Chicago Daily Tribune Newspaper, December 1, 1878, Page 9

THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE: SUNDAY. DECEMBER 1, 1878—BIXTEEN PAGHES. 9 — e —————— RELIGIOUS. mgersoll’s Lectures Pro- nounced Impolitic, Un- just, and Unphilo- sophical. ' .. Wholesale Denunciation’ of the Bible Irra- tional and IMis- . chievous. Iy SQholaIiy Review of the Great * Freo-Thinker by a Uni- tarian, by the Israclites Shonld Re- “move Their Self-Imposcd Social Ostracism. Gambling at Church Fairs Not in Conflict with the Catholic Church Rules. General N otes--Personals--Hu- morous Piety--Serv- ices To-Day. BIBLE LESSON. HOME AND CHURCH, DEC. 1, 1878, e tors fo the celcoration of the Lord's sup- e “These words which T command thee this day {be 1n thine_heart. and toon sbalt teach them b amto thy children, and shalt talk of them e oa wittest in_thy houze. and when thon - , and_when thoa liest dowa, )y the wi e onrsect up, and thoa shalt bind them = “ hand for a sign, and they shail be us e betwen “nd thou shalt write tem TPOR 5 bouse, and on thy e a (el of Luke. .. 20. e o ey evening. Apell 3 (L4th of . 50 B A verive Conar, Emperor of Romes Pon- R eie, Procurator of Judea; ilerod Antipas, Fearelof Galtlec. eimeen the legsons: e Femained In seclusion a1 Dethauy from e attoraoon until Thursday afternoon, o Thureésy afternoon le went to Jerusalem to ne Pacsover. o R interval from Tuesday toThursday spent, iy, 10 reposc. ; e olime the Sanhedrim had matured their st o aie Ie life. 5 0t aetecd 10 arrest Jesus privately for fear of fhe peojuie. §. The Passover ceicbration begun on Thursday, pof Friday. Farrar, Alord, Pressense, and Tiechendor! think otnerwize. © EXVLANATION. Fulfillments. Supernataral foresight. Lyerusalem. Probably a slave at his work. 'The owner of the house. Peo- ple 1 the East exccedingly Thospitable to strangers. Wil taples, triclinia, or couch- s Furniehed.™ !‘".\"urm make ready. ™ In the lawfc] way, the Passover. See **Prasover.” They went. "/ Hia will ehould always be done. Fotoe as bhe! bsd #aid. ™ {The obedient disciple salways oes. “+The hoor. ™ !l’mbflbly 2tGp. m. i“The twelve Apostles.™ Peter and John prepared the feasl. and then the others came, eveii Judas. 15 Witkdesire, "} |4 ebraistic 1diom of intenstty. 1Tis terrible 2cony i3 thus con- stantly kept before them by anuicipation. ete. i gaar.” 16.Tatil it be | faifiled.™ |Until the Great Deliverance the | Passover trpified is fully real- | |_izea. 17 Con iFour cups were nsed, of uafer- e: (1) At the be- 2) during supper; ) the “‘cup of thantagiv- 1 (4) the ‘‘cup after er. ™ +!Gave thanks™ To God; a beautifal example. "‘Ui\’lde it." |To1ake'the cup not prescribed. 1 will ‘ot drink,"etc. {Apain. ““Tntil the Kingdom,”| etc. ‘In_the new heaveas and new earth, “—Alford. y*He tooki bread.” [The formal institution of the Lord's Supper. lan" embiematic” act.—I. Cor., i, 24, “Brake it.” ‘“This is My body." " [Does not mean what canmot be troe: transubstantiation, con- sabstantiation. “In remem-| brance.” |4« 2 memorial of His person and WOrK. New Covenant. “My blood shed for you “For the remission of your eins."—Matt., 26, 28. _ TURPOSE OF THE LESSON To pisea monument. the Lord's Supper, to JesuaUhrist, to last nntil the _end of Time. upon Refoundation of the Hebrew's Passover, itselfl a iendid memorial. The Passorer — Thei The Lord's Supper— leméation. |The memorial. Afeist of the Jews,| A Christian feast, kept tin memorvof Isracl'sfin memory of man's de- Girersnce in Egypt.. (liverance from the bond- age of sin. The Paschsl Lamb—A| Christ Slain—The Pas- tipeof Chrier. chal Lamb. The Unleavened Bread| The Christian Warfare ~and, —The unleavened bread Biter Herbs—A typeland bitter herbs. o Chrietian discipline. ¥lxe, to be used or| Wine. used or not— Gatied a5 the worship- Unreliable, shifting, use- o oote, & fype ofiless, Christian emotion. felautlity of Cristizal 4 LESSONS. & Our Lord Jesus Chriet is omniscient. Asdisciples we are to follow our Lord's ‘com- A ‘l:hddnlng Christ's work we may boldly address e i Tbe disciple will always find matters just as YLord e 1n Tis Word. 3 e Lond is ready to commune with His dis- 8. Jeeus Chris o oy, Chrstfothe Paschal Lambin the new m"-mch‘hm eamnestly desires to sup with His + & Weshonld give thanke for daily fooa. 1y, Us gifts are distributed with impartial- 1o, A"]‘l:nh::! s (}ls:iplzs shonld partake of these morials. n'fl M:X:.X'A body was broken and Ifis blood was L S0ME MISTAKES OF INGER- SOLL. ALCTCRE DELIVERED AT THE FIRST UNITA oy C‘gnzlcb& CINCINNATIL, SUNDAY EVENING, el ) ¢, BY THE REV. CHARLES W. g DTE. FORMEULY OF CHICAGO. pPeaking the Trath in Love. "— Ephes. , ir., 15, s the past week there hias heen a erowd- " endance on the lectures of that advocate i, ous radicalisra, Col. Robert G. Inger- r Ina general way it may be said that while Tagapersoll 16 in no sense a representative of daey Views, yet the geueral drift and ten- e of bis elorts are to a -certain extent in ,mnm)‘ With our own: to cmancipate the hu- iod from the thralidoms and superstitions Dast, 10 free man from the errors and mm&o{ 2 crude theology, and to enable him o crect in a self-determining and cheerful ol fnx;amm_ With Mr. fugersoll’s denial fty or JIPtTDatural origin and iniallible autbor- 5ol the Bible, the arromant claims of the W-‘I&O?, the irrational and immoral charac- Hiapagy PUPar ereeds, we arc in substantial ity 3 Weshare fn bis hatred of all insin- J» towardice, and slugeishness of thought % -: ;vhgre of the relizious. Wemay notgoas 28w, 20es In bis denials and dislikes, but, as Py 2 Fu, We agree with bim most heartily— st e 1y hlc agrees with us; for there is little a mm“): )l::s these topics which has not been Other ndif:u ; on the lips of Unitaran or o . teachers for half 2 century. He 0 eriticism, offers no proof, frames no ery disciple rejoice in the **New argument which free-thinkers like Channing, Ballou, Parker, Thomas Paine, and others have oot advanced long before him. To be an origi- nal thinker on these great topics iz, however. riven to very few, and it fs not probable that our fricnd makes 'any such claim. But what he inay justly claim as a personal distinction is the Ireshuess and vizor with which he presents the oldarzuments, the truly remarkable eneray, logicul xicenness, and punzeut wit with which hie Lrings home tis :onvicuion to his Learers. A man” of such positive traits of character, and Withal engared 1n so iconoclastic a work natu- rally awakens a deal of opposition and dislike in the community. In all fairness, how- ever, I think even those who do not agree in bis conclusions or admire his methods, ought not to refuse their tribute to the personal ability and ssof the man. Those who b listen- ed to his utterances must avknowledye him to bea large-brained, outspoken, determined cham- pion of the truth as lie sees it Strong in his personal likes and dislikes, he possesses a heart caslly stirred to generous impulses. and displays happy optimism “of nature, the outcome of a zood digestion and unusually worldiy suceess, which atones in part for his somewhat gloomy philosopby of the universe. As an orator hie belonz to the robust schoni, bred in the camp- meetings and hustings of the West, and has the characteristic excellences and vices of that school. His energetic presence and powerful delivery are suflicient to outweigh certain de- fects of manner and lanauage. while his evident carnestness, his abounding animal spirits, ready wit, and_shrewd manazement of his audiences make him almost irresistible to the averaze mind. To one who like myself is in substantial sympathy wit oll’s central purpose, and who believes him to be very much in carnest, there is much to admire in such a man. He is reported to have a lining for Unitarian and Universalist mivisters. In my owo case at Jeust, thas liking is heartily reciprocated, and, 1 pre- sume, {s snared by a large part of this congre- gation, This personal sympathy, however, should not disqualify us from estimating fairly the nature and value of his influence in the realin of fres ligious thought, a