especially as belong to the general recklessness and worthlessness of miners; but it is a comfort to think that these mining colonies put on their worst aspect first, that every blow struck among them by Christian wisdom tells something for the Kingdom of Christ. This immense field then is a hopeful one. The old West is destined to make rapid strides in knowledge and religion: the new West, destitute as it is, will not reject the laborer for Christ, but rather invite him to work in all freedom and confidence. This is the principal sphere for the East and for the West-the East still urging forward that work in the nearer West which they long ago begun-the West aiding the East to penetrate into the regions beyond, which have lately become the white man's home.

The new era then seems to promise hard work, a struggle greater than any to which the Christians of the United States were ever before called. We must not neglect our old enterprises in foreign lands, for foreign missions have been the noblest fruit of American Christianity; but we must add to it another work that has played a second part hitherto, but is now become more vital than all others. And we must set about this new work not in the spirit of proselytism, not to spread Congregationalism for instance, but to spread the knowledge of Christ. Congregationalism has been eminently unsectarian in times past, almost carelessly so; it has been content to sow for others to reap; it has rejoiced if others have builded on its foundation; it has supplied the leaven for others to take and put into their separate baking troughs. It is not required to do so much as this, although this has been its preeminent and exclusive glory. Its motto has been "sic vos non vobis mellificatis apes." But it will be an evil day when it shall change its tone entirely. Let it provide for its own, and especially for those of its own house, but let it not go down into the arena of sectarian strife with jure divino claims, and a competition like that of merchants. Let it keep the Kingdom of God in its eye, as it has done in times past, and all men will honor it, whose honor is worth having.

In closing these thoughts on the dangers and duties of the new era, we revert to the great danger and the great source of hope. The great danger, beyond all others most to be dreaded,

is that from intense worldliness. The prosperity of the church is to be fearfully tried by the prosperity of all the gainful pursuits of life. Ostentation, expensiveness, self-indulgence, false estimates of life, with false tastes and the loss of simplicity of life, and their consequences, are more dangerous enemies to religion than secession and war. New York can do more harm in the new era than slaveholding did in that which passed away. And the worst of it is, that the evil influences of unbounded prosperity are insidious; they paralyze and stupefy; earth is made more attractive, and heavenly realities kept further off.

Shall we fall into or resist this evil influence? Shall we need great disasters to bring us back to our bearings? Who can prophesy what is to be the destiny of our land? But faith is better than prophecy. All the old arguments that God meant something great for us, and through us for himself—the seclusion of this virgin soil and this boundless continent, the character of the first settlers, the habits of self-government preparing for a broader freedom, the great revivals, the extinction of the French power that confined the colonies as within a wall of iron, the success of the Revolution, the immense growth of religion and knowledge-all these are eclipsed by what God hath wrought to introduce this new era. our sins and the falseness of the government to its trust portended national decay, He punished, and in punishing saved us; He separated, and in separating united us; He called forth our energies; He made the slave-power its own executioner. He may have room to punish still, He may draw dark clouds around us again, but we will trust Him the more, for we see more of Hin in our recent history. And as we believe that He has a progressive plan, we will enter into the work of the NEW ERA with faith and hope.

When

ARTICLE II.-SYSTEMATIC TRAINING FOR THE MINISTRY.

WHEN the late war with the Southern rebels broke out, there was a prevailing impression that it was only requisite to collect a host of men, put muskets in their hands, and hurry them into the field, and the rebellion would be specdily quelled. Persons who knew nothing of the military art were thought to be quite competent to head these untrained levies. In fact, study and experience in the grave business on which they were entering was thought by some to be rather a disadvantage than a qualification in those aspiring to command. Martial ardor must not be damped by the rules and traditional prejudices which were supposed to have sway in the military class. The bitter disgrace of Bull Run did something to open the eyes of men to the folly of such views. Yet one sapient editor, having sat for a day or two on the penitent's stool for his share in occasioning this mortifying rout, quickly fell from grace and signalized himself by setting up a cry, in the very midst of the terrible war, for the abolishing of the West Point Military Academy! Military training was so dire an evil, that the nation's great training-school of officers must be swept out of being, at the moment when skillful leaders were required for the salvation of the country! And the individual who raised this foolish cry was one who deemed himself competent to handle any subject, from the cultivation of a potato patch to the Trent case-though in his discussion of the latter question he did twice mention Lord Stowell and Sir William Scott as if they were two distinct persons! The nation learned by experience that although a trained general might be a poor onewitness McClellan-and a general trained elsewhere than in the regular schools might be a good one-witness Terry-yet the just presumption is not only that the officer who has received a military education is far superior to the novice, but also that the regular, prescribed course of education is likely to furnish the best leaders. Nobody laments that the management

