of order; for, besides that, this will all be rectified at last, it is God's cosmos we are at present speaking of, and not man's chaos.

"This universal harmony without finds its mirror in the microcosm of the human spirit within. The soul, rightly strung, will be nature's æolian harp, vibrating to her breath, and giving back her melodies; or, like the fabled Memnonium, it will warm under her smile till it becomes vocal with the praise of nature's God. All the genuine products of the human soul shadow forth this harmony. All virtue is but the harmony of moral relationship-of all harmony the loftiest and the best. All science is knowledge harmonized. All art, whether it addresses the eye or the ear, is but the vesture or the echo of the indwelling sentiment of harmony and beauty. All poetry, that deserves the name, is truth and loyalty to nature, within or without, and has thus been grandly defined as musical thought.' And religion is the gathering up and the sanctification of these and all other genuine things, and the consecration of

them all to the God of the whole earth.'

tion should a Believer in Revelation dedicate his property to the cause of God?"

"The Jewish Law of Tithe, a Guide to Christian Liberality."-By the Rev. R. Spence, A.M.

"The Christian Weekly Offering; or

the scriptural principle and rule of self-assessment in the dedication of property."-By the Rev. J. Ross. "The Christian Steward, an Essay on the right appropriation of the profits of business, salaries, wages, and income in general."

The reader is to understand that the

66

authors belong to "different Christian communities.' One is an Episcopalian clergyman, the second is a Presbyterian minister, the third is a Scotch dissenter, the fourth is an English nonconformist, and the fifth a layman; and that as the scheme in the first instance originated with Baptists and Wesleyan Methodists, it may be regarded as combining the suffrage and sympathy of the largest evangelical denominations in the United Kingdom."

Concerning the authors we shall only

What is a layman? From the above we may conclude that he is not an Episcopalian clergyman, Presbyterian minister, Scotch dissenter, or English nonconformist. Perhaps the question may be best answered thus-alayman is a creature of God, while clergymen of the Established Church, and Presbyterian ministers are creatures of priestism. The layman, too, in this case acted in harmony with his origin-his ministerial competitors accepted their portion of the prize fund-he appropriated his towards the expense of publication.

One purpose this volume will certainly serve. It will show that wide departures from apostolic procedure have not proved efficient that letting seats in theatrical style, falling back upon popular orators, begging sermons, concerts, fancy fairs, lotteries, excursions, and other not more reputable schemes, will not answer the holders of the "sordid dust" cannot be induced to throw out sufficient quantities to rechurches, without these more than plenish the bins, while the apostolic questionable means, had enough and to spare.

-

The first essay commences with a

new appropriation of the leading maxim of a celebrated modern Socialist, "Property is crime," and shows that while man has a right to property towards his fellow-man, he has none towards his God. Nothing which he possesses is his own God exacts from those who hold his talents a strict account.

'Oh, vain man of the world, with thy heart set upon thy treasures, be they great or little, with the firm purpose to use them for thyself, and to call them and think them thine own, in what light does Scripture place thee? Thou art in its searching eye but the usurper of another's rights-the breaker of a trust which thy God has given thee-the earuer of vengeance when he comes to call thee to account. * * * * Cease, then, to speak of your possessions as your own: be wise, and call them what they are-a trust from your God."

After urging that God is the disposer of all things that he has not resigned to man the absolute disposal of even a portion of his trust-it asserts, that as

"The wide ocean might seem to be without a master, rolling its huge billows where it pleased, were it not met by that restraining shore-those bars and doors which he hath placed who said to it, 'Thus far shalt thou come, and no farther; and here shall thy proud waves be stayed,' so might man imagine himself without a superior-the original, not the delegated, lord of this lower world, unless he too were met with a bound beyond which he might not pass; unless, in the disposal of his property there were a portion placed out of his discretion, of which God had said, 'This may not be used for thy pleasure, it is mine.' "

