powerful friends at Court. Nor has it received money from the public treasury. The Romanists and the Reformed Churches on the Continent, the Church of England, the Church of Scotland, the Romanists and the Presbyterians in Ireland, have fed more or less at the public treasury. In America, in early times, the Episcopalians and the Congregationalists were supported partly at the public expense. But Methodism has stood alone, unbefriended by the Government, and unaided by its treasury. Its people have never been dependent, and hence have acquired self-reliance, and dare to express their opinions in the face of opposition. They have passed through serious convulsions of government without harm, for they had no power or place to lose. But, though unaided by Governments, they have ever been loyal. No people have volunteered more freely their means, or consecrated more promptly their lives, in their country's service. They have borne the burdens, without enjoying the patronage to any great extent.

III. Nor did they own large landed estates, or possess great wealth. In other years, patents were granted for large tracts of land, which became to families, and indirectly to Churches, of great value. The cases of William Penn and Lord Baltimore may be cited as instances. But Methodism had no such sources of wealth. Its people at first were poor; they had no estates and no endowments.

IV. Nor had it special assistance from Schools, or from old educational institutions. In its earlier years it had none. Mr. Wesley founded and struggled for years to maintain the Kingswood school, which has had a proud record, and has accomplished great good. But what was that compared with the venerable colleges and rich endowments in England, Scotland, and Ireland? It is well known that until comparatively recently Oxford and Cambridge refused their honours without subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles; and the sons of Methodism who sought a university education were estranged from the faith of their fathers. In America the literary institutions were under the control of some of the older churches, and while no religious test was legal, the whole influence was thrown against Methodist theology and usages. Some of us well remember the proscription and ridicule through which we passed on account of our faith. At last, in self-defence, Methodism was obliged to build its own seminaries and colleges. But what an unequal struggle! A people few in numbers, without wealth, to come into competition with the strength and endowments of centuries! When we look around us and see what has been accomplished in this direction, and what facilities are now afforded, we can only say, What hath God wrought!

V. Nor did it enjoy the powerful advocacy of the Press. In its earlier years it was fearfully traduced and misrepresented, and to this day it is the subject of unjust and merciless criticism from old-established papers and reviews. Nor is the ink scarcely dry upon pages prepared and published by its enemies to caricature it, in view of this Ecumeni.

cal Session.

But its opponents forget that it has stood this ordeal for more than a hundred years without serious injury. To defend himself and his cause, as well as to furnish religious reading for his people, Mr. Wesley early established a magazine, which still lives. This has been followed by papers and periodicals in many countries and languages, until it may be boldly said that the press of Methodism is not surpassed in the number of its issues, or in the ability of its management, by the press of any other denomination. Meanwhile the general Press has become more courteous, and we have little of which to complain, except from a few controlled by our enemies.

VI. Nor did it grow because the times were propitious. The age of its origin was one of spiritual darkness. England in the early part of the eighteenth century had largely lapsed into infidelity. Ministers even in the pulpit cast doubts upon the truth of the Bible. Some of them, by their lives and writings, brought discredit on the sacred desk. Immorality was rampant. This is the universal testimony of divines, statesmen, and historians. Had it not been for some such movement as that of the Wesleys, England would have followed France in her terrible career. I heard Cardinal Manning, in his sermon on the anniversary of the re-establishment of the Roman Catholic hierarchy in England, say that had it not been for John Wesley and his preaching of justification by faith, "no man could tell to what a depth of degradation England would have sunk."

VII. It may be said that the unprecedented growth of Methodism, especially in America and Australia, is due largely to emigration from older lands. It undoubtedly has thus received many, very many, valuable accessions, but its relative growth cannot be traced to this cause. The heaviest emigration was for many years from Ireland. But in Ireland there is, according to the census, but one Methodist to every 100 of the population. There is but one Methodist to ten Presbyterians. If the emigration is relatively equal, other Churches must receive 99 for every one that swells the Methodist ranks. Still stronger is the ratio against Methodism on the Continent and in Scotland. In England the proportion is different, but the Established Church still largely outnumbers them, and, consequently, in the emigration the Protestant Episcopalians are largely the gainers.