judement which Mr. Inzes himselt invites by his andacious and antagonistic methuds. Now that he has eoncluded for a season his labors among us, it is in order to sum up their result, and so far as may be, strike the balanice of good or evil he has done. Per- laps a liberal like myself can do this more fairly thau those who have a creed to defena or :n ::lfulliblu bouk to bolster up against his at- acks. A WRONG METHOD. It is, then, with the utmost desire for fair- ness thav 1 utter the conviction, which I think is that of most thoushtful Liberals, that, while Mr. Ingersoll has done undoubted good among us by awakening the public mind from its tor- ]'Aor and calling renewed attention to the base- ess and immoral character of any of the popular beliefs, he has done still more harm to the cause of rational and liberal reliion throngh the mistaken methods he employs. It is_precisely here that we take issuc with our fellow-reformer. We believe him to be in earn- ¢st and to have the right direction and aim, but his way to achieve that aim we believe to_be impolitic, unjust, aua unphilosophical. Our objection is not that he antazonizes and denies the cherished beliefs of his fellow-men, for that is inevitable in all carnest hearing of testimony or attempts at reform. It is the extravacant, intemperate statements, the harsh denunciation, the irreverent and unsympathetic handlingof other beliefs to which AIr. Ingersoll must so often plead suilty, Sure- Iy thisis not the spirit in which the radal thinkers, the lover of fair play, the evolutionist i ion, should approach the themes of deep- est interest and importance to mankind. This unseemly heat and temper of mind disqualifies bim for “the calm, dispassionate consideration which such questions demand. But it may be urzed that, while Mr. Inzer- 501’s inethod has little attraction for cul and thouzhtful persons, it is very eflective anotber class of minds not likely to be reached by any sober reasoning or refinement of ma ner. Nodoubt he draws his hearivg main] from this last-named class, but I quustion whether his influence over them is a beneficial one. If you carctully scrutivize the char- ucter of ~ the audiences attending his lectures, you will find it madc wp in great part of persons, mostly men, who are al- ready in sympathy with Iis view of the ques- tion, or are indiflérent to_auy view of it. ‘They £0 to hear him because they waut to be enter- tained or because- they wish to emjoy his hard thrasts at their peiglibor’s creed. Some are theological bard-heads, in whose ears nothing is g0 sweet as denunciation ana abuse. Others have a secret bate avuinst everything that ven- tures to call jtself respectable or upright, but the great majority are * in for fun aud desire the mental tickhng and divertiscment of the hour. Now, what rood does Mr. Ingersoll do to such persons? He feeds their pugilistic pro- pensities, increases their prejudice and scorn. against those who differ from them in opinion, and cocourages the epirit of trreverence and in- tellectual flippancy in the community. Nay, more, it reacts upon himself. Ivsensividbly, he is led to make concessions in manner and mat- ter to his audiences, lafisns into slang and pro- fanity, which, while they “make the ground- liogs laugh, make the judicious grieve.” The thoughtlul radical may be carried away for the moment by the excitement of the scenes, but when be comes to himsclf hefcels that this boisterous mirth on high and sacred themes— sacred to many of the best and truest people— is unseemly and mista! I humor is out of place anywhere, it is iu the discussion of such solemn_issucs between tinite man and the. Su- preme Power of the universe. Laughter about God or -our brother's vision of God! to what deptns of irreverence and uncharity does it not lead us! A want of reverence for what 15 above us, for ageand station, superior knowledze, character or services, is one of the crving evils of our day,and he who contributes, even indi- rectly to destroy this reverence in the breasts of his fellows is not their bencfactor, but their enemy. Itis all well enough for Col. Ingersotl to piuckup the tarcs in the fieldof human thought, but if he cannot contrive to do this without destroving the wheat also, bis husban- dry is not of the kind our age necds, Again, this method of inteliectual bullying is unwise in a reformer because it malkes few or no vonverts. The believera who attend his lec- turcs, finding their views so rudely and unfairly treated, are kindled into countér emotions of resentmient and opposizion. ‘Their prejudice of dogmatism increase. Thus he drives back into their error the very men who by a_ kindlier and more gencrous treatment mizht have beco won o the truth. Read the controversial replies to Col. Ingersoll that bave appesred in the news- papers, or been tulminated;from the pulpit. and see what a bitter, personal, arrogant, and un- charitable tone distinguishes the most of them. They are discreditavle to their authors, lay or clerical, and yet for this sad display of bigotry and temper Mr. Ingersoll is maimly responsible. 1t is the result of his own doguatic and unkind utterances. For it must be said, and very re- gretfully, that while no word is so constantly on Mr. Ingersol’s lips as charity, no one more constantly violates it in spirit xnd in letter. CIIURCH AND MINISTRY. To show you to what extravagant and unjust statements this temper of mind Ieads him who fndulges in it, let us look more in detail at some: of the rehrious fnstitutious and sanctions which Mr. Ingersoll opposes so strenuously, and see if they deserve such ungualified censure. Con- sider, then, in tne first place, Mr. logersoll’s Ditter criticisin upon the churches of the pres- ent day. He declarcs, indeed, that he bears them all no ill-will, but his tone in speaking of them is so uniformly contemptuous and spiteful as 1o gainsay this zencral disclaimer. The Church to him is ap unmitigated evil which be’ would giadlv abotish if he could, and upon church members he visits his particular scorn and ridicule. Well, the Christian Church is not what it ought to be in any of its divisions, but what is there better toput in its place asa moral teacher, a consoler and insyirer of men? Mr. Ingersoll tetls us that universal cducation, ,the pubhie school, the college, the lyceum are 10 redeem the world. Buu it the experience of wan proves any one thing more satisfactorily than anotier, it ls that intcliectual culture is not cnough to save men trom their weakness and wickedness. An edncation often makes a Tuag all the more powerful for mischicf. The best educated are not pecessarily the most just er humane. Those rascally church-members whose frauds and misdeeds Col. Tuwersoll loves to adduce, probably re- ceived more aid in their villainy from their pub- Jic school educatfon than their church connec- tion, for their relegion was a pretense, while their edueation was; a real possession. Nog without goud reason do the poets represent Satan as a man_with a Jarze brain, but neither conscience nor heart. Science also is a Messiah 10 Mr. Ingersoll, but science alone is not ¢nongh 10 sccure the moral order of socicty. It may Do used to base cads, to adulterate food, to up- Bold tnonopolies, or invent life-destroying ma- chines. Noj it is the moral and spiritunl cul- ture, and in human experience no ocy has Dbeen eo efficiest 1n spreading this as the Church. It nas its roots deep in the social order, and is 2¢ necessary and eternal an justitution os the Sebiool or the State. There are 150 churches in Cincinnati, and any fair-minded person will ad- mit that they arc important saleguards of our city’s order, and generators of moral force, whose Dlace no other agency could fili. The truer way, therefore, is not to sneer ab the Sourch, of unquaiiiiedly condemn it bat to eriticise its shortcomings in a kindly spirit, and try to make it better and more useful to man- kind. 7 in, Mr. Ingersoll Is very barsh in his tr?::l!:):nt of ministers. He eXcepts the Ux?l- tarinn and Universalist clerey, but all