strengthens the conclusion to make the broader comparison. Among the Romanists the aggression of polemics seems, as has been hinted, to impart animation! German Protestantism is as near stationary as anything can be and yet be alive, and the pulpit shows it plainly. Methods of aggression upon the unconverted world seem scarcely to be thought upon in the church proper. They are just beginning to be felt through the Young Men's Christian Associations, and the Sunday schools. Were there not an undertone of the deepest personal piety sustaining the pulpit in a partly experimental preaching, Protestantism must disintegrate in Germany. As it is, the venerable Tholuck said to us, when asked about the prospect of the unity of the church, "I fear they will all end in believing nothing, and thus become one." God forefend! But the educational theory of religion, confirmation at a certain age, one service on the Sabbath, no prayer meetings, and no Sunday schools, make such a state of religion as puts both the power and purity of the pulpit in jeopardy!

French Protestantism, especially that in the north and in Paris, which owes its vitality, under God, largely to the Monods, seems to be in better case. It struggles not so much. with spiritual apathy, as with excessive worldliness and gaiety; but is so sore pressed with these as to make a tearful appeal to America for prayer and sympathy. There is more life in the heart of the church, and more spirit in the pulpit. The preaching of the English establishment, as heard through its representatives on the continent, seems greatly to lack spiritual force and vigor. The miserable whine of their semi-intonation, the tardiness of attempted ritualism, with nothing to sustain it (like a theater in a barn), the meagerness of the sermons, provoked constant remark. We had reason to thank the church many times for the service, but only occasionally for the serv ants. At home, most earnest efforts have been put forth, and with partial success, to popularize the services of the establishment, and to reach the people with preachers they will hear. Yet we heard Canon Burrowes, in St. Paul's Cathedral, deliver to an audience of some thousands the most lifeless essay on the whole Epistle to the Ephesians, in which, moreover, he managed to leave the Paul, who wrote the first and

fundamental chapter, quite out in the cold. In the country districts, as many would become dissenters probably, as in the cities, but they are held to the establishment by their pecuniary interests. Cottage-rents go, often, by favor to friends of the establishment. James Spurgeon told me of one clergyman who said, "Dissent in my parish! No, indeed, I am the minister, and my brother is the squire, and they daren't call their souls their own."

The preaching of English Dissenters and Scotch Presbyterians, is strong, direct, and searching! They honor the word of God, and are honored by it. They shun not to declare the whole counsel of God, in the great doctrines of salvation. Such men, too, as Donald Frazier, Cummings, Newman Hall, Parker, and Spurgeon, hold the banner of the cross full high advanced, and give evidence that the state of religion answers to the condition of the pulpit, both being cause and effect. We may not forget the force of Liddon, nor the fervor of Ryle, nor the earnest work of thousands in the establishment. Still the fact remains that the pulpit feels most sensitively the views respecting religion which are held by those to whom it ministers. Vital godliness, aggressive piety, thorough self-sacrifice in the church, give the pulpit its golden opportunities. Such would seem to be the causes that influence the pulpit abroad. They are full of the gravest lessons for us.

I. We may rejoice in the complete separation of Church and State, which permits so free movement of religious bodies in their own component particles, and leaves the pulpit free to rebuke or support the powers that be, according to the will of God.

II. We must be thankful that we have no theory of the church that clothes us with any unreal authority. "By manifestation of the truth we commend ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God."

III. Let the heterogeneous character of our national elements only strengthen us in all the admirable traits of our original stock, and stimulate us to strive to accomplish all which the work can demand or employ.

IV. The prevalence of Christian morals, determining the level of the whole population, must become a matter of constant solicitude to us.

V. We speak to so intelligent a people that every possible effort is demanded to meet their wants.

VI. Purity of doctrine and power in the pulpit are inseparable.

VII. The ministry may rightly protest against any disturbance of the simplicity of worship. It ceases to serve its own ends, and encroaches upon the domain of instruction, whenever elaborate and formal. And this is true, though both the impressive and expressive functions of music in divine wor ship be held, and though it be counted true, as it is true, that one may worship by instrumental as truly as by vocal music.

