cation. We have been prejudiced against hate, malice, envy, and ingratitude; that is all. The traitor in himself is as good a man as the loyal citizen. Apart from all prejudice, Arnold is as noble as Washington, and Judas as good as Christ. The worst that can be said of the vilest sinner is, that he has been imprudent. The best that can be said of the saint is, that he is long-headed and shrewd. These are the conclusions to which the utilitarian, denying that conscience reveals immutable and universal morality, must inevitably come. But who can accept them? Who does not see them to be false to universal experience? Mr. Mill himself does not accept them. In a passage criticizing Mr. Mansel's doctrine of Religious Nescience, he says, "If instead of the 'glad tidings' that there exists a Being in whom all the excellencies which the highest human mind can conceive, exists in a degree inconceivable to us, I am informed that the world is ruled by a Being whose attributes are infinite, but what they are we cannot learn, nor what are the principles of his government, except that the highest human morality which we are capable of conceiving does not sanction them; convince me of it, and I will bear my fate as best I may. But when I am told that I must believe this, and at the same time call this Being by the names which express the highest human morality, I say in plain terms I will not. Whatever power such a Being may have over me, there is one thing which he shall not do; he shall not compel me to worship him. I will call no Being good who is not what I mean when I apply that term to my fellow creatures; and if such a Being can send me to hell for not so calling him, to hell I will go" (Exam. Sir Wm. Hamilton, vol. i, p. 104). Goodness in God must be the same as goodness in man! So strong is Mr. Mill's belief in this doctrine, that he is prepared to go to hell rather than deny it. We do not see how Mr. Mill could have given a more supreme proof of intense belief. Yet what is this but an admission that the principles of morality are objective to the human mind, and are identical throughout the universe? But if any one choose in spite of consequences to look upon the moral instinct as a contagion of others' views, there is the sufficient answer that self-judgment must precede any judgment upon another. Self knowledge is an indispensable condition to knowing others. Light or sound are mean

ingless to one who has never seen or heard. Pain is nothing to one who has never suffered. So also the language of moral judgments is absolutely unintelligible to one who has not learned their meaning from the motions of his own soul. We must conclude then that this law is not earth-made but heavenborn. Man's chiefest dignity is in being placed under this law, and his greatest glory lies in obeying it. All below man are ruled without their knowledge or consent, but man is taken into his Maker's counsels and asked to obey. "Henceforth I call you not servants but friends, for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth."

The sum of our argument is this: Conscience judges actors; reason judges actions. Conscience selects the motive; reason selects the act which will best express that motive. Conscience gives the principle of action; reason applies it. To misapply the law is error; to disobey it is guilt. Reason detects the first conscience judges the second. The sense of error is never the sense of guilt. The former arises from an examination of consequences; the latter from 'comparing purpose and motive with the ideal law of action. Both schools are thus seen to be necessary to a complete science of morals. When the intuitionist attempts to construct an à priori code, he falls into the most ludicrous extravagances. When the utilitarian denies that we have the power of moral insight, he reduces morality to the lowest selfishness, and does violence to universal experience. Conscience is absolute in its sphere; but its sphere is only the determination of the true order of the soul, or the relative rank of motives. The end of all action is not to do right, but to do good, either to ourselves or others; but what kind of good we shall do will depend more upon our moral affections than upon our sensitive nature. In physics the mind must constitute its metaphysical data and the laws of formal logic; perception must add the facts. Without these two elements, the internal and external, no science is possible. Science without the fact is void. Science without the law is chaos. So, too, in moral science, there must be the moral postulates of conscience, the fixed principles of action, and there must be reason, foresight, experience, to determine their application. Skill and prudence come with the years, but the fixed order of the soul is given as the original datum of action.

ARTICLE III.-THE GOSPEL IN BIBLE LANDS.

Republication of the Gospel in Bible Lands. History of the Missions of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions to the Oriental Churches. By RUFUS ANDERSON, D.D., LL.D., late Foreign Secretary of the Board. In 2 vols. Boston: Congregational Publishing Society, 1872. 8vo, pp. xxiv, 426, 532.