the rest he despises and defies. But 1 should be sorTy ] \ e f to thick thar the liberal sécts contain the only sincere or able men ju the Christian ministr, There are ministers in the United Sta and [will venture Lo, say that no vocation con- taws so large a pumber of honest, intelligeor, faithful, and self-sacriticing en. The minis- ters, whatever may be their intellectuai limita- tions, are the best of citizens, neizhbors, and friends. ing i a elare of publicity, su: 5 artends mo other profession, with thair ever: peeeadillo or sin published to the world by a sen- sational press, and lonted over by prarient- minded men, vet how small is the contribution 3 daity calendar of wrong-dome. in that public function, too, they fultill im- portant offices to the community as the reli ctors of the youns, fuspirers tc heavenly liopes, cousolers in sickness W, voicing by the open wrave the pre- grief aund prayer. Such services alone entiile them to respectful treatmen: at the hands of thefr eritics. It is true they are often varrow and bizoted, dozinatic and hteral. They preach a deal of gloowy and irrational theolo: ut much of this is neutralized by their own better sense and humanity, and a deal more by the larger knowledge and theological indiffer- ence of their heare: For this character of Protestant preachin is by no means what it as, or what Col. Ingersoll still supposes it to be. His illustrations arc all drawn from his hoyliood experiences, or the revival meetings of the illiterate Suckers around Peoria. Lt mizhtbe well for him to so far overcome bis prejudice as togo and listen 1o a cultivated prescher like Phillips Brooks, Dr. Stone, Theodore Cuyler, Bishop Simpson, Prof. Swinw, or Dr. Thomas, and ‘learn what the orthodox pulpit really teazhes on the great topics of human thoushit and hfe. The minister, like the chureh, is a m:ccsmrf' factor of bumansocicty. In one form or another he has ahvays existed, and will al- ways continue te exist. The vricsthood have been a source of evil to mankind, as what order of society has not? But let not this chironicler of shamé exlipse the brighter record of their illustrious services to man. It is in_such min- isters of heaveuly truth and wrace as the glorious company of Oid Testament prophets, from Moses to Micah, Jesus of Nazareth, that unique fiure in human listory, Lutaer, the herald of a new era in civlization, Wesley and Georze Fox, Channing and Parker, that " the modern world has found its seers and saviors; and even Jona- than Edwards, concerning whom Mr. Ingersolt declares, “it there fsan infamous man in the lustory of the Church, it “is Jonathan Edwards, T hate him dead,—I hate his ashes, L hate his name,” was a man whose grave Christian men and women may well visit with reverence. Pro- nounced by the uoanimous voice of Europe and America the most remarkable mind our country has yet produced, from a metaphysical standpoint, it. was the iron loric of the man united to a conscience of the most intense sensibility which made him such au ar- dent champion- of eterual retribution. DBut Edwards not only preached this doctrine, he believed it, and used to go about in selt-nceus- ing agony, wonderiug that divine merey could spare so guilty a wretch as himself. His pri- vate character was. exceptionally pure and up- right. 1lis courtship reads like u Puritan idyl, and his married life was all that even Col. In- wersoll could desire. ~After three yearsof hard service, hie voluntarily resizned his pulpit. and, refusing the most flattering offers, went to live 2s & missionary among the Connecticut Indians, a martyr to bis noble conscientiousness and self-sacrifice. Suchn man way have been nar- row, intolerant, and bigoted, but bLis purity of life and loftiness of purpose atone for such faults. which were, atter all, the comumon de- feets of hise srre. Such amun we may pity for s mistaken theologs, but never hate. It is only ignorance or malice that can do that, or, as in Col. Ingersoll’s case, an extravagance of the rhetorical Timagination. INGERSOLL AND THE CREEDS. Once more, us religious liberals, we deplore as much as Mr. Ingersoll the continued acceptance by the Church of certain lmliqlufltcd doctrincs. Yet it is surcly time for radicals to Zive up the unfounded notion that these doctrines are the purely arbitrary inventions of a dcbased priest- Diood, and meant to serve- the worldly interests ofthe Churcn. A deever philosophy shows us that all existing systems of opinion, and ail great ductrines of tbe Church which have taken any deep bold ou the buman mind over long eras of time, have something in them which corresponded to man's need uud suited man’s nature. A just critic will not becontent withde- nouncing and ridiculing such doctrines, but will try and discover the clements of truth, beauty, and fitness_to the time und place which they contuin. Every beliel bas a noble side. In the midst of error there is a soul of truth, These old creeds may not be true to us now; they may pever have been absolutely true in themscives. Yet they were intended to utter thestruth as it appeared to the religious cousciousness which produced them, and to minister to_the wmoral and spiritual needs of munkind. Now no stateuent of truth is final and iufallibl Perhaps another generation will smile’as pit: ingly over Col. Ingersoll’s upinions as he does scornfully at those of his spiritual aucestors. ‘This should prompt him to be moresympethetic and kindly in his treatment of theancient creeds of Christendom. TInstead of travestying and ridiculing them, let him rather try to get inside of them, and read them aceording to their best {ntentions, asking in what scuse they were sig- nitieant to the men and women of the past, and what value, if any, they have for us pow. From this point of view these old dogmas will be found to contain, amid much that is crade and irrational, a Kernel of truth and beauty. In the vital kernel lay the secret of their power over the minds of men. The doctrine of the Triotty, for instance, stated in the bald and literal way in which Col. Ingersoll or Mr. Moody utters it, as an arithmetieal distinction of person, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, three separate existences, and yet but one, is an irra- tional and absurd bel It cannot be fntelli- fixixly stated, it cannot be conceived by the man understanding, it has no argument in reason, no support from the Seripture, and no foundation in the nature of things. But the Trinity of the Godbead as an Augustine cou- ceived it, as it was [ormulated by an Anselmy Thomas Aquinas, Abelard, aud other master intellects of the Church, how much there is in v that is beautiful, spiritual, and true. it was an bonest attempt made by religious philosophy to give outward and formal expression to the soul’s desire in that age for a God who stould be in intimate yet cthical relation with his uni- verse. 1t sought to reconcile the two_opposite idess of deity_held by Greek and Jew, and known as the Pantheistic and Tneistic, so as to escape the dilemme of a God who was incom- muunicable by the yorld aud & God who was jmmersed in it. Christian theology cfected this reconciliation between God and the universe, the divibe and the human, by filling the gap between them with the sancti- & person of Christ, who on His human side was akin to man, and on His divine side was a part of the Godbead. Thus the doctrine of the Trinity gloritied maukind by raising it to Heaven, whale it brought the Father down to the side of man by teaching that God was.in Christ recou- ciling the world to Himself. Such thenwas the beneticent purpose of the doetrineot the Trinity. 