The British Quarterly Review. No. 97. Jan. 1, 1869. London: Hodder and Stoughton. THIS is a thoroughly good number of the British Quarterly. Its contents are-Literary Forgeries-Davidson on the New Testament-Gustave DoréChurch principles and prospects-Dr. Vaughan; in memoriam-The New Parliament and Mr. Gladstone-with 85 pages of Book Notices, under the head of Contemporary Literature. The article on Dr. Vaughan will be read far and wide with deep interest. The paper on Dr. Davidson's speculations on the New Testament, contains the most conclusive and satisfactory exposure of the pretensions and results of the so-called higher criticism, which we have met with in a small compass. We thank the Author and the Editors for so clear and masterly a defence of our New Testament Scriptures. The Congregational Year-Book, 1869. Containing the proceedings of the Congregational Union for 1868, and general statistics of the Denomination. London: Hodder and Stoughton. WE sometimes wonder how we "got on" in those days when there was no Year Book. The volume is now an indispensable of our Denominational life. And we feel ourselves every year under deeper obligations to the Rev. R. Ashton for the painstaking and admirable manner in which he exercises his editorial functions. Here is an octavo of 400 pages for eighteenpence! We need not add that we commend it most cordially. Stories from Germany. 1. Gold Seekers and Bread Winners. 2. The Cobbler, the Clerk, and the Lawyer of Liebstein. Translated by ANNIE HARWOOD. London: Hodder & Stoughton. THESE stories, pronounced by an intelligent young friend of ours to be " very good," have already appeared in the pages of "Merry and Wise," and now, with a smart binding and illustrations, make a pretty Christinas gift-book. With the Tide; or, a Life's Voyage. A Story for Young People. By SIDNEY DARYL. London: Hodderand Stoughton. CONGREGATIONAL REGISTER. December-January. [To prevent mistakes and delay, all communications for the Register should be addressed to the Editor, 2, Ivy Lane, Paternoster Row, E.C., and marked on the envelope "For Congregational Register."] ing the name of the Society for promoting English preaching in Wales, into the Home Missionary Society for South Wales and Monmouthshire. Dec. 22, 23. Aberdeen and Banffshire Association. The sermon was preached by Rev. D. Arthur. A Paper was read by Rev. J. Chalmers, from China, on the "Duty of Ministers at home with regard to Foreign Missions;" also, by Rev. J. Murker, of Banff, on Evangelistic Efforts." A soirée was also held, at which various addresses were delivered by ministers in the vicinity. 66 NEW CHURCH FORMED. CHEVELEY, near Newmarket, Cambridgeshire. Union of Baptists and Pædo-Baptists. Aug. 30, 1868. J. MILES, Pleasant Creek, Victoria. Revs. J. J. Halley and D. M. Davies took part in the service. Jan. 15, 1869. T. STIMPSON, Middleton, Manchester. The Revs. R. C. Lumsden, Professor Scott, LL.B., R. M. Davies, Professor Newth, and J. A. Macfadyen, M.A., took part in the service. RECOGNITION SERVICE. Rev. H. W. BRIGG, Union Chapel, Woodhouse Moor, Leeds. Prayer. Rev. H. Tarrant. Charge, Rev. W, Thomas. Address to Church, Rev. J. P. Chown. CALLS ACCEPTED. W. A. CRAVEN, of Airedale College, to Wyke, near Halifax. W. SATCHWELL, late Assistant to Rev. J. Hoyte, of Atherstone, to Hartshill. دو Jan. 2. Rev. B. H. KLUHT, of ministry, 27 years. Length 7. Rev. R. W. MONSELL, Neuchatel, Switzerland. Age, 52. 12. Rev. J. CHATER, Sen., Southport. Age, 63. Length of ministry, 32 years. 22. Rev. T. EVANS, Shaftesbury. Length of Ministry, 50 years. DEATH OF MINISTERS' WIVES. Dec. 28. Mrs. ROSS, wife of Rev. J. R. Ross, St. John's Wood. Jan. 13, 1869. Mrs. FOSTER, widow of late Rev. J. K. Foster, formerly tutor of Cheshunt College. TESTIMONIALS. To Rev. R. G. SOPER, B.A., on leaving Ludlow, Purse and Timepiece. Rev. H. ALLON, Islington, on completing the twenty-fifth year of his ministry at Union Chapel, Purse. The MERCHANT'S LECTURE will be delivered (D.V), at Poultry Chapel, on Tuesday, Feb. 9th, at noon precisely. THE CHRISTIAN WITNESS, AND CONGREGATIONAL MAGAZINE. WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MINISTERIAL SUCCESS? By the Reb. S. Hebditch. By Ministerial Success I mean a spiritual effect upon the people in kind and degree, such as may be reasonably expected, and such as is promised to follow on fidelity; or, if this is vague, I would say, the presence of a power upon the people whereby either Christians grow more like Christ, or sinners come to faith, or both these in considerable though not equal measure. That ministry might be called successful which keeps the Church in peace, which secures its numerical and internal growth, and which produces in the people around the Church-young and old, especially young-those impressions which give them strong affinities with the Church, and continuously bring them within her pale. These results require time. All enquiries about success during the first weeks, or even months, of a ministry should be discouraged. Give it time, It is the building of a bridge to connect earth and heaven, and the first outlay is on foundations below the surface or behind the hoarding. Its aim is a harvest, and the first weeks must be given to ploughing or even fencing, and when the seed is sown, November is a long way from August in spiritual husbandry. "Behold the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it until he receive the early and latter rain. Be ye also patient." But our enquiry is not wherein success consists, nor how long it takes to appear, but who is responsible for it? If it is small or nil who is to blame? if moderate, where lie the limitations? if great, to whom is the credit due ? Must we look for the explanation of these variations to one quarter or to many? and if to many, in what proportions is the responsibility to be distributed? The prosperity of a business firm is observed to date, it may be, from the introduction of a new partner, or foreman, or traveller, from VOL. V.