ourselves, Christ is in us. We are to be cast out from communion, only when we are beyond proving, or reprobate.*

In the very few passagest where the proving is designed to eliminate dross, and exclude the unworthy, this purpose is subordinate to the immediate work of finding and vindicating those who are "approved." Every Christian, in the process of "proving" himself for the Lord's Supper, will find many hateful lusts to destroy. To prove all things and hold fast that which is good is to reject that which is evil. The exact meaning of the word is rather self-preparation, than self-examination. This strong word, so often used by Paul, is selected in the text to describe the searching test to which a truly regenerate man ought to subject himself; not to decide whether he shall come to the communion or not, but to prepare himself to come worthily.

This truth, which is apparent enough from the word, is also affirmed positively: "Let a man prove himself, and so let him eat." The proving is not trying the question whether he will eat or not. This is already settled before he begins the proving. But he prepares himself; and so prepared, so approved, he is permitted and expected to partake. The supposition that any one is excluded by this self-preparation, is not entertained in the text at all.

But is not eating and drinking unworthily, a more flagrant sin than withdrawing from the table altogether? This sin is nothing less than to be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. It is "showing" the Lord's death, not as our own propitiation, but as a rejected atonement. This is essentially the sin of unbelief, with the aggravation of presumption and profanity. Hypocrisy is not necessarily implied. One may be guilty of the body and blood of Christ from mere careless neglect of suitable preparation. And the dangers incurred by this sin are fearful. It is eating and drinking judgment to ourselves, that is, reaching out after and eagerly receiving severe chastisement. And what chastisement? In the case of the Corinthians, an epidemic, with many fatal cases. We must never presume to interpret such afflictions, in our time, as divine judgments. But severe chastisement of this sin in the Church we may always

* Compare also 1 Thes. ii. 4; 1 Tim. iii. 10; Heb. iii. 9, and especially 1 Pet. i. 7, *proved by fire." The test is searching, but it only purifies the gold.

For example 1 Cor. iii. 13 and 1 John iv. 1.

expect.

For it is, indeed, a flagrant and dangerous offense. But let us now observe the terms by which it is compared with the sin of withdrawing from the communion altogether. "For he that eateth and drinketh,* eateth and drinketh judgment to himself unless he discern the body."+ There is still hope that at the last moment he will discern the body. He has come unprepared, but perhaps the sight of the broken bread will bring the broken heart. "For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged." This word judge is the same as discern in the 29th verse. To discern the body, is to discern ourselves, and our own need of the body. And this would save us from God's discerning us, or judging us, with sore chastisement. But if this is not the case, and we eat and drink unworthily, then, "being judged, we are chastened by the Lord, that we may not be damned with the world." Here, at last, in the 32d verse, the awful word so unfortunately applied to the unworthy communicant in the 29th verse, is actually applied to the world, and to Christians who forsake the communion altogether. To partake unworthily is to receive a searching judgment from the Lord, with severe chastisement. But to abstain wholly is to be conformed to the world, and to be exposed to eternal damnation.

It is more sinful and more dangerous, therefore, to withdraw from the communion altogether, than to eat and drink unworthily. For there is a safeguard in the very judgments which we invite, while we abide in the Father's house. We are unworthy and rebellious children, but we are not beyond the reach of a searching and sorrowful discipline. There is still hope that these chastisements will lead us to repentance, and to a discernment both of the body, and of our distressing need of its expiation. But" with the world" there is no hope. All is lost when the place is deliberately taken outside of the fold, with the reprobate. There is no longer a prayer for the restraining hand of God. Afflictions are no more sanctified, to restore the day

of salvation.

If this exposition of the text be correct, these words should never be used in "fencing the tables." If a Christian is obliged

* Much confusion is caused by the gloss from v. 27. Unworthily. It is omitted in all the best MSS.

†The gloss "of the Lord," must also be omitted. The use of the participle clause with the negative, to express an alternative, is very frequent: "In due season we shall reap unless we faint." Gal. vi. 9.

to raise the question, Shall I partake? his thoughts ought to be withdrawn completely from examination of his own feelings. This is a question of positive immoralities. There must be some flagrant sins, such as those named in the eighteenth of Matthew or in First Corinthians, fifth chapter, eleventh verse and following, to place a Christian out in the world. And the grounds for self-exclusion ought to be precisely the same as those of church-discipline. We should never withdraw from the communion, unless we are in the secret practice of sins which would incur church-censure if publicly known. And such a case is not contemplated in this passage at all. It is never to be used, therefore, as a bar to the communion.

But its true design is to promote a searching and devout preparation of heart in those who on other grounds decide that the sacrament is their duty and their privilege. They are to partake worthily or unworthily. If unworthily, they may look for chastisement to keep them from a more fearful doom. But they may prepare themselves to come worthily, by judging themselves, and appropriating the Body in faith and love. This preparation is a spiritual exercise wholly different from, that severe introspection to which many subject their own feelings. The only feeling that is essential, is to feel the need of Christ. The most worthy often feel the most unworthy.

