sionally absent, then occasionally present, and at last absent altogether, we begin to look at each other seriously, and significantly shake our heads as we discover, only when it is too late, that while we were flattering ourselves that all was well, in reality all was very far from being well; that, in fact, they had been receiving no religious or ecclesiastical instruction, or training worthy of the name. Now what I plead for is that the Church realise and implement her own obligations to look after the lambs of the flock, as well as after the sheep. It will not do to say that she discharges her obligations, when she inculcates upon her members the imperative duty of attending to the spiritual interests of their children. These children are her members, as well as their parents' off-spring, and she is responsible to God for the manner in which she discharges her duty to her members, as well as parents are responsible for the manner in which they perform their part to their children. Is not this one of the privileges conferred upon children by baptism? Assuredly it is. And it will be at her peril, if the Church neglects to ensure them the benefit of it. When the Saviour gave the Church her commission, through the medium of the Apostle Peter, His injunction to feed the lambs was quite as explicit, as it was to feed the sheep. The meaning of which I take to be that they were to be specially tended, and supplied with food adapted to their capacities. And this duty was directly imposed upon the Church, and she lies under the most solemn responsibilities to see that it is efficiently discharged. Now, let me ask in what manner this important duty has been performed in our body in the past. What means have been adopted to ensure that parents discharge their duty in this matter. My own experience supplies several cases, where there was a manifest and serious failure, on the part of parents in full communion in our body, in this matter; but I never knew of one case in which the office-bearers of the Church interfered either in the way of bringing the discipline of the Church to bear upon the parents, or the salutary influence of the Church to bear directly upon the children. I do not presume to aver that no such interference ever took place. But it is to be feared that is rare. I am quite aware of the delicacy and difficulty of such dealing with families. Indeed, the difficulty is almost insurmountable. How can the office-bearers of the Church know whether their young members are, or are not receiving religious instruction, unless by a system of family visitation, that would be in most cases, perhaps where it was most required, resented as impertinent espionage. And suppose that by some means or other the office-bearers of the Church should discover that certain parents were scandalously neglecting their duty to their children in this matter, how would the Church proceed? According to the traditional system they would endeavour to "stir up" the parents to a sense of their duty. Quite right. Stir them up vigorously, by all means. But while this "stirring up" process is under experiment, what becomes of their children? Must they wait on till their parents are "scirred up"-perhaps qualified-to instruct them? When the Poor Law

authorities in our land discover parents culpably neglecting to provide for their children's sustenance, while they send the parents to prison, they at the same time mercifully send the children to the workhouse. Are we prepared to imitate this wise and beneficent policy with regard to the young of our body, by providing for their spiritual interests while their parents are being stirred up by discipline, or otherwise, to discharge their obligations? To this it may perhaps be replied that the occasional visits of the pastor of the congregation among the members, affords him an opportunity of knowing, to some extent, how the religious instruction of her young is being attended to. I admit that this is the case "to some extent," but what is the "extent?" Is it to the extent necessary? It cannot be. Suppose he should discover some deficiency, would not delicacy, and charity, &c., be ready to counsel forbearance, and tenderness, and last of all silence? No, no. The Church is not warranted either by Scripture or wise policy to treat the young in such a hap-hazard fashion. We have referred to the maxim that the young are the seed of the Church. Now if this proposition be true, does it not follow that it is the highest wisdom on her part— nay, is it not vital to her very existence, that she bestow the utmost care upon her seed, her very life. How does the farmer act with regard to the seed from which he expects to reap his future harvest? Does he only look after the more mature grain, and garner it carefully, while for his seed be trusts to those grains that may have fallen from the ears of the standing corn, and that may grow up in such a fashion as neither to facilitate nor reward the labours of the

reaper? Certainly not. Such conduct would be justly regarded as either the result of folly or sloth-or perhaps a mixture of both. And why should the Church be content to prosecute a similar haphazard course with regard to her vastly more important seed. I greatly fear that, to her own hurt, as well as to the injury of higher interests, our Church has too long acted upon this unhappy principle -akin to-but worse than-what is known in the world as "locking the stable door after the steed has been stolen." I say worse, because, although we are aware that our stable is being unhappily emptied, we are, as a Church, making no effort even yet to lock the door. We are not wise even after the event.