Next follow several chapters designed to prove a tenth was required of mankind from the "earliest times," and that the requirement was re-enacted under Moses, and continued under this dispensation. Abraham and Jacob, in offering a tenth, are adduced on the ground, that these ancient worthies were not supporters of will-worship, which consists in adding to, or taking from, Divine appointments. We trust the evangelical denominations" which have countenanced this volume will learn the lesson. How the author, who is a curate in the diocese of Cork, will make it square with the practice of his own church, it may be hard to say. We leave him to apply the following lines: "True worship never sprang from the earth, and ascended with acceptance to heaven; but

from heaven she came to earth, and thence went back a welcome visitant to her original home, the bosom of God. No worship of man's own choosing, i. e. no heresy, was ever acceptable to God; to all such he replies, Who hath required this at your hands ?' So persuaded was Mr. Hallet of the force of this, that he does not hesitate to pronounce that God's acceptance of Abel's offering was a 'demonstration' of its being in obedience to the divine commandment, according to that obvious maxim of all true religion, 'In vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Even apparently minute and unimportant matters have not been thought by God unworthy of notice, or the deviation from them undeserving of condemnation. How minute, for example, are the directions of the Levitical law, and yet how sorely was their infraction punished, as witness the account of Korah and his company, of Uzzah, and many others."

That the author, however, cannot distinguish Christianity from Judaism, will be seen from the following :

Testaments, then, are essentially the same, so "As the Scriptures of the Old and New the churches ruled by both are essentially one. They are not two churches.'

* * * *

What is done away with we can only learn, either from those Scriptures themselves, or from those of the New Testament, or from both. Whatever cannot be proved from these sources to be abrogated, must be considered still in force. We will show, then, not only that no such abrogation exists in the matter of the tenth, but that, on the contrary, we have every fair and sufficient reason for concluding that its obligation is continued in the Christian dispensation."

The next four chapters relate to Christian free-will offerings 66 over and above the tenth," the objects upon which they are to be expended, motives to liberality, and tests of covetousness. In arranging for the expenditure, our good curate seems inclined to take care of number one, and consequently places the support of ministers first support of the gospel ministry occupies the leading place' - their education, then missionary enterprises, and THEN the poor of the household of faith. Of course we say-let the last be first.

66

the

The second essay contains ten chapters with the following headings:-The Bible, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Day of Pentecost, Macedonia and Corinth, The First Day of the Week, Examples, Miscellaneous, Conclusion.

"It is taught that, the gospel of Christ leaves the question (how much?) to be determined by Christians themselves that while we may venture to say that one tenth of our whole income is an approved proportion of charity,' this is to be understood only of those who, with so doing, are able to support themselves and families-that there are some for whom to give a twentieth or fiftieth would require the nicest frugality and care'-and that of many among the poor it may be said, if they give anything they give their share.' Are these representations in accordance with the revealed will of God? We hold that they

are inconsistent with it. It is our belief that a law for the regulation of giving is laid down in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. It is our conviction that no one, taking these for his guide, can devote less than a tenth of his available income to the cause of God. He may give more, as much more as he will, or his circumstances warrant; but less be cannot possibly give, and act consistently with the inspired standard of man's duty. The case of a pauper in a poor-house may be pleaded against this view; but what income

has he? He has none, and where there is no income, there is no obligation. Let that pauper, however, receive a shilling from the passing visitant, and he is bound to recognize the

claim of God to at least the tenth. Yes! and he may devote it to him with as high a principle and as holy an affection as he who gives his thousands out of his great abundance. Or we may be told of others who are sunk in debt and under obligations which they are unable to discharge; but what comes to them is not their own, it is the just property of their creditors, and can only pass through their hands to them. Every man must be able to say with David, in his religious contributions, I have of mine own proper good given to the house of my God.' Let the subject be cleared of all extraneous matter-let the question stand in its simplicity, What proportion of his income should a believer in Revelation dedicate to the cause of God? And without hesitation it is affirmed he cannot consistently give less than a tenth. It will be observed the phrase, a believer in Revelation is used designedly, for our appeal is to the whole word of God. The Jewish and the Christian Scriptures are not being paraded against each other as though they inculcated different or contrary doctrines. They are together the exposition of one system of religion, but the religion is throughout one and the same. The same moral law pervades the Old and New Testa. ments. Their principles are identical. These are taught in a peculiar manner under the ancient economy, and they are brought out dif

After this confounding of dispensations, there are many noble remarks contrasting the liberal bestowment of the first Christians with the miserable contributions of modern congregations. The time of religious contributions is then marked

"Above all, it should be carefully noted under what powerful impressions and motives the Apostle would have our minds, when we would thus habitually devote our property to God.

On the first day of the week!' What associations are connected with that day!