1t did not realize that purpose. It was a partial and imperfect statement at pest. 1ts logical re- sults in Christian theolozy were often mistaken and mischievous. The créeds of jater ages sadly misinterpreted and perverted its spirit. But it has u noble side. It was the best statcment of the relation between God and manof which that age was capable, aud it has been of ivealeulable service in the theological and relizious life of Curistendom. It brought God nearer to man, and gaveman a divine ideal for worship and moral a- legiance. This1s not the time to show how or why it failed inits attempts to fill the gulf be- tween manand God, the finiteand thieintivite. But though, as Unitarians, we oppose aud deny the validity of this doctrine at the present day, that does not prevent us from being just to it, or speaking of it with respectful sympathy. It was an error, but it was an crror beld in ¢ i i truth. It was a fiction, but every fi Tays stich stronir hold on the buman intellezt is the mistaken image of some great truth. Itis for us to seek what that tcuth is, not scofl or deride our spiritual fathers for failing to uiter it perfectly. ‘We are still engraged in’ the solu- tion of the same great problem thas agltated them. We bave found other answers to-day which better satisfy our mind and heart, but who shall say that these may not become caually untenable and irrational to succeeding ages?t As we hooe to find charity at their hands; us we ‘ope to have our honest and loving intention ap- preciated, even if those who arc ta follow shall outgrow our special opinions, let us render sym- pathetic justice to the purposes of our ancestors, and beneath the letter of their creeds discern the spint of truth, of beauty, aud of love. IIELL. In this way it would be possible to take up one by one the great dogmas of the Church and show the clements of good in cach. Even the doctrine of Hell, which Mr. Ingersoll so terrific- ally denounces, and which I hate as cordially as he—the Jeast defensible of all the articles of theology—has a soul of truth in its error. It expre: the hatred of the Christian world against sinand iniquity, the inevitablencss of the divine retribution, the moral responsibility of man, the inviolable character of the divine de- crees. Now, the essence of Caristianity lies in its intensificd morality. As Martineau says: Tt is the ascent through couscicnce to God.” This easily led to an exaggerated sense of per- sonal aceountability for wroug-doini. But side by side was offered a way of escape through God’s pardoning mercy, free to every soul by Christ’s mediation. - This was what was meant by Christ’s *glad tidings of areat joy,” and not what Col. Ingersoll cuuningly distorts it into, the news of nell-ire. Now, as a system, ihis was perfect. As a practical rule of life it failed; failed miscrably, disastrously, But let it not be forgotten that this doctrine was taught by the Christian Church more mild- Iy than by any of the other great world-relizions, it we except Judaism. Bzdides the horrors of o Hindu, Persian, or Chincse pandemoniam, our Christian hell * pales its inefTectual fires.”” Let us thank God that this great ‘‘raw-liead and bloody-bones of theology.” as_its historian, Mr. Alger, calls it, has weil-nigh alsapocared from our religious norizou. E Bug that is ao reason for Col. Ingzersoll to rall into the op;osite extreme, and iznore all moral retribugion whatever. 1 listened in vain during his lecture on this topic for one word to indicate o his hearers that he believed in auy pu; ment whatever for man's moral delinquenci either in this world or the world to come. Ths is not, perhaps, surprising in a man who evanor- ates all persoual wickedness into.iznorance, and makes all a man’s virie depeud on the ex- tent of his knowledge. . But even rrom 2 materialist standpoint there are surely enougn facts and laws discernible in the stracture_of the universe to imoress uson men the inevitabie, the awlul nature of pysi- nd moral retribation. What 1 man sows s “erststenet o evil courses bring, pliys scry and spiritual discord. | sin must, be exprated oo carth, 0r 4 if there is a future life,”” m the herealter. If ever there wasa time for a public speaker to finpress this sreat trath on his neurers, it was at the close ot a lecture devoted to *abolishing hell.” ‘Inat Col. Inwersoll was absolutely silent on this question was a sad wmistake. It left his hila- rious discipies to imawmne tnat the only duty in lite was to “eat, drink and be ierry, for to- morrow we die.” If such is the morat out- look of Mr. Ingersoll, then I for one prefer the of the churches. Dr. Lyman Beceher s reported to have said in u sermon on the Jove of God, Yes, brethren, God is loving, loug-suffering, forgiving, bur, brethren (this with great emphasis), God is not a fool!” No, d is not mockeil.. There is a personal respousibility for immoral conduct, and no one can eseape the conscquences of his actions. The vicious, the drunkard, and the sensualist, the seltish and the dishouest, the un- faithful, and the unjust, must expiate their evil doings.” There are hells of suffering for body or conscience, which we enter here and must eu- dure hereatter, until the evil s prayed away and a full atonement made for the viotated luws of the universe, We conclude, then, that, if Col. Inzersoll had rightly rasped that central idea of "the philoso- vhy of our day, the development or eyolution of all beliefs, be would not be guilty of despis- ing these uncient doctrines of Christendom. Out of them have proceeded the fuller, richer belief of to-day. With inercased sympathv the evolutionist studies the faiths of his ancestors, only to discaver that that which has been Jone away was slorfous, even if that which remains is more glorious. INGERSOLL AND THE BIBLE. Perhaps nowhere 15 the inadequucy and injus- tice of Col. Inwersoll’s method more strik inglv displayed than in hiscriticism of the Bible, cerning the currant and tion of the Scriptures, we most cordially agree with him. It is baseless, irrational, and mischievous. By it the Bible i3 erected into an idol, made the'final Court of Appeal_for every crude und superstitious be- hict, and a barrief agaiust intetlectual and wnoral progress, How to destroy L alze veneration for the Bible is an important coonsideration for the religivus reformer. Col. Inzersoll solves itin hisown way, but I forove believe that way to be a mij: It_leads him in the ficst place to be unjust to the Bible, and to identify the current interpretation of it with what the book itsclf teaches and clalms to be. The common mnotion is that the Bible claimse to be literally inspired, z2nd of in- fallible authority over the souls of men. But this is an utterly mistaken notion. The Bible nowhere mukes auy such claim, or teaches avy such theory of its owa origin aud nature. [t is simply s claun made for the Bible by the theo- lozians ot the later Church, andmade, too, without authority or warrant. Now, Mr. luger- soll knows this as well as T do, aud yet in his arguments xhout the Scripture he illing to accept the orthodox theory of it as a divine aud trastworthy record of historical facts and events. This may be the most convenient way to win his case, but it will pot satisfy any other than a lewal conscience. 