of the war, instead of falling into the hands of Grant, and Sherman, and Sheridan, and Thomas, was not committed to Banks and Butler. To say nothing of common sense, the experience of the world ought to have saved our people from the costly error into which they fell. "One of the most certain lessons of all military history," says Arnold in his Lectures on Modern History," although some writers have neglected, and some have even disputed it, is the superiority of discipline to enthusiasm. Much serious mischief has been done by an ignorance or disbelief of this truth." "While not even the most military nations can become good soldiers without discipline, yet with discipline the most unmilitary can be made efficient."

Now there is much to be learned from our late national experience. One great lesson is, that, generally speaking, training, discipline, special study, are indispensable to effective work in every department of action. Not all are fit for all things. Examples are found of individuals who have succeeded in complex and difficult professions, seemingly without the advantage of training, certainly without training through the established methods and instrumentalities. But it is fallacious to reason from exceptional cases. Because Dr. Franklin, when a boy, ran away, and afterwards stood before kings, it does not follow that fugitive lads are likely to attain the same distinction, as many who have imitated his example have ascertained to their cost. Rare natural gifts may now and then enable individuals to do what the generality of mankind in the same circumstances would be unable to effect. And where distinguished success is reached, apparently without the slow steps of preparatory discipline and study, it is often possible to see that a much higher and more beneficent success would have been attained, had thorough training been superadded to uncommon natural powers.

The general truth set forth in the preceding remarks, we propose to apply to the particular topic of preparation for the Gospel ministry. There is apt to be, even in enlightened communities, more or less of prejudice-prejudice which is sometimes latent—against the regular, systematic training of candidates for the pulpit and the pastoral office. This prejudice is built upon misconception and fallacious reasoning, and has

often been exposed. But some considerations bearing on the subject may be profitably advanced at the present time.

A minister is called to interpret the Bible and apply the truths of Christianity, in public discourses and more private instruction, to all classes of men. It is plain that he should be better acquainted with the Bible than the generality of those whom he undertakes to guide. He must be able to study, and must have already studied, the Book in the tongues in which it was written, with the aid of the various lights which critical investigations have provided for the learner. Without this qualification he is but an ignorant expositor of the sacred volume, perpetually at a loss to determine the meaning of its authors, unless indeed he is blessed with sufficient conceit to fancy that he can do by intuition that which patient study alone can accomplish.

But besides practice in exegesis and familiarity with the laws of interpretation, the minister must have attained to a systematic view of the contents of the Gospel. He must have become possessed of a definite, coherent idea of the message which he assumes to deliver. In what a hapless plight is the preacher placed who has no connected, consistent interpretation of Christianity, to underlie and regulate his teachings! He is to charge upon men their sinfulness, but he cannot tell what sin is; he is to summon them to repentance, but knows not what repentance involves; he is to direct them to believe in Christ, in order to be saved, but cannot answer the inquiry what "salvation" and what "believing in Christ" mean; he is to proclaim the Deliverer, but is at a loss to say what He has done or offers to do for mankind. He is, moreover, to solve difficulties, unravel perplexities, answer objections to the Christian system or to the evidences on which it depends, and to set forth the Gospel in a clear light before auditors, many of whom read and think on these high themes. It is evident that he is poorly equipped for this arduous task, which is here briefly sketched, if he has not gained a scientific apprehension of the Gospel system. The study of doctrinal theology, as a distinct branch, is then indispensable-the study of Christianity with a special aim at the accurate definition and harmonious combination of its doctrines.