the mind of God, and to see the divinity of the Congregational system exhibited in all its hallowing influences. The chief point upon which I feel in doubt, and upon which I want the opinions of wise and good men, relates to the duration of the deacon's office, or rather to the length of time for which our brethren ought to be inducted to the office. Does the Bible require that the persons chosen to the office should be chosen for life, or does it leave the time of service, as it leaves many other things, to the good sense and pious judgment of the church? If the latter, I might ask whether a periodical election by ballot would not contribute to edification, more than the plan now generally adopted? Would it not give the churches an opportunity to rectify any mistake they might have committed, in choosing a person who either was unsuitable, or had become so since his election; to choose any individual more efficient, whom the providence or grace of God had placed within their reach; to encourage and honour by a re-election those dear brethren "who had used the office of a deacon well?" And, so far as the brethren themselves are concerned, would not a periodical election by ballot give to those who, from a variety of causes, had been inadequate to the duties of their office, an opportunity to retire without dishonour to their own character, and without producing an agitation in the church? Again, I ask, whether a periodical election would not prevent the excitement, the almost crisis, which a choice of deacons now causes? By diminishing the value or importance of the office, and shortening its duration, we should, I think, lessen the anxiety to secure it, and the anxiety to avoid it, which we now often witness. Lastly, I would ask, whether there are not several churches in the kingdom, which, seeing the beneficial tendencies of periodical elections, in many civil, and literary, and religious institutions, have adopted this plan in the choosing of new deacons, when the former ones had either fallen in death or become too few, and which are now in a high degree prosperous? May the benediction of the Most High rest upon the Congregational Churches and Union so prays,

Mr. Editor, yours cordially,

Wigan, March 11, 1841.

W. R.