If, then, its growth cannot be accounted for by the sword, by Government aid, by the patronage of the nobility, by wealth, by the schools, by the Press, by emigration, or by the demands of the age, where among human agencies do we find the cause? Was it by the superior wisdom and skill of those who laid its foundations and planned its superstructure? Our critical friends will scarcely admit that. Was it by the superior learning or eloquence of its ministry? That will scarcely be granted. Was it by social position and influence ? That would be denied. Was it by the assumption of exclusive powers or privileges? It never claimed

apostolic succession. It had no close communion. From its earliest history it recognised as Christians all who loved and honoured the Lord Jesus Christ. Neither its altars nor its pulpits have ever been closed against Christians or Christian ministers by canons either of brass or of parchment. Where, then, can be the secret of its success, save in its spirit and in its life? Its ministers felt the power of a Divine call. Like the Apostle, woe was upon them if they preached not the Gospel.. They braved winter's cold and summer's heat, swam streams and threaded forests, endured persecution and reproach, to save their fellow-men. The people recognised their earnestness and sincerity, believed that they were sent of God, listened to their words, and were saved. Thus societies were gathered without church edifices and without regular pastors. They met together for singing, prayer, and mutual exhortation, until increasing numbers and means enabled them to erect an humble building and to establish a congregation. They grew because there was unoccupied territory. They grew because the Head of the Church had given to them "spirit and life."

There are those, however, who disparage Methodism because it has had divisions, and they predict its early disintegration. For the same reason Christianity itself might be disparaged. The learned and eloquent Bossuet wrote a work against Protestantism on account of its variations-showing its weakness; but, nevertheless, in the last century, its progress has been more rapid than ever before. I am not sure that these divisions are an unmixed evil. They seem to me to have compensations also. With the different tastes and habits of men, I fancy that, through churches somewhat differently organised, and with different usages, more minds may be won for Christ. Certainly we may be provoked even to love and good works. It seems also to me that as God has showed us physical life in almost every possible form, He means that we shall understand that Christian life may exist and flourish in different organisations and usages. He would show us that there is no sacredness in mere ecclesiasticism. Organisation has its value, and every member of each church should be true to his association; yet the organisation is only the temple in which the life dwells. The organisation is of man. The life is of Christ. Were there but one organisation with certain usages that prospered, we should think its forms and usages were in themselves sacred, we should grow narrow and bigoted. Our Church would be the Church, and all others would be schismatics. But when we see life in other churches, we learn that the God of the Jew is the God of the Gentile also. We recognise a brother beloved in every member of the family, and praise God for the infinitude of His grace. Quite possibly, also, in these separate organisations a little more flexibility may be gained, and, while holding fast to the Great Head of the Church, and contending earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints, we may learn from

cach other something that may help us in conquering the world for Christ.

As to the divisions in the Methodist family, there is little to mar the family likeness. For, first, there has been among the Wesleyan ranks no division as to doctrines. The clear statements in Mr. Wesley's sermons, and the doctrinal character of the hymns constantly sung, have aided in keeping us one. All over the world Methodist theology is a unit. Nor, secondly, is there any radical difference in usages The class-meeting, the prayer-meeting, the love-feast, the watch-night, though more or less strictly observed, are known everywhere in Methodism. So far as the membership is concerned, there is scarcely a single difference. Even in the Connexional bonds there is general likeness. The itinerant ministry, and the quarterly and annual conferences, exist in almost every branch. In the manner of legislation, and in the mode of effecting ministerial changes, there are some differences; but the points of agreement are so numerous as compared with the differences that we are emphatically one. We have no divisions as to vestments, and candles, and genuflections. We have no High Church, or Low Church, or Broad Church.