*

* In almost no instance is the apostolic rule, in this matter, obeyed. In a large proportion of the churches of these lands no religious contribution is made on the first day of the week. In many, a halfpenny or penny may statedly be given. But as to meeting the spirit of the letter of the apostolic rule, where shall we find it? Personal enjoyment and profit seem to be the grand absorbing objects of attendance upon public worship. We go to receive good, and forget the Apostle also taught us we should no less go to do good. To do good and to communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices is God well pleased.' It is to be feared we are in no readiness to act upon this apostolic rule."

After a just condemnation of modern words occur:beggingism, the following acceptable

"Can you point out a way to fill the exhausted treasury? Yes, and a simple one too -a way simpler and easier far than that which is at present pursued, and as much more efficient, as it is easier and simpler. It is just to return to the apostolic counsel, 'On the first day of the week' give your substance to the cause of God. It is obvious he means, not as selected now and again, but every first day of we seem to have understood it, a special day the week. Wherever the church of Christ assembles on that day, let members give what their pains-taking has enabled them to provide for the cause of God."

The third essay seems decidedly more healthy in regard to the Old Law.

"Thus it appears that, under the Old Testament dispensation, liberality to the cause of God was a moral duty, as it is now-the difference being that a tenth was then stated to be the proportion which should be given, whereas now every Christian has to determine for himself what he ought to give.”

State churches might learn a lesson from the few words following

"It does not seem that any provision was made by the law of Moses for the recovery of tithe, if the people proved unwilling to pay it. "The rendering of what was due was simply a matter of religious obligation, and where this failed the claim could not be enforced by any constraint of law' (Fairbairn's Typology, vol. 2, p. 336.) The payment aud appreciation of them, (the tithes) Moses left to the consciences of the people, without subjecting them to judicial or sacerdotal visitations' (Horne, p. 298.) This is manifest from the absence of any allusion to the legal machinery which would have been requisite for its enforcement, from the silence of the historical facts of Scripture respecting the occurrence of such a case, and still more from the expostulations addressed to the Israelites when they withheld their tithe."

Notwithstanding that the law of the tenth is not held binding, it is presented as a standard which the Christian may well use in measuring his contribution. Objections to this measuring of liberality are stated and met. For instance:

* *

This

"We cannot afford it. This, if true, is sufficient excuse. God hates robbery for burntoffering, and would not have his service made heavy and grievous: Let every man give according as he purposeth in his heart, not grudgingly, or of necessity, for the Lord loveth a cheerful giver' (2 Cor. ix. 7.) excuse, however, will often be adduced where it ought not, as a cloak for covetousness; where, were the light of eternity beaming round the soul, and the love of Jesus warming the heart, a fifth would not be thought too much. Let us look at this excuse a little more minutely. We would say to the believer, it is probably quite true that your income barely equals your expenditure already, and that even a very little addition to the latter would prove more than you could bear. But is it indispensably necessary that your expenditure should be quite so large as it is? Must you have these elegancies and luxuries? Is there no needless expense for unnoticed fineries and formalities? Must you have them, even though your neighbour should in consequence want a Bible? You would miss them--would you? And is this the utmost of your attachment to Christ and his salvation, that you will give him what you will not miss ? Was this the measure of his love to you? Miss them! Aye, and so you should. You can never know how precious Christ is to you, until you deny yourself for him. What a warm gush of cheerful love wou'd rise up spontaneously within your heart, if you felt that you were making real sacrifices, not to fashion and custom, but

to Christ! Perhaps you would not feel the loss so much as you think. There are many of the things which cause half the expense of life without the least use, and not a few which destroy its comfort, manliness, respectability, freshness, and facility."

This essay concludes with an exhortation to which we shall do well to take | heed.

"The day of the Lord, in which we shall have to give an account of our stewardship, is rapidly approaching; our time for service will soon end. Then will it be found, that he only who sowed bountifully shall reap bountifully, while he who sowed sparingly shall reap sparingly. What reflection for a death-bed will it be! What a thought for eternity! ‘I wore a better dress, ate richer food, occupied larger sum of money, by my parsimony to the a more splendid house, and left behind me a

Lord's cause.' How different will be his re

Will

flections who can look back upon his pilgri mage and see that he might have had to toil less severely, and made a little better show in the world, had he not given a tenth to the Lord! Will he then regret his toil? he lament his liberality? No, he has sown to everlasting. He has made to himself friends the Spirit, and shall of the Spirit reap life will be received into everlasting habitations. of the mammon of unrighteousness, and he These two courses are before us, with their respective terminations, and we must choose between them. May God give to every reader grace and wisdom to weigh aright this most important duty, and to act in it according to his convictions of duty. Amen."

