work, as the judgment and sympathies of the donor were enlisted. This combination of interests makes it quite an impossibility for the "General Missionary Committee" to give satisfaction in their appropriations.

That there is a demand in the Methodist Episcopal Church in favor of the home work, that is not met by our General Missionary Society, is evinced by our numerous missionary societies for local purposes. Our City Missionary Societies, Ladies' Missionary Societies, and Young Men's Missionary Societies, altogether independent in their organizations, are constantly increasing. And these exist and multiply because of the demand by the Church for larger appropriations for the home work than can be secured through our present Missionary Society. Would it not be wise Methodist policy to yield to this demand, and form some scheme for concert of action, rather than risk these isolated societies?

This demand, indeed, has been recognized in our Disciplinary provisions for the "Support of Missions."

"Any annual conference may, at its option, by a vote of two-thirds of its members, assume the responsibility of supporting such missions, already established within its own limits, as have hitherto been reported under the head of 'Missions in the destitute portions of the regular work,' and for this purpose it shall be at liberty to organize a Conference Domestic Society with branches, provided such organization shall not interfere with the collections for the Missionary Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, as required by the Discipline. Provided, also, that in case more funds shall be raised for such missions than are needed, the surplus shall be paid over to the treasurer of the Parent Society of the Methodist Episcopal Church, at New York, to be appropriated to such mission or missions, under the care of the society, as may be designated by said conference."-Discipline, p. 198.

Under this provision domestic missionary societies may be formed in every annual conference, with branches or auxiliaries throughout their limits, for the support and enlargement, it is presumed, of the "destitute portions of the regular work." Here a beginning could be made. A Connectional Conference Home Missionary Society could be formed, and these conference societies could be combined and represented in a general organization for the whole Church. Thus our entire home field could be brought under the direct supervision of those most interested and best acquainted with its wants, each auxiliary reporting to its conference, and each conference to the General Board. And such an organization, in its details, could be made to meet all the necessities now calling for local societies. Indeed, it would be composed of local societies, under general government, which should have their own Board of Management, and the control of their own funds, with certain limitations for general purposes.

Why not organize such conference societies? They are disciplinary, practical, and demanded. The complaint of annual conferences is almost universal, that the appropriations for conference purposes are entirely too small.

To do our work well in the several annual conferences, we must have more money in some way, more missionary money, directly or indirectly. It occurs to us, that conference organizations are the surest and most Methodistic way of securing the object. And those who are more immediately interested in the foreign work say they have no apprehension that such a movement would diminish the receipts for that department of labor. Let us then have a home missionary organization for the Methodist Episcopal Church. In this connection we are tempted to a speculation on the subject of specific missionary societies, distinct from the organization of the Church with which they are associated. The true, visible Church of Christ is a missionary society, a divinely-constituted missionary society, and the only divinely-constituted missionary society; missionary work is inseparably interwoven with her organic existence. It is the paramount object of organization at all. Is it, then, the more excellent way to organize societies to do the work of the Church, the special work to which she is divinely called? Whether we have not by these organizations marred the close, life-circulating relations which should always exist between the missionary work and the Church of Christ? Would we not more effectually serve our object of advancing the kingdom of Christ in the world, by teaching, and impressing upon every local Church organization the great truth, that it was raised up, and blessed with Gospel privileges and spiritual power, for the very purpose of extending them to others? Should not every Church, not by the formation of a separate society, not by formal voluntary resolution, but by Divine appointment, be considered, and, in the name of the great Head of the Church, baptized, Missionary Society! By such teaching we would more effectually bind the missionary work upon the heart and conscience of the Church. This idea, we think, is expressed on page 194 of the Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church: "The support of missions is committed to the churches, congregations, and societies, as such." Yet, for the present, special missionary organizations seem to be a necessity.

But to return from this speculation. If the arguments here adduced will not secure the adoption of the policy presented; if, as a Church, we must go abroad, jumping over wide wastes to get far off; if this must be so, let us, as the next best thing, consider, as a Church, our peculiarities, and select our fields and method of labor

in view of them. Individuals have their personal qualifications, fitting them for certain positions and duties; so have individual Churches their esprit du corps and their peculiarities, fitting them for certain fields and modes of labor in the vineyard of the Lord.

We have delineated briefly what we consider the peculiarities of Methodism in spirit, call, and organic adaptation, and have designated what we suppose to be her appropriate work in the great enterprise of saving the world. She is peculiarly adapted to civilized communities, to nominally Christian lands, to raise fallen and infuse life into dead Churches. If, then, we must go abroad, let us select fields presenting these features. Our German, Scandinavian, and Bulgarian missions are eminently of this character, and we may multiply such to any extent. All Europe is open to us, presenting fields of this description; the great empire of Russia, all South America and Mexico; in the Lutheran Church, the Greek Church, and the Romish Church; among the mountain Nestorians of Persia, and the Armenians of Asia Minor. Here are ample fields for work for which we are peculiarly fitted, and we need only to adhere to our original spirit and method of labor to accomplish a great portion of it.