Differ as we may, there is something in all of us which the world recognises. Does a minister preach with unusual fervour, does he in all his duties exhibit unusual zeal ? Does not the world say, He preaches like a Methodist? Does a congregation meet, and sing, and pray, and rejoice? Does not the world say, They are like Methodists ? This Conference evinces a yearning for closer union, for more fraternal feeling. It is in the spirit of Mr. Wesley, who sought a closer union among all Christians. His societies were at first independent. When by the formation of a Conference they were united he greatly rejoiced. Not only so, but wrote in 1764, "I have long desired that there might be an open, avowed union between all who preach those fundamental truths-original sin, and justification by faith, producing inward and outward holiness; but all my endeavours have been hitherto ineffectual. God's time has not fully come." Again he wrote, "I do not desire a union of opinion among them. They might agree or disagree touching absolute decrees on the one hand, and perfection on the other. Not a union in expression. These may still speak of imputed righteousness, and those of the merits of Christ. Not a union with regard to outward order. Some may remain still quite regular, some quite irregular, and some partly regular and partly irregular." Again he wrote, "I ask but one thing, 'Is thy heart right as my heart is with thine?' If it be so, give me thy hand." His great heart was a hundred years in advance of the Christian world. Recently we have seen a Pan-Anglican Congress, a Pan-Presbyterian Council, and now a Methodist Ecumenical Conference. Do not these foreshadow an Ecumenical Protestant Conference, when Mr. Wesley's hope shall be realised, and the world shall see that evangelical Christians are

с

one in heart and one in effort? Certain I am that there will be au Ecumenical Conference, if not on earth, at least in heaven, when the good and the wise of all ages and of all churches shall meet at the Redeemer's throne. The nearer we rise toward the spirit of that heavenly union, the closer we come together here.

I was walking, some weeks since, in a beautiful grove. The trees were some distance apart, and the trunks were straight and rugged. But as they ascended higher the branches came closer together, and still higher the twigs and branches interlaced and formed a beautiful canopy. I said to myself, Our churches resemble these trees. The trunks near the earth stand stiffly and widely apart. The more nearly towards heaven they ascend, the closer and closer they come together, until they form one beautiful canopy, under which the sons of men enjoy both shelter and happiness. Then I thought of that beautiful prayer of the Saviour, "That they all may be one, that the world may know that Thou hast sent Me, and that Thou hast loved them as Thou hast loved Me." In loving obedience to Christ's commands, and in earnest efforts for the extension of His kingdom by doing good to men, is true oneness with Him to be found. Those who have the spirit of Christ, who go about always doing good, will be like-minded.

The future of Methodism, if I have rightly traced the source of its power, will depend upon the careful study of God's Word, which should be still more encouraged both in the family and in the Sunday school; upon an implicit belief in its Divine authority, a loving obedience to all its commands, a ceaseless activity in doing good, and a glorious enjoyment of all its precious promises. This last feature is essential to great success. "The joy of the Lord is your strength" is as true to-day as in the time of Nehemiah. The cry of the human soul in its hours of weakness and loneliness is for God. "Oh, that I knew where I might find Him is but an echo of the voice of humanity. The Romanists seek to satisfy this want by alleging that in the Mass the wafer is actually transmuted into the body and blood of Christ, and that He is there and then actually present. No marvel that with this belief the knee is bowed at the elevation of the host. No wonder is it that the priest has such power over the consciences of the people. The Ritualists in the Church of England, and the High Church party among the Lutherans, tend strongly in the same direction. The doctrine of apostolical succession is but a figment invented to require a priestly intervention between the soul and its Redeemer. Methodism rejects all these doctrines and practices. It invites the sinner directly to the Saviour, and assures him that in his own conscious experience of peace and love and joy he shall know that he is accepted in Christ. There are but the two ultimate theories. The sinner must come to Christ through the priest, who holds the keys, or he must come personally to the throne of grace, where he shall find grace and mercy to help in time of need. He