1t is misleading and ivjurious to the higher interests of trutn, be- causc it confuses men’s mings _concerning the true character and value of the Bible. It is un- just to the book ftself. The true method is to tell men the exact truth about the Scriptures, and so give them a correct_foundstion on which to buila their subsequent interpretation of it. Now, the slightest acquaintance with the re- sults of modern critical science teaches that the Bible is by no means to be tuken literally as a pluin unvarnished statement of facts and oc- currences. That course only leads to mental confusion and chaos. Yet most persons are con- tent to do this, and think toey know the Scrip- tufe because they ure familiar with the letter of ts contents. But modern scholarship shows us that to rightly understand the Bible we must not ouly be well read in it, but well read about it. Itis true, as Mr. Ingcrsoll seys, that a man doesu’t ueed to understand GreeK ar Hebrew to get the gist of the Seripture meanng, - A zood many persons arc_preciously muddled by their little Greek and less Hebrew lu interpreting Scripture. But no inan bas any right to set up as acritie of the Bible who has not famuliarized himself with the fullest and most recent scholar- ship concerning its orivin, naturs, and parpose. The researches of DeWette, Buur, Ewalds, Strauss, Kalisch, Kucnen, aod others have thrown a flood of lizht un_ these questions, and their conclusions have recently been made ac- cessible through sucti pupular works as “ The Bible for Learners,” Sunderiand’s ¢ What [s the Bible?” and Chadwick’s **Thbe Bible of To-day.” Now I do not say that Mr. Ingersoll is inorant of this critical scholarship. only charge that during his public deliverances” here be has steadily iznored it. In his treatment of the Bible hie has been content to follow the methods of T'homas Paine and the early and uncritical school of radicals. This has Ied bim to take a shallow view of the Seriptures, make numerous crroneous statements about it, awd maintain an unjust and unsympatbetic attitude towards the greatest literary, historical, und religious treas- ute of Christendom. The Bible is a great book, with a wonderful history and -surpassing influ- ence. Upon it have been founded States and 4 Empires, - Constitutions and codes. It has fostered the social life, fertilized the thought, and inspired the moral outlook of tne centuries. Three world-historic movements have sprung from it,—Judaism, Christianity, aud Islamism. it underlies the common morality and religious trusts of all Christian people. It is found in cvery home, familiar to every mind, dear by association to nearly every heart. It bas been translated into almost every modern tongnc. Keneath the newly-crecteil Cleopatra’s Needle in London was placed a chapter from the New Testament, priated in 233 different lanzuages. A book witn such a history, of such a commanding influcnce on human life, is su worthy of our respect and sympathy; and this feeling of reverence is deepened and confirmed when we rightly siuay its contents, calling to our aid the historical and critical helps of to-day. It isa book, oru col- Jection of books, full” of mistakes and limita- tiops;.it contains muny errors of fact and of feeling; its value as direct and authentic hisiory is not always to be depended upon; its moril judenents” are often defective; its theolozy crude, its philosopby fanciful. Yet, for all this, it is a noble, a grand book, fuil of strengih and fire, swectness and lizht, and one so interwoven with the art, literature, bistory, politics, philos- ophy, Institutions, and relizion of our modern world, that it cannot he destroyed without over- throwing the social order itsel man will suf- fer more inconvenience iu_our society from not knowing the Bibfe than if he were jgnorant of all the classics of Rome and _Greece, and all the Elizabethan poets. In its German and English translations it is the great classic of humble ana cultivatea alike. The version ot Lutherfixed the idiom of bis pative country, and among the An- glo-Saxon races the King James transiation has ever been “a well of Enelish undetiled.” Bug greater far than its literary are jts moral and relicious merits. It contains the literary re- Inains of a people as remarkable for moral and spiritual genius as Greece was for art, or Rome for government. The whole drift and tenor of this literature is religious. “There is only one book, the Songz of Solomon, in which the moral motize is not the controiling idea. There is history in the Bible, but it is all subordinated to the ethical purpose. It lays the most tremendous emphasis on the moral side of lile, ever holdivg up to us in precept and exam- ple the importance of justice, truth, mercy, and righteousness. ‘There are also immoral and im- perfect teachings in the Bible, injunctions i seew harsh and eruel to us now. These must be ascribed to the time, and place, and people from whom they procceded. ‘But while the standards of right and wrong change with the centuries, the moral motive is the same, and that motive in the breasts of the scers, and sing- ers, and heroes of Isracl must be acknowledzed to have been surpassingly grand. Iknow Mr. Ingersoll denies this, but for every false or crucl word from the Bible I will snow him a hundred that are beautiful and true. _Anotber radical critic of the Scripture, Mat- thew Arnold, a_wnan certainly not less free- spoken, just, and scholarly thaa our friend from Illinois, Jeclares that ‘“rirhteousuess is _the master word of tie Old Testament. Keep judgment and do right. _Cease to do cvil, learn to do well.” A seutiment cchoed by the New Testament: “Let every one that cometh in the name of Christ depart from iniquits.” Mr. Arnold declares that the whole Old tament s summed up in that magnificent passage: 0 ye that love the Eternal, sce that ye hute the thing which is evil! To him that ordereth his conversation right shail be shown the salvation of God.” A right reading of the Bible discioses more and mare its transcendent moral worth. Tha profundity of Job, the piety of the Psalmist, the undring hope of the prophets, blend wita the tenderness and trust of the Gospel story in a chorus of eternal harmonv and beauty. The Bible is the impressive monument of our spiritual cvolution. It shows the gradual growth ot the God idea from the anthropomor- Phic Deity, wno speaks with Moses fuce to fce, 05 a man speaketh with a [riend,” to the sub- lime announcement, **God is a soirit,” and will be worshiped in spirit aud in truth. From the terrors of Sinaf it leads us to _the tender plead- ings of the Sermon on the Mount: from the doctrine “an eye for an eye and u tooth for tooth " to the iutlowed injunction, * Render to numan evil for evil. Bless them that curse you, do zood to them that hate you.” A book so rich with the lifeblood of the cen- turics, so associated witn. mau’s hishest hopes and deepest prayers, which so faiehfully reflects the variable moods and changeful experien wankind, is not to be shunned or despi it is to be honored noove all others, and lieid deep within our heart of hearts. Bigots muy misuse it for their private purposes, unbe- fievers may flout and ridicule it. but we will re- mewmber that while the letter killeth, the spirit maketh ive, and s0 study and . employ it as shall make it & service of quickening and . of joy. As Gocthe tells u: ‘he great veneration which the Bible has received frowm so many peo- | ples amd generations of earth is duc to its own intrinsie worth. . . . The higher the cen- turies rise in cujture, the more will the Bible by made uscof by all who arc not wise in their own conceits, but truly wise,—as in part the founda- tion and in part the nstrument of education.” _ CONGLUSION. In conclusion, let me restaie my persoual faith in Mr. Ingersoll’s abihity and earnestuess, and my ayreement with him ox many points of doctrine and mor But his method I believe to be defective. There is a higher way to sjpeak one’s truth in love, to trear others’ opinions with respect sud sympathy, and in all things to believe that knowledge aud piety united shall yet redeem the world. JEWISH EXCLUSIVENESS. A SELE-DMIOSED OSTRACISN WHICH SHOULD BE KEMOVED. ’ Tne Jewtsh Times. We are In receipt of several communications on the subject oL our recens editoriat entitled, “Who s Ashamed to Be a Jew?” Ouelady writes tous, *1t isall very well formen to deny the existence of an auti-Jewish prejudice, —they may not feel it; but we ladies find it at the watering-place hotels aua in the socicty we meet. A Jewess is rarely treated by a Christian like a Christian is.”” Our fair correspondzat is not eutirely wrong., No doubt Jewesses ure treated somewhat differently from Christians in Cunstian society. But whose fault is this; is it duc to an anti-Jewish prejudice? We be- lieve not. The time has come for enlightened fsrealites to decide for themselves, once for all, if they will form part of modern society or if they will countinue to be soclally, as well as religiously, a peculiar people. There can be wo halting half way. There s, we knoow, a dispo- sition on the part of some dJewesses to tolerate the soviety of Chrisilan ladies and geatlemen whom they meet at summer- resorts, as lonx as they are there, and