Let me now refer to the second question proposed—namely, What means have been, or are now being employed to arrest the further progress of this evil. I have already referred to one of the most important, namely, parental instruction. I have also expressed the

conviction that it is not sufficient of itself. Another means more or less employed-but not universally so-is the minister's class, meeting on some week-day evening. That I gladly allow to be a valuable auxiliary to family instruction. But this, too, must, in most cases, fall far short of what is necessary, in order to deal faithfully with the highest interests of the young. The pastor has two formidable obstacles to contend against in the management of such a class. In the first place, the time at his disposal is altogether inadequate to enable him to instruct and catechise individually all the

young in a congregation, and this is the only way in which young persons can be efficiently taught. Those who have experience in Sabbath School teaching, know that a class of seven or eight is quite enough for one teacher to overtake. And how is the pastor to overtake in a similar length of time a class of a score or two? In point of fact he could not. The second obstacle is the difficulty of securing the regular attendance of the young on week-day evenings. I mean the young between the ages of seven and twelve, or fourteen years. Day-school lessons, weather, locality, that is, distance from place of meeting, &c., &c., will always interfere more or less with the regularity of attendance, and consequently with the good results that might accrue from such a class. Now, so far as I am aware, these are the only means hitherto recognised by our Church in dealing with the young of our body. And it is only because I am deeply convinced that we fail in our duty to the young, by relying exclusively upon these, that I have ventured to trouble you with this communication.

And having presumed thus far, let me conclude by throwing out a suggestion or two fitted, as I believe, to effect some reformation, and by God's blessing, advantage to the young. In the first place, it would be an important step towards improvement in this matter, if the Synod had a few statistics furnished by each congregation, and forwarded regularly to every meeting of the Supreme Court in our body. The advantage of this we presume to be so evident, that we refrain from adducing any argument in its support. Another suggestion I would respectfully make is, that the session of each congregation should organise classes, at some convenient hour on Sabbath, for the purpose of communicating religious instruction to the young of the congregation. Let them be thoroughly under the supervision of the session in every particular. And parents who are so disposed could take their children with them to such a class, and assist in the good work. Such a mixing of the young of a congregation would tend to weld them together, as Church members, in a way that nothing else, humanly speaking, will ever do. And the last suggestion I would offer for the present is that there might be, say twice a year, a public examination of all the young in a congregation, upon some subject assigned previously, so as to allow time for preparation. Such an examination might be made both instructive and interesting, alike to old and young.

I have only to add that I have thrown together these sentences under a full sense of the responsibility which I incur thereby. But I prefer to lie under this responsibility, rather than under that of crushing my deep and solemn convictions, the result of many years experience and consideration. And I now leave it in God's hands.

I am, yours truly,

Glasgow, 2nd January, 1879.

R. J. WOOD.

Literature.

A Historical Sketch of the Life of our Lord, with an Introduction and Notes. By W. Ireland Gordon, M.A., B. D., Minister of Walkerburn, Peebleshire. William Blackwood and Sons, Edinburgh and London. 1878.

As Solomon said of the making of books in general, so may we say of the writing of "Lives of Christ "-of such book-making "there is no end." Nor is this surprising, when we think of the theme so exhaustlessly full of interest; nor is it to be deprecated but the opposite, when done in a right manner. As the writer of the "Life" before us remarks-"There are discoveries yet to be made in the Gospels by the very humblest mind that ever brought itself to bear upon them. These Gospels are a garden full of the richest and rarest flowers, which may be culled unceasingly, and the crop of which seems never to diminish." Mr. Gordon's special design in entering this "garden" is to furnish a text-book on the Gospels, for Sabbath-school teachers and Bible classes, "at once comprehensive, simple, and moderate in cost." In working out his laudable design he has evidently given himself to the task, con amore, and has expended upon it not a little thought and labour, and we have no doubt it will be found useful by those for whom it has been prepared. Those who make use of it, however, would do well to exercise caution, and not accept all that the writer says simply because he says it.