VIII. And it is certain that the condition of effective preaching, taken by and large and in settled relations, is an aggressive type of piety in the churches. The ministry which is careless of this, though it be everything else, must ultimately fail. Blessed are they whose hearers both "hear and do" the will of God.

ARTICLE VI.-THE REVISION OF THE AUTHORIZED ENGLISH VERSION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

THE Revision of the Authorized English Version of the Bible, as is now generally known, was originated by the Convocation of Canterbury, in England, at its meeting in February, 1870. This body resolved, on that occasion, to undertake the work, and appointed a Committee of its own members for the purpose. The resolutions which were adopted, were very simple and brief. They declared the desirableness of a revision, but indicated that it should not be extended so far as to become in any sense a new translation, or to involve any alteration of the language of the old version, except when, in the judgment of competent scholars, such a change should be necessary. They also suggested, that, in the case of such necessary changes, the style of the language employed in the existing version should be closely followed. As members of the Committee eight representatives from each house of the Convocation were named, of whom Bishops Thirlwall, Ellicott, and Wilberforce, and Deans Alford, of Canterbury, and Stanley, of Westminster, are among the more prominent as known on this side of the ocean. With one further expression of its judgment-namely, "that this Committee should be at liberty to invite the coöperation of any persons eminent for scholarship, to whatever nation or religious body they might belong"-the Convocation intrusted the work entirely to the charge of the new body which it had created. It imposed upon the members of that body no obligation to submit the results of their labors for its own examination or approval, and no conditions of any kind which should make them dependent upon itself. The Com

NOTE. This Article is the substance of a Lecture given at the Sheffield Scientific School of Yale College, on the 4th of March, 1879. This fact will account for some peculiarities of style and expression. It may be stated, also, that, inasmuch as the rules of the Revision Committees, both in England and in our own country, do not permit the members to make any announcement of alterations from the Authorized Version which have been adopted, until the work has been brought to its completion, the suggestions offered in this Article with regard to such points are suggestions for which the author alone is responsible.

mittee owed its existence to the act of the Convocation, and carried the authoritative influence of that act into the new undertaking. But, in the work itself, it had no responsibility laid upon it, except that it should proceed in accordance with the general principle of Revision which had been set forth, and should be faithful to the truth.

In accordance with the resolutions which gave it being, the Committee met in May of the same year, and divided itself into two companies, one for the Revision of the Old Testament and the other for that of the New Testament. At the same time, it extended an invitation to thirty-seven other gentlemen, both of the Established and Dissenting Churches of the kingdom, to join the two companies, on an equality in all respects with the original members. The Committee, then, established a few rules for its own guidance in carrying on its work, which were in the line of the suggestions given to it by the Convocation, and were fitted to secure the best results. The first meeting for the purpose of Revision was held on the 22d of June, 1870. It was only a few months after this date, that negotiations were entered upon for the creation of an American Committee of Revision, which should act in coöperation with the English companies, and should be governed in its work by similar rules. These negotiations were in harmony with the resolutions adopted by the Convocation, as we have already noticed them, and were prompted by the same large-mindedness which had extended the limits of the original Committee, so as to include representatives of the non-conforming churches in Great Britain. The American Companies, after some delay with reference to their organization, met for the beginning of their work in October, 1872. For nearly nine years, therefore, on the other side of the ocean, and for more than six years on this side, the new Revision has been in course of preparation. The sessions of the Committees in both countries have been held-one in London and the other in New York-once in every month during the greater part of each year within this period. These sessions have been devoted to consultation and decision respecting passages previously assigned, which have been investigated by all the members in their individual studies. In this way, every chapter and verse, every clause and every word have