to drop them, as the phrase woes, when they return to town. Christian men aud women are good enough for them in the country, faute de mieuz, but they cannot or will uot invite them to their ‘housts. - Aud because self-respecting Christians resent this apparent sssumption of social ex- clusiveness, they are accused of beiug preju- iced against the Jews forsooth. ither Jews must form partol general society or they must avold it altogether. ‘I'hey cannot play fast_and loose with Ciristian acquaint- am They cannot be futimate with Christian women and refuse to Invite their male relatives to their homes. This Eas been tried and has taited. Our readers well kuow that we are in favor of the most uvrestricted eocial inter- course between Jews and Gentiles. Both would be wainers by it. But such unrestricied inter- course can only exist when perfect contidence bas been established: ‘Chere may be among some people a feeling against the Jews, just as there exists among others @ ing. against Catholies, and amung many a prejudice against the Irish. But all the weight of cvidence i3 agaiust any deeo-rooted, general anti-Jewish prejudice on ihe part of tae American people. For the most part, the dil culties in the way of the complete social eman- cipation of the Jews are the results of the course that the Jews themselves have pursued. Either from fear of inter-marriazes with Christians, or from a feeling of timidivy becotten of European persecutions, or from a fear of the effect of Christian associations upon the religion ot their children, the American Jews certainly baye, by their own acts, reared artifivial barriers betweei .themselves and Christinn _society and replaced the enforced social exile that thelr fathers com- plained of by a system of sovial self-ostracisi, which is none the less burdensome because it is selt-imposed. Ope of the results of this has been that Jewish young women sometimes have Christinn aequaintances, unknown to their parents, be- cause they know their parents object to ente taining Christtan men at their houses. This is sell-evidently wrong; no girl should bave any male acquaintance without the knowledee and approval of her family. Then, aga, Christian young men, tinding themselves excluded from Jewish houses, black-ball Jews 1w their elubs, and sometimes mistake the lowest type of Jews for a type of the best class, simply because they know no better, and because the Jews them- selves prevent them from learning better. All this should stop. As soon us Jewish houses are open to Christians, Christian houses will be open to Jews,—and indeed they ar ready. 1f there evists in New York society any prejudice against the best classes of Jews, it would take the lanternsof ten Diogzenescs to dis- cover it. Onr brethren must not scek to ex- cuse their own cowardice by preferring false accusations against Christian society. It is as much cowardice as anyching else that makes the Jew coutinue his self-ostracism_and the social exile of his childr: As we Rave repeatedly satd, it is only necessary to acquaint the Gentile world with the real character of the Jew to re- move from intelligent minds the last vestice of prejudice that cxists. Whendews and Chris- tiatis cease to be strangers, we shall have no more of aoti-Jewish prejudices. CHURCH FAIRS. VIEWS OF A CATHOLIC PKIEST ON THEIR MOBALITY. New York Wurld, Nov. 22 «Those terrible liitle boys,” said Dr. McGlyna smiling, **who are squandering their fortunes on the turn of a wheel in the Cathedrul Fair have stirred up a real tempest in o teapot, it secms. The Holy Catholic Chureh fs in a state of sicge on their account, and I have been led into a long disquistion in its defense and in the inserpretation of the higher moral Jaw.” A shade of vexation succeeded the smile, a3 hie continued, more gravely: * I could not help thinking 1t a little hard that my words a few days aro should have been so strangely misin- terpreted and commented upon in so caustic a manpner in the editorial which appeared in the Euening Dost last Wednesday. - Probably the editor who reviewed what I said did not draw auy unfair inference fntentionally, but neverthe- less the Catholic Church and I myself, as one of its represcutatives, are placed it a false position. It is certainly implied in the review that the Catliolic Church holds the ground that the end justities the meaus. Now, this I explicitly de- nied at a former interview, and repeat the denial. The Catholic Church has never maintained this false doctrine. “ Again, the conclusion is drawn from my re- marks that Ido not acknowledge the binding force of human law, of civil aud criminal stat- utes. This is also an entire mistake. The Catholic Chureh expressly recogniz:s the au- thority of the laws and inculcates obedience to the powers that be. It isa simple cthical truth, accepted by all persons who believe in the cx- jstence of a divine power, that sin consists in a willful and deliberate violation of the divine laws. These laws arc implanted in the human heart. St. Paul says truly that God has not lefo himself without a witness. As soon as a persou berins t6 reason be becomes conscious ot the existence of thesc jaws; in other words, he knows what it is to have a conscicace. A man, then, who disobeys the dictates of his own con- science, sins. Now, human laws are rightly to be divided ioto two classes. ‘The first class in- cludes sucn enactments as are substantially the expression of the divine laws: *‘Thou shait do 1o murder,’ * Thou shalt not commit adultery,’ and the like. The second class comprehends those laws which are enacted for thecom- fort, convenience, and protection of sucicty, and yet are such that a violaton of them is 108 S etfminal offenso—penal eoactments. to be eure, but not involvine the aquestion of morali- ty. It would be absurd to consider: disobedience o such laws immoral, although it may be very reprenensible, The Church woald never couu- tenance the violation of human laws founded o tne dictates of conscience; it might certain- 1y countenance such infractions of law as were strictly conscientious. . i In the cditorial referredfto the statement is broadly made thas a Jaw as such must bé obeyed. This conclusionis plainly untenable.- The Roman = Emiperors, during the tirst edicts, constraining Chi to worship fals zods. Should the Christians have obeyed the Inws and abandoned their faith! 13 Is unnece: :-i:r\' to cite nstances which confute this p o three centuries issued * Now, Iu regard to the sccond class of laws, The offense of gambling is nov an mfraction of amoral law, but merely of a statute of thc second class.” . *‘Daes the Church countenance a violation of a law of the second clnss in permitting the wrames of chance at the Cathedral ¢ * L canuot answer that question.” replied Dr. AMeGlyno, fraukly, *witbout a better knowledze of the statutes. " It is my impression that the childish zames of chance played in the Cathe- dral are not prohibited by any city or State ordinance. We were only foilowing the -ex- ample, you know,” he continued, with 4 quies smile, hich has been sel by many Protestant oacishes in this city without reprehension froni the pulpit or press. 1f vou come to the broad question, Would fhe Church - cou: i fractions'of the laws of thie second positively, No. The Churen nas always charged its adherents to be serupulousty obedient to the laws, except witen obedience to law meant diso- bedience to conscience. [f it can be shown that the games of chanee in the Caghedral violate a statute which s not virtuaily ebsolete, the man- agers of_the fair will undoubtedly put an end to tacm. If a fine should be exacted by law in consequence of tnese grames, that fine. will be Daid without hesitution.” “Do you thinkit possible these rames of chance may have a bad influgnce on the habits of the boys who risk their money on the turc of a wheet *No,” returned Dr. McGlynn, serfonsty. “T cannot think that there is any corrupting ten- deney in such a momentary ‘amusement. The bovs are given pocket-money to spend at the fair, and, instead of filling themselves up with pastry and other unwnolesome ‘gimcracks, they amuse themselves with the shinuing-wheels. The moncy is miven to them to do what they please with it, aud, boy like, they choose what- ever gives them themost for thelr mooey. The 1ea of auy passion for grain heinz impiented by these eames is untounded, I think. Older peo- ple who spend money in the raflics almost in- variably do so without any hope ol getting any return for the sum iovested. Toey vay num- bers carelessly or to pluase their friends. Yo know church lottery prizes are not sucn as to exuite any Hvelv cupidizy. 