In a very full introduction, the author treats of the four Evangelists, the contents and characteristic features of the Gospels, the elements of our Lord's teaching, and other topics. Then follows the historical sketch, which is of the nature of a "paraphrase," divided into numbered paragraphs headed by passages from the Gospels, arranged in chronological order so as to form a "harmonised" continuous narrative. And after this come the "Notes," which are for the most part brief, but often pithy and suggestive. There are also useful Indices and a neat map of Palestine, ancient and modern.

In perusing the book, while admiring the ability and industry it displays, and relishing its freshness, we are sorry to say we have met with a good many things in it, particularly in the Introduction, to which, if our space had allowed, we should have been constrained to take serious exception. Only one or two of the more important points can be alluded to now. Like Dr. Dods and many others, Mr. Gordon discards the doctrine of "verbal inspiration as "utterly untenable," and speaks of inspiration as "the intensely personal and eminently spiritual attitude of the sacred writers,' as "differing only in degree from that of all good men," and as a thing which there is no evidence to show 'stands by itself." Accordingly, in keeping with this low and erroneous view of Inspiration, our author finds many mistakes in the Gospels. He makes also, in one place, the extraordinary assertion that "in no sense are the Gospel records to be regarded as historical compositions," while elsewhere, he virtually contradicts this assertion

by saying, that "the author of the Fourth Gospel gives not a historical, but a philosophical view of the person of Christ," which surely implies that the authors of the other Gospels give a historical view. On the important subject of miracles, too, the writer is far from giving forth a certain and intelligible sound; indeed, in our opinion, he gives forth a most uncertain and dangerous sound, when he denies that miracles were a proof of our Lord's divinity, and affirms that Christ "did such deeds as any one who triumphs over the flesh as He did may do," and that "if His works are beyond our power, it is not because we are men, but because we are not perfect men.” Our author also sadly misrepresents the nature and design of the Gospel in saying that it "professed only to embody the essence of the Law." For if the Gospel be nothing more than an embodiment and republication of the Law, it cannot be the "Gospel of our salvation," since by the deeds of the Law no flesh can be justified, for by the Law is the knowledge of sin.

This, we understand, is Mr. Gordon's first publication, and in many respects it is highly creditable to him. We trust, however, that he will reconsider such points as those we have referred to, and that he will be led to adopt views more in harmony with the teachings of that infallible Word, for which we believe he has the deepest reverence, and into a fuller knowledge of which he desires to be instrumental in leading those committed to his care.

January,

The Catholic Presbyterian-An International Journal, Ecclesiastical and Religious. Edited by Professor W. G. Blaikie, D.D., LL.D., F.R.S. E. 1879. London: James Nisbet and Co.

THIS is the first number of a new monthly Shilling Magazine, to be issued simultaneously in this country and in America. It is one of the fruits of the Pan-Presbyterian Council, and is to be devoted specially to the furtherance of the objects which that Council had in view. We have perused the varied contents of the number with much interest, and on the whole with satisfaction; and though it is hardly possible to judge from a single issue, we anticipate that the Journal will be successfully carried on under the skilful editorship of Professor Blaikie, and we would cherish the hope that it may do good service in the interest of our world-wide Presbyterianism. Toward the close of his vigorously written opening paper, the Editor strikes, what we may take to be the "key-note," when he says, with reference to the Council and its aims, that "the whole movement is liberal, and must be liberalising." What this may mean, as regards this Journal, remains to be seen. If, in its "liberalising" efforts, it is carefully regulated by the principles of the Divine Word, all will be well; but if it set aside any of these principles and become an advocate of unscriptural latitudinarianism in religious doctrine, and ecclesiastical practice, Presbyterianism would be better without it. We regret we have not room to refer particularly to the several articles in this opening number, but this is of less consequence, as we hope to have other opportunities of noticing this interesting "International Journal."