While sects are seeking to restore the one contribution, let us thank God and attend to "the fellowship" in a manner acceptable to Him. Let us rejoice that the truth is prevailing, and that though we may now say it is neither light nor dark," (a sort of twilight, truth and error in conflict) "yet at eventide it shall be light."

66

an important question, but, unfortunately, left it unanswered, i. e. "How is it that our churches have little or no hold upon the masses?" Since the putting forth of that question, the only advance seems to have been to a state of such internal confusion, that this year the Annual Meeting of the Union has not been held. Light and darkness positive and negative theology have been doing battle, and in some quarters developing not a little "negative morality.' But what is to come? Something nearer to Christianity. Congregationalism, however, has not been to man-to nations-an unprofitable servant. Last week the celebration of the "Centenary of Manchester Independency" gave rise to the following just remarks:

"The true founders of the United States were, not WASHINGTON and his colleagues in the war of the Revolution, but those pilgrim fathers who, in December, 1620, landed on the bleak shores of New England, choosing rather to brave the privations of exile than bend their consciences to the prelatical tyranny then rampant at home. The Nonconformists who then left their native shores were unconsciously the instruments of founding a free empire, which, after the lapse of two centuries, rivals the oldest European states in population, industry, commerce, education, and political power, and whose future influence upon mankind it is all but impossible to over estimate. But there were Nonconformists left at home, CROMWELL and MILTON to wit, whose achievements in a narrower sphere are entitled to a niche of equal renown. One of them sent a king to the scaffold, and the divine right of kings along with him; the other embalmed in immortal language the noblest aspirations of universal freedom. The political influence of Nonconformity did not expire with the Restoration. The attempts which were made to extinguish it provoked a reaction, which made itself felt when WILLIAM OF ORANGE landed at Torbay. The theory of the revolution was, in fact, the same as that which had been

matured half a century earlier in the writings and speeches of Nonconformists,-republican principles, adapted to the exigencies of monarchical rule, and resulting in that compromise between despotism and democracy whose best type and monument is the British constitution. How large is our indebtedness to the same quarter for the impulse which has slowly extended the domain of civil and religious free

dom !"

This is, however, no reason why Congregationalism should stand in the way,

"We venture then to ask whether the mem

bers of the Congregational denominations in Manchester are perfectly satisfied with their present position? Are we to suppose that an aggregate of 3,500 church members, and 17,000 represents the spiritual power which Congreattendants on public worship, adequately gationalism ought to exert among the vast population of this city? We might extend the query so as to embrace every other existing denomination. It is gratifying to see places opened for public worship; but bricks and mortar do not constitute Christianity, and are in themselves no proofs of religious progress. Every thoughtful man must recognize the vast gulf which exists between the religious denominations and the multitudes outside. The former constitute a charmed circle; they move in a world of their own; their principles are misunderstood; their language is scarcely intelligible; and while the spirit of Christianity, and a certain reverence for religious truth, are on the increase; while the old race of scoffers is almost extinct, and you can hardly meet with a person who does not admit the importance of religion as a branch of moral culture, the estrangement of the people from the institutions of Christianity is certainly not on the wane. Is there no cause for this anomaly? Can no reason be assigned why the influence of organizations which professedly aim only at embodying Christian truth, should be so narrow in its range? Whether is it likelier that the fault exists in the truth itself, or in its human expounders? The ecclesiastical polity of Congregationalism is peculiarly adapted to make progress, and that because it rests upon a recognition of human freedom, the right of self-government, and the sole sovereignty of the conscience in all religious matters. These are noble principles: to them, ultimately, all religious communities must come : but are they clearly understood and legitimately developed by those who make them their chief boast ? Does not a religious profession, as ordinarily understood, involve in it a human yoke of bondage-a submission to a series of conventional requirements, of which not one word is said in the New Testament, and which, however they may be willing to bear it to whom education has made it easy, is utterly repellant to all beside.”