ART. XI.-NOTES ON CURRENT TOPICS.

IMPORTATIONS OF EUROPEAN MINISTERS.

SOME discussion has arisen in the religious journals as to the causes of the recent transfer of several preachers from Britain and Canada to leading pulpits in this country. First in time, and most conspicuous thus far before the public, among these, Dr. John Hall has deemed it worth his while to give to the public his solution of this phenomenon in one of our weekly journals. So far as he explains it by the attractions of novelty, the enchanting effect of distance, and especially the intrinsic qualities of the preachers so transferred, his solution is just. But so far as he supposes any inferiority in the thoroughness of ministerial training, or presbyterial supervision of candidates in this country, as the explanation, we dissent. We know too many facts which positively disprove it, most of which are of a kind not to be specified here.

In

answer to the question then, why our churches seek pastors from abroad, while we have so many without charge at home, we say, that the extent of this movement is very limited, and has been greatly exaggerated in the popular apprehension by the conspicuity of the pulpits thus supplied, and the eminence of the foreign ministers thus brought into them. Thus far, if we are rightly advised, the number of cases does not exceed half-a-dozen, and these scattered through at least three denominations which include some seven thousand ministers and as many churches. Surely this is not enough to indicate any great, extraordinary movement or tendency of the times. And it is very certain that, aside of any supply from abroad, these churches would never have supplied themselves from our unemployed ministers at home. They would have laid hands on those already in the noon-tide of success in other important fields. The case is simply analogous to the occasional transfer in all the spheres of human activity of men from one country to another, and especially from old countries in which high pursuits are overcrowded, to those which are comparatively new and undeveloped. This occurs oftener even among journalists, educators, lawyers, physicians, inquirers, architects, merchants, manufacturers, than in the ministry. As to agriculturalists and laborers, skilled and unskilled, to say nothing of the "dangerous classes," is not immigration hither still at its flood-tide? And with this immense influx from Europe, shall no salt be sent to purify it? If Ireland sends its millions to romanize us, shall it grudge her Hamilton, Hall and McCosh to strengthen our evangelical Christianity? If Germany sends her swarms who strive to break down our Sabbaths, may we not receive with them an occasional Schaff or Lieber to defend these and other bulwarks of our Protestant Christianity?

It is still further to be observed, that in nearly every case, the ministers called to this country have first risen to foremost places in their own, and have been sought for here, after the fullest trial and proof of their gifts. Enough has occurred already to prove that, if congregagations call ministers from abroad simply because they are foreigners, without more decisive proof of their gifts, it will be as if they thought it enough to obtain a pastor from some particular state or theological seminary of our own country. Acting in their haste, they will repent at their leisure.

Moreover, there is a positive advantage in the intermingling, to a certain extent, of ministers of diverse countries and nationalities, analogous to that which arises from the commingling of those from different sections of our own country. It not only evinces the catholicity of the church, but realizes and promotes it, by rendering all its members and branches mutually helpful to each other. They thus see in others some

excellencies of which they are themselves destitute. By contact and comparison they discover in themselves defects and their remedies, to which they would always have been blind had they remained shut up to the sight and use of mere provincial ways and grooves. Indeed, this is one potent method of rescuing different sections of the church from such narrow and angular provincialisms of doctrine and practice to a genuine catholicity, as distinguished from Broad-churchism. In this way North and South, East and West, and the Interior, are constantly teaching and learning from each other. This applies especially to modes of preaching and conducting public worship and private pastoral work.

It is particularly in respect to the manner of preaching that the recent introduction of the few British clergymen among us, which has excited so much comment, deserves consideration. We think that our young country has long been no wise inferior to Britain in the eminence of her theologians, and in her ample provisions and appliances for ministerial training. We think, moreover, that the American working clergy, in their theological attainments, their pulpit power, and their ministerial efficiency, will, on the average, compare favorably with any ministry on the globe. In the substance and solidity of their sermons, they, as a class, hold no secondary rank.

There are, nevertheless, in the prevailing type of preaching in Britain, outside of the Anglican Church, characteristics which might be more largely infused into most of our American preaching with advantage, and which are finely embodied and exemplified in the few representative preachers they have sent to us. These are, 1. Scripturalness not merely in abstract doctrine, but in the whole frame-work and structure of their discourses, and in their applications to living matters; 2. Simplicity, without dullness or dryness, but with ever-sparkling freshness; 3. A strongly oratorical character, which, whether with or without a manuscript, speaks with warmth and earnestness not merely in presence of, but to their hearers; and this (4) with what Dr. Chalmers calls "blood-earnestness." Herein we think their style of preaching will be of real benefit to our own ministers, who, with all their merits, will be none the worse for unlearning any provincialisms or idiosyncracies of a contrary sort. Herein do we find the chief secret of those attractions which induced the congregations over which they preside to procure them as their pastors.

PAUSE IN THE PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIAN UNION.

It is quite plain that the measures initiated by our last Assembly, looking towards organic union with other Presbyterian bodies, can come