THE union of soul and body is typical of the conditions underlying all healthy religious life and all successful propagandism. The soul, we doubt not, has the capacity of separate existence, but not of earthly work and recognized influence, apart from the body. In like manner, piety, though isolated, may be genuine, fervent, growing; yet without Christian institutions it has much less than its normal luster of manifestation, scope of service and power of self-diffusion. Religious history in all ages verifies this statement. Even the incarnate Word of God, while in this world, was "a light shining in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it not," a light for which there was no candlestick of ordinances and organization; and after the crucifixion there remained no center or bond of union for the few and scattered disciples, who, but for the reappearance of their risen Lord, would have lapsed speedily into an improved Judaism, and would have left no traces of their better faith and hope in the succeeding generation. But after his resurrection, the eucharist which he evidently renewed at Emmaus, thenceforth never to be suspended, the establishment of baptism as a seal of discipleship, the union of the band of believers as they awaited the ascension-promise, and the recognition of the apostles as official heads, gave to the new religion a body. and form, an earthly habitat, a position from which aggressive movements could be made on surrounding unbelief and misbelief, a nursery for the nascent and immature faith of fresh prosélytes. From that time onward the Church (which before had existence only in the plan and foreknowledge of its Founder) had a rapid growth, and in its growth soul and

body were equally cared for. The apostles seem never to have sought to multiply sporadic conversions. Wherever they went they gathered churches, ordained elders, and made provision for the stated administration of Christian instruction and worship.

But Christianity might (so far as the ordinary laws of causation are concerned) have lingered long in obscurity and inanition while its body grew, had not God provided for it an already adult body. The soul had left the institutions of Judaism; but its body remained entire, and possessed all the members essential for the new life of the Christian community. The organization of the synagogue hardly needed change to be adapted to the Church; there is no little ground for believing that the baptism of proselytes was practised among the Jews of that age; and the eucharist was but the paschal supper with its spiritual significance developed. Wherever the apostles went, the synagogue had preceded them, and either offered them its hospitality, or expelled from its congregation members enough to be the nucleus of the new church, and to perpetuate the form and order of the synagogue in the constitution of that church. Here we may trace one of the providential preparations of the world for the advent of its Redeemer, in the dispersion of the Jews, and the consequent establishment of synagogues in divers and distant lands; for without them the constructive work of the Christian teachers would have been too slow for the spiritual needs of their converts, and large numbers of the flock would have been left to the sole care of the chief Shepherd, with neither under-shepherd nor fold.

The modern history of the missionary enterprise is rich in instruction as to every theory and mode of propagandism. It has shown that the soul cannot be developed from the body, that a spiritual faith and piety cannot grow out of an institutional religion, nay, that institutions, however extensively received, tend of themselves to die out, unless they represent belief and sentiment. This has been demonstrated by the Roman Catholic missions in both hemispheres. Never have there been more self-devoted men than the Jesuits who first planted the cross in China, in Japan, in Canada, in Paraguay.

They were backed, too, by the entire, virtually limitless. resources of the Church in men and treasure. They were eminently wise in their whole policy, both in their conciliatory relations with all descriptions of people, and in securing permanent sites and spheres of operation and influence. They made millions of idolators familiar with the Christian ritual, and reckoned their adherents at least by tens of thousands. But the religion which they taught was little better than fetichism. Salvation was to be ensured by a compliance with certain consecrated forms, and so little importance was attached to a Christian life, that sometimes in China whole companies of priests employed themselves solely in behalf of children exposed by their parents, baptizing them to exorcise the Divine wrath, and then deliberately leaving them to perish, that the grace of baptism might not be forfeited by mortal sin. What traces have they left? In the great Orient there remains. scarce a vestige of their toil and sacrifice. On the western continent we can hardly say that the case is otherwise; for the feeble hold which Romanism has on the aborigines of North and South America is no more than what might be expected from the influence of the dominant European races, even had there been no special missionary labors for their express benefit.

On the other hand, it has been seen that the soul has no power of self-diffusion apart from the body. The missionary expeditions of the Quakers, from first to last, would constitute one of the most edifying curiosities of religious history. From time to time earnest Christian men and women of this amiable sect have been moved to carry the gospel message to strange races and savage tribes. Many of these persons have maintained on cardinal points a belief conformed to dogmatic orthodoxy, have been of an eminently fervent and loving spirit, and have manifested the evangelic graces in their most attractive simplicity and beauty. But we know not that they have ever made a convert from heathenism. They certainly have never established a "meeting" outside of Christendom. Even Penn and his associates, though they exerted so powerful an intenerating influence upon the native tribes around them, and certainly wrought among them a superlatively Christian work,