1f his Eminence the Cardinal or the Very Leverend Vice-General thouznt that these Zunes were wrons o injur- ing the children you may be very sure thais stop would be put tothem onthe instant. “Lueir taciz approval of them is un evic hat they are belicved to be Larmless. Understand, however, 1 do not vome forward as a chawpion of church ratlies or games of chance. f you ask me us a matter Of persoun! Laste whether I approve of themn, I should say that they might, perhaps, have been dispensed with. It is, however, purely a matter of taste. If ex- cesses oceur Which e the eenth of good taste, it is ditlicult to Catholic clerzy can be held responsible. tainly a Protestant minister would hesitate to shoulder all the little emeanors of s parishioners at parish gatherings or church fairs. +1 wish you would put me riht on oue more point. I did not say exactly that the Bible au- thornzed gumbling. 1 suid merely that the Bible sunctioned, spparently, the ca: or drawing of lots. Nor did I represeni the method by which the yacant apostleship was filled on the death of Jus a contest similar 0 one for the post of an Excise Cowrmisstoner. “Fhe cnoive was u very solemn andserious matter | and was decided ‘in » Christian splrit. Of the wwo men best entitied to the place one was chosen, whether by drawinz lots orcastinz voies it matters not a fir. 1 do not carz to discuss the point, though the phirase ‘casting lots’ is one whicn is autborized by the aceepted En- i glish versions of the New Testament.” DR. THOMAS. IS OPPONENTS ROUNDLY REBUKED. The Methodist Recorder, in an elaborate article on Dr. Thomas and the recent sessionof the Rock River Conference, expresses the following opinion : The Bishop made a crael test of the case by ask- inz all the members of tne Conference who thousat Dr. 'I'nomas’ course had injured the chuse of Christ tostand up! Perhaps he cxpected to protect Dr. Thomay, fecling that, as the case was scttled, nons but the intensely intolerant would venture to irise. It is said tiat tne whole body arose! The dear brethren took occasion 1o &hosw L ood standing by standinz rignt up! B up they wert entitled trom that very mos - cates of good standing. There i+ nothine hil ing a stand. If the Bishop haa asied to stand on their Lenas, no doudt the; tried It nnanimonsly. ifow Dr. Taomas® preachin for fen years or wmore. under whi souls had been converted znd th made. to rejolce in the Gospel ; how one of the largest_conzrezutions of intellizent, ucful, and united Methodists in Chicago ha his preaching, znd were prompted into sctive lines of Garistian dutyamnd bencvolence by s indnence ; how all_this record of facts had inj of Ghrist, these brethren ho snran standing ~ taat day may not be answer. The Dishop had given tiem u chance 0 stand up ' in condemnation of a prother who was defenseless in that hour,— who Bad no more broken Disciplinary law nor transgressed the Seriptures than themsclves. Lat, strange, now stranze to suy,—they stood up to a man against 2 brother whose life was a« pure and sweet as that of any Bishop's; 2ud they mast stand now before the public untii they are counted: What 2_summary way of disposing of their Goubting Thomas! [t wasa prematuse and arbi- tfary eppression of acase worthy of most judi- cions treatment. We ace impatient at_tae hamen nature that ailowed itself to be soarrayed a an honest spirit. Itwas a cmel shame. Where ‘were tne hearts of those men, even if tney had lost their heads? No wonder the gentic Dr. Thomas wept like a child at such surprising demonstration. The brethren had proved their own g00d standing, every one of them, tu the Bishop's face, if 0t 1o the sight of the Lord. The Bishop becioned, and ap they stood, the Solid-Rock River Conference, more Itke a heartiess rock than placid niver that day, while Dr. Thomus, poor man! sat still and cried, the only man in the Confersnce wno had no standinz! And vet. some way. there Is a ztandear about him in that humiliating stttude which makes him central of interest of all the group. GENERAL NOTES. The yearly sale of seats for Prof. Swing's Sunday service will commence to-morrow at No. 117 State street. Last Sunday the corner-stone of the new moa- astery and church of the Franciscan Fathers at Paterson, N. J., was laid by Bishop Corrigan. The Wethodist Recorder laments that the Old City-Road Chapel, London, in which John Wes- ley founded Methodism, is embarrassed by debt: The minister of the Establishcd Church of Gairloch, Seotland, preaches to three familics, numberiog 2 duzen hearers, while the minister of tue Free Chyrch has a congregation of 900, In the heart of the Scotch licnlands has ‘been founded a large Rowan Catholic monastery and school. The baildings, which are not vet completed, will cost 3 Lord Lovat gave the site, and the institution is in charze of the Benedictine Fathers. The choir of male volces which has been or- ganized by Prof. Case meets on Monday, Tues- iy, and Friday eveuinus of cach weels In Far- well Hall. Thev are procressing finely in numnbers and musical attsinments. Al Chris- tian younyg men who sing are invited to become members, and thelr vanies can be eurolled a auy of the choir meetings. A Catholic pricst preached a sermon iu behali of the Church and Couvent of St. Louis Ber- trand, at Louisville, in the course of which ke paid 4 glowing tribute to the faith and iiberality of the women of the Catholic Church, and said. that especially to the scrvant girls of America does the Church owe most of its success. Their donations have made the Catholic Church what it is to-day in the United States. The Burgomaster of Oberammergau, for fear that the world might regard the theatrical com- pany which proposed o produce the Passion Play in London as baving been formed in Ober- ammergau, writes z card to deny that the - habitants of that town have anything to do with that company orsanction the sacrilege. The play will next be produced in Obcrammergau in 1880, and nowhere else lezitimately. O account of the Catholie tendencies of Cud- desden Theological College, the Rev. C. P. Go- lightly has addressed a letter to the Bishop of Oxford setting forth'a number of charges sgainst the teachings ol the College. Mr. Golurhtly fmplores the Bishop, *before God aud the Dio- cese, to dismiss its unfaithful, or at leust un- trustworthy, teachers, and close the College,” till he “is able to put the administration into other hands.” TInsome parts of California the state of relizion scems to be unpromising. A Petaluma preacher s credited with sayiny that in Calaveras Coun- ty, out. of & population of about 10,000, there are ouly about 100 professing Christians. ' The cou- dition of the_churches in Napa is thus tersely stated: The Episcopal, Baptist, and Campbellite Churches are without pastors. The Kev. Mr. Ruces, of the Baptist Church, and the Rev. Mr. Moore, of_the Episcopal Church, have resizned and gone East. ‘The Southern Churchman raises the question: Was Bishop McCoskry, Jate of the Diocese of Michigan, deposed according to law? If he was, the Churchman asks,.what was thelawi Tne Bishops who _assembled in this city convened under #Title L, Canon 15, Scc. 16,” which merely gives power to accepta resiznation. This they did oot do. ‘The case of Bisnop Ives, which our been built up by | contemporary cites. was provided for by a canon of the General Convention, passed before szu- tence was formaily oronounceu, and under it ho was deposed. tcoce the Southern Churchman raises the poiat that Bishop McCoskry’s resizna- tion not having beer acceoted, and his deoosi- tion having been accomplished not according to 1aw, he is stiil Bichoo of Michizan. At the Exeter.Diocesan Conferénce, Eugzland, there was an interesting discussion respecting extempore preaching, and a proposition to cou- stitute a pew order of voluntarv Iay helpers who snould oreach in churches and pérform all clerical duties exceot administer the sacramenz. written sermons were generally condemnped, and extempore preaching recommended by resolu- tion.” A humorous suzzestion was made that the Bishops should wstitate an- inquisition atcer all old writzea sermans gud baru tuen. “In visitinz Gospel Huii 3t the Trocadero, the Princess of W7 - rdimz to the Lou: don Truth, ay interest in Evangelical work parsued there, and | some sum behind her. phv whick greatly stru Was a microscopic Bible in 5 bear the test of a magnifving-miass. freouid alinost fit anio a siguet-rine. A “copy of i, beautifully bound, was presented to her. French ladies call this the Amulet Edition. It is a thing £o be set in 4 reiquars. a0d worn 35 a charm.