-NEW SERIES. I the withdrawal of some competing firm, or from some quite accidental circumstance. Is any corresponding dependence on circumstances, persons, and coincidences to be traced in the success of the ministry? To some it will seem irreverent, almost profane, to ask such a question. Have you forgotten, they will say, that it is neither of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy ?—that though a Paul may plant, and an Apollos may water, it is God alone that can give the increase ?-that man is the clay and God is the potter, having power to make one vessel to honour and another to dishonour ?—and that Paul distinctly attributes the various successes of himself and his fellow-labourers to God's sovereign ordinance, even as the Lord gave to every man ? 1 66 No, I have not forgotten this. I should be sorry to forget a truth so really encouraging. But is this a truth in the spiritual sphere and not in the material? Is God less absolute among seeds and birds, and fire and water and air, than among the souls of men? or are we less responsible in spiritual matters than among these? If the agency of God ignores or suppresses or limits the agency of man anywhere, is it exclusively in the spiritual sphere? If not, then we may speak of divided responsibility, and of co-operation with God in both spheres alike, or in neither. The sovereignty of God is everywhere or nowhere. It does or does not appear in all His working. We do meet it everywhere, but we must not meet it in, one way here and in another way there. If it may excuse the Christian worker from all solicitude, so it may the worker in the field. If sovereignty means an iron ordering of things, excluding all creature responsibility, then it means this everywhere, and leaves responsibility nowhere, not in the husbandman for the state of his farm, not in the shepherd for the state of his flocks, not in the parent for the training of his children. If the power which makes the word effectual were exercised arbitrarily, quite independently of conditions and reasons, then there were but one answer to the question, Who is responsible for Ministerial Success? and to all questions of the sort that answer would be invariably-of all failure and of all success, the same "God." To Him, then, must be referred all that we now charge on the negligence of men. The slothful servant would deserve no more blame than he who gained five talents; and the drone, and the liar, and the thief, and, the dumb dog, and the careless watchman might sing over their cups and their crimes "we are delivered to do all these things." Then all idea of ministerial responsibility or Church responsibility, and all self-reproach, and self-rousing, and mutual exhortation, and all discussion of the subject were an impertinence. Our time will be wasted, and our seriousness be a grimace if we do not hold as certain, as fundamental, that in bestowing His. blessing upon ministerial labour God has some regard to conditions that are within within our power-that there are circumstances under which God certainly will bless His Word, and circumstances under which His blessing is likely to be withheld, or sparingly bestowed. It is probable that there is quite as close and constant a connection r་་་། between antecedent and consequent in this as in any other department of the wide region of the Divine operations. It is true that in this sphere we encounter the unique element of will which baffles all our calculations. But we cannot s suppose that the relation of a creature will to God is abnormal or undefined, or that it causes any real disturbance of the great laws of His procedure. It causes no faltering in His utterances, no uncertainty in prophecy, promise, or plan. Our search after the Divine method, so wonderfully successful of late in the natural sphere, may, in the next world, if not in this, discover the connection between spiritual antecedents and consequents. We may there see why Jesus "could not do many mighty works" at Nazareth, and why the Jews "could not believe; why one minister succeeds and another, apparently as able and good, fails, and why the same is successful here and unsuccessful there. But eno enough is now known to assure us that there are reasons, and also to enable us to predict with great certainty when we see certain causes at work what results will follow. Enough is revealed to convince us that even the effect of the Gospel on men is to a large extent put within our power, and is regulated by certain combinations, which make the question of responsibility for those 2 2 results a reasonable and very solemn one. Those combinations are so complex, and depend on so many concurrent agencies, that we may safely assert that the responsibility of which we are now enquiring is a divided one. It never rests wholly on one man. It is a partnery of the most solemn and sacred character. The conditions of success require many hands to supply them. One may do his part and another not do his, a third may blunder and a fourth oppose. The Divine photography which seeks to imprint the image of God on the soul demands not less than the natural art does, favouring elemental da conditions, a steady hand, a watchful eye, nice adjustments, and a careful preparation of the recipient surface. The sun is never at fault. He is always bright enough." Tisin Tis in our cloudy skies and in our imperfect moral chemistry and careless management that the hindrance lies. Let the terrestrial conditions be faithfully found and the celestial forces will not be wanting the image will be there to the joy alike of subject and artist and all concerned. My object in this paper would be partly realised if I said no more. One answer to the question we are considering is furnished. Who is responsible for ministerial success? Who is? No one is, but many are. The honours and joys of success, and the responsibility of failure, are both too heavy a weight, of glory or of shame, for any one soul to bear. To see souls converted in hundreds, to see Christians abounding in the fruits of righteousness, the whole body making the increase of God, this is too much, too grand, too God-like a thing, to be claimed as the work, even instrumentally, of one man, and is never allowed to one man. Rather for the gift bestowed by the means of many persons thanks are given by many on its behalf."" |