More than fifty years ago the Rev. Melville Horne, successor of the saintly Fletcher at Madeley, and who at one time traveled with Mr. Wesley, in a series of spirit-stirring letters on missions, apprehends very clearly this point in connection with Methodism. In contrasting it with Moravianism, he says:

"The zeal of the Methodist blazes and burns everything before it. He is open, active, bold, and ardent. He sees himself in a pushing world, and pushes with the foremost. He mixes in the world, makes a hundred attempts to effect his purpose, and if baffled in them all, directs his labors to some other quarter which affords full scope to his activity. He lives in action, and is dejected and uncomfortable if he wants active employment. The Methodists are known chiefly for what they have done at home. . . . Itinerancy is the palladium of Methodism. Fixing upon some favorable post they revolve in a circle around it, perpetually making excursions in the neighboring country, and multiplying their circuits and their preachers in proportion to their success. If they do not split of themselves there is hardly anything in the missionary line which they may not attempt and succeed in. But they will not, I fear, be able to steer clear of persecution, as the Moravians have done, nor do I conceive they have patience and perseverance for a Greenland mission. A Methodist preacher would think his life thrown away, in spending twenty or thirty years upon a few converts, and I flatter myself that Methodists are too well acquainted with themselves to engage in such undertakings, while so many large and populous kingdoms are accessible to them.-Letter III. The method by which we should work these fields is worth a thought, whether by independent Church organizations, or in accordance with our primitive method. Asking no recognition as a Church where the people are already churched, and sufficiently

orthodox for salvation; disclaiming all sectarianism; going forth into the highways and hedges only to do good; breathing life into dead orthodoxy, writing salvation upon the walls and praise upon the gates of existing Church establishments. The result proves this to have been a wise course in England. And would it not now, under similar circumstances, reach and conciliate certain pastors, and open doors of access to the people for greater usefulness than could be secured in any other way? Could it not have been done in Germany, in Norway, and in Stockholm, years ago? Could it not be done in Bulgaria? Are there not always a few pastors in these national and ancient Churches who, by proper approach, would welcome such co-operation? May we not diffuse Gospel salvation throughout Germany more successfully by this method than by independent Church organization? Our missionaries have been persecuted, fined, and imprisoned in Germany, for violations of national Church laws; and only in the city of Bremen are we permitted to exist as an organized Church. Has not our choice of this method very much circumscribed our influence? There were national causes at work in Germany before we sent any missionary there, stirring to spiritual life and regeneration. Here and there the national pulpit gave out a certain sound. The spark was beginning to glow. Now might not Methodism have blown the spark of Holy Ghost religion into a flame, if our ministers had offered themselves as helpers, evangelists, and revivalists to the spiritual part of the established clergy, and might it not be to Germany what it was to England in the days of Wesley? In accordance with this view, one of our missionaries, (Brother Nippert,) in a recent letter, gives an account of a hearty welcome into the parish of the Rev. Mr. Kuntze, of Berlin, authorizing him to form classes, and labor in his own way for the salvation of the people. Are there not more such welcomes awaiting us? Is it too late to accept of them?

These are speculations and queries only, thrown out to call attention to a point of practicability in prosecuting our mission work. It is true this course might not reflect so much denominational glory, but our glory should be to do the greatest amount of good; and if it can be accomplished by this co-operation with established Churches, let us not falter in following in the footsteps of our founder.

Before closing this our last article on missions, we wish to notice. briefly the comparison so frequently made between the contributions of the Methodist Episcopal Church for missions and other benevolent objects with those of other Churches, particularly with the English Wesleyans. These comparisons are instituted so frequently upon the platform, in the pulpit, and through the press, by our own

writers and speakers, to our great disparagement as a Church, that humble acquiescence in their truth seems to have become a virtue. We believe that in this matter downright injustice is done us. In an article in the "National Magazine," November, 1858, p. 410, entitled "British and American Methodism compared," we find the following statement: "That British Methodism raises for missions one dollar and forty-two cents per member annually, while we (in the Methodist Episcopal Church) raise for the same object but twenty-eight cents per member annually! The American Church has more abundant means, and about double the membership, and ought, in all fairness, to outstrip the parent Church in the amount of her contributions."

66

Comparisons certainly are odious sometimes, and one hundred and forty-two against twenty-eight, five to one, is sufficient to make the Methodist Episcopal Church so, if it be a fair comparison. Yet, to make it still darker, it is affirmed that the Methodist Episcopal Church has more abundant means" and about double the membership." It is true we have a much larger membership than they, but this has nothing to do with the point of the comparison. It may be true also that our aggregate wealth as a Church is greater than theirs, and it is also true that our wealth is more generally distributed, and we have more comfortable homes among us than they have, for which we are unfeignedly thankful. But even this does not determine that we have more for benevolent purposes than they have. The wealth of England is in a few hands. In the Church as well as in the world there are instances of overgrown wealth. Hence the large sums contributed by individuals to the various Wesleyan funds, which swell the aggregate so greatly. Ten thousand a year in the hands of one man ought to furnish a much larger proportion for benevolent contributions than if it were equally distributed among ten persons. Now comparatively, we presume, the Wesleyans have more persons of the greater ability than the American Church has. It does not require much arithmetical skill to discover that such a state of facts would greatly increase the ability to make a larger average contribution.

Again, to confine the comparison to missionary contributions only is unfair; it is to present a very contracted view of the subject; missionary money, as technically understood, is not the measure of a Church's labors or liberality. In this comparison home Church expenses must be taken into the account. Ours are much greater than theirs on an average of membership, thus diminishing our means for foreign contributions. Our population is sparse, expensive to reach; we are all the time beginning; everything is new; FOURTH SERIES, VOL. XI.-19