™ . Methodism appears to be on the ds in California, ‘The minutes of the twenty-sixth session of the Cahiforaia Anaual Contersnce ol tho Methodist Episcosal Church. held a duriaz the lnst wi beer: publish ;. h clear print as to 851, when W. Raberts was ing oflicer and S. D. onds was Secre- tary. The nuinber of members in tull connec. tion had increased from eieven in 1851 to 143 in 1873, when the Conference was divided. Sincu then the hizhest number reported” in full connection is 130, which was the number given at the last ion. The State is divided cozzaphical districts. A few years an Department wus _created, ix departments has a Presidis 1 from the clergy. New York has not so many churches as is zeu- crally supposed. . ‘fe common notion of the number is about 500, which would not be many for a city contzining over 1,000,000 peoples Whiie churches have steadily in ed here, 16 1s thougzht by wany of tie Orthudox that tuey bave not increasad nearly so rapidly as they snould bave done, not, indend, in proporuon to tne erowing populatioh of the metzopolis. The ciarches ag present number 325, divided aimong the follow it Elder Presbyt therad, 2 Duteh Reformed. 205 African tscopal, 95 United Presbyterino, nal, 65 Reformed Presbyterian, Unitarian, 4; Friends, $; misceliancous, 21, —amons the Dutch Reformed, 1 Swedenbore: 15 often Lias been said that ther Tiere, and also a Josh temple to whizh Mohammedans aud the Chinese resort; but this seems to be one of the facts of imagination that 50 -abound oo here may be a place where the Manitattan Celestials worship, but it is not worthy the neme of The wwo'hundred and filtieth cuniversary o nding of the Reformed Protestans Dazeh in New York was brated a few days h 2 as the Fifthe N In the aiternoon at 3 o’ vices were beld. Toe Rev D. D.. senior vastor of the historical address. It interesting, @.ving complete strazzles of the Duteh Churen in the wother country, and the history of its orzantzation in New York. The d fonal excreises were con- ducted by President Campbell, of Rutwers Col- lega; Dro S. M. Woodbridae, Dean ot the Theo- Iogical Seminars at New Drunswick, 3. the Rev. M. 8. Hutton, of New York, Dr. Ormiston presided. Servi: in the cvenmg, aad 3 number of delivered by - prominent among others the Rev. Dr. Dix, of ’ v Church; Dr. Crosley, of the I'resbyterian Chureh; Dr. Tila- ny, of the Methodist Chureh; Dr. R. 8. Storrs, of the Congregational Church; Dr. Anderson, of the Baptist Chureh; aod Dr. E. P. Koaers, of the Refornned Dutch Church. ‘The devotional exercises were conducted by the Rev. Dr. Taylor, of Newark, and the Rev. Mr. Sabiue, of New York. Dr. Chambers presided at the eyen- fugs services. WEER OF PRAYER, 1870, he Execuuve Committec of the Evanzelleal Alliance of the 1 States ing sugzestions for the observauce of the W of Prayer. subject to sueh clterations ss loeal circumstanees may render desir The Allinnce is 10w $o widely extended a2 to inciude ia its membdersinp Christisns in_all na- tions, znd the first wi ary, be observed in ail Chnsi onary stations in hea uldresses were lands. as a subject for the pulpit. istian_Union.” Mouduy, Jan. 6—Thanksyiving for the bless- ings of the year past, aud prayer for their con- tinuance. Tuesday, Jan. 7—Prayer for the Church of Christ,—its ministers, its growth in grace, and its enlarzement. - Vedgesday, Jan. S—Christian education,— ily, the young, coileges, seminaries of learning, Sunday and other schools, Chiristian Associations of young mea and of young women. Thursday, Jan. 9—For nations, rulers and people, for peace and religious liberty in the earth. Friday. Jan. 10—The press,—for a blessiazx on publishers, editors, and_aathors, the causs of temperance and other social reforms. Saturday, Jan. 11—home and foreign mis- sions and the conversion of the world. Ou Sabbath eveniow, Jan. 12, it is_sugzested that public union meeti be held for prayer, e praise, and the presentation of the object and . woris of the Evangelical Alliance. PERSONALS. Bishop Kip, of California, recently celebrated the twenty-fifth anpiversary of his conscera- tion. The Rev. Frank S. Fitch was installed pastor of the Seventh Street Congrezational Church, on the 21st ult. The Rev. Nathan Brown, D. D., has translated about half of the New Testament ioto the Jap- auese tongue for the Baptist converts. Tie Res. §. E. Lithrop, of New London,Wis., has gone to Macon, Ga., t2 labor under the au- spices of the American Missionary Soclety. Bishop Perry, of Towa, has recently received aoplications from a Methedist and a Congrega- tional minister for orders in the Episcopal church. The Bishoo of Oxford has probibited the Vi- car of St. Barnabas, Oxford, from allowiny tha Rev. Arthur Tooth and another Ritualist to preach in his pulpit. The Rev. Ira C. Bellman bas teodered thie resignation of his pastorate of the Congrega- tioual Church at Adrian, Mich. It has not yet becen definitely pted. The Rev. Fraok Rozers Morse has' tendered his resignation tothe Tabernacle Baptist Church in Albany, and_goes to the Tabernacle Baptist Churct in Brooklyn Dee. 1. e The Rev. E. iI. Uratt, fur many years Secreta- ry of the State ‘Temperance Union, und an a ive worker in the temperance cause, died at [East Woodstock, Conn., Nov. 12 ‘The report that the Rev. Dr. Howard Malcom? of Newport, R. I., was about to withdraw from the Bantist and enter the Episcopal denomina- tion is denied by Dr. Malcom himseif. The Rey. J: N. Murdock, D. D., the able Sce- retary of the American Bagtist - Missionary Uniou. made a telling speech recently at Execer Hall, London, at a 1aceting over which the Earl of Shaftesbury presided. ‘The Rev. W. 1. Budington, D.D., of the Clin- tou-Avenue Congregational Church, Brooklyn, has been compelled to underzo a fourth peray tion for cancer on the lip. It’is hoped:-that this time it will be successful. - It [s stated that two prominent Methodists— Dr. L. 1. Townsend, of Boston University, and President Cyrus D. ¥ L Wesleyau Ubiver- sity—bave been successively invited to the pas- torate of the Ceatral Congregational Church of Boston. A recent letter from Mrs. Georze Muller to a lady in this city says that Mr. and Mrs. Muller propose to re-visit America next year. - Mr. Mutler will preach throughout the countr: They are now [u_Switzerland, and will soon g0 to Spaln, 1taly, and Germauy in Christiag work. The first Methodist Protesiant in Ohio ia still living, a well-preserved aud active layman, Brothicr Joseph Wells, of Wellsville, O., now past 80. Cornelius Springer was almost as soon in thefield as a Reformer in the State, but Brother Wells claims tne seuiority ol . servicce by a few months. The Rev. Brooke.Lambert bas resizned the viearaze of Tamworth, England. In a com- munication to his parishioners he assizos as bis reason that his income is iusuflicient, and that Increased famuly claims compel him to scek a living in sote other than tae clerfed vocation. He says thut u the Enuhsls Church pay 15 nos