gether for common objects. John Wesley said, "Though we cannot think alike, may we not love alike?" And surely those who love alike may join hands in works of love which without co-operation would be impracticable. We have much more in common than in difference. Let us emphasize what unites and respect what divides. This, if we have a vision clear enough to discern the signs of the times and their needs, is all the preparation required to transform the churches from a Christian mob into the army of the living God.

Have we enough of love and charity and sanctified commonsense to make practicable this co-operation which is so obviously needed? Many have, but some still insist that unless all the sons of God have the same given name, they do not belong to the family at all. There are still some who believe that no matter how loyal and brave his fighting may be there is no true soldier of the cross who is not a member of their regiment and who does not wear their particular pattern of brass buttons; and who imagine that the Great Captain is pleased when they recruit their regiment from some other. A friend of mine, the pastor of one of the most prominent churches in New York, tells me that a colored Baptist brother from the South recently called on him for financial aid. Our Southern brother had mortgaged his house to save his church, and now he was in danger of losing both.

"What," said my friend, "is the condition of your work? Is it successful?"

"Oh yes, sah," was the reply, "we had a powerful blessin' dis pas' wintah. We des took in 'bout fifty members from de Meth'dist church cros' de road, an' 'bout broke it up. "Tain't goin' to 'mount to nothin' mo'. Yes, sah, we's had a powerful blessin'."

I fear there are not a few white as well as black, and north as well as south, who under like circumstances would feel like gratitude. My friends, the cutest thing the devil ever does is to set a good man to tearing down or obstructing a good work. He would always rather have good men for his business because when they undertake it they can do it so much more effectively than bad men.

The resources of the churches are great, but if they were ten fold greater there would be none to waste in doing the devil's work, none to waste in competition and strife. The Master said,

"Gather up the fragments that nothing be lost." Though he could command infinite resources, and could make a loaf feed a thousand, he would not waste a crumb.

Let the church put a stop to the waste involved in competition and in ill-adapted methods, and her strength will prove equal to her day-this great day of new opportunities, of new light, of new life, of new forces, of new inspirations, of new hopes -the day of Him who said, " Behold, I make all things new."

CHRISTIAN CO-OPERATION IN CHURCH

EXTENSION.

BY PRESIDENT W. DEW. HYDE, D.D., OF BOWDOIN COllege, BRUNSWICK, ME.

IN presenting a plan of co-operation in church extension a Congregationalist is at something of a disadvantage. For at once the Laocoons of the other denominations exclaim, in an almost literal version of the Trojan priest, "What strange madness is this, my unhappy countrymen! Think you that a Congregationalist could ever make a proposition that has no treachery in it? Either the Congregationalists are lying low behind this scheme, or it is a device for breaking down our denominational walls, or there is some other secret mischief. Put no faith in it, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopalians. Whatever it be, I fear the Congregationalists even when they bring offers of concession. Now I frankly admit that there has been ground for this distrust. It has come from sad experience with so-called union churches. A few people, representing half a dozen denominations, compromise their differences and form a union church. The Baptist gives up immersion; the Methodist, the itinerancy; the Episcopalian, the historic episcopate; the Presbyterian, the Westminster Confession; the Congregationalist--well, he gives up the name and there you have your Union church. To be sure, when you come to the question of internal government and external affiliation there is but one type of government and one bond of affiliation that will fit this independent local church, and that is the Congregational. The Congregationalists have made a very satisfactory compromise. It is like that of the husband who preferred to sleep on cotton sheets and the wife who had an equally decided preference for linen. When asked how they settled the matter, the wife replied complacently, “Oh, we compromised on linen."

Fortunately it is no such compromise as that, no form of union church which we are to discuss to-day. Christian cooperation in church extension, instead of suppressing one denomination at the expense of another, aims by concerted action to most effectively promote the common interest of them all. It offers no novelties either in polity or creed. Christian co-operation in church extension simply means that the several denominations shall consult together concerning the interests of the kingdom of Christ in a given territory, and so distribute their forces as to present at each point the most effective working force and the most attractive Christian life that a wise direction of their united strength makes possible. It proposes to found a Baptist church where a Baptist church will do more good than any other; to found a Methodist church where the needs of the community call for that; to encourage the growth of the Episcopal church among those who prefer its form of service; to foster Congregational and Presbyterian churches where there is a preponderance of Congregationalists or Presbyterians. The question what church a given locality most needs it proposes to settle in advance by friendly conference of all parties interested, instead of by cut-throat competition on the ground. And in those cases which cannot be decided by such friendly conference, it proposes to introduce the method which nations, in proportion as they become Christianized, are substituting for war, and which employers and employés, in proportion as they are Christianized, are substituting for strikes and lockouts-the method of arbitration. Certainly the church cannot afford to be the last to abandon an appeal to brute force and financial strength in the settlement of differences. We ought not to lag behind civil government and industrial enterprise in accepting the most peaceful and Christian method of adjusting disputed rights and rival claims. Christian co-operation in church extension is nothing more nor less than a proposition to do Christian work in a Christian way.

In this simple demand that the representatives of the different denominations shall meet together, and look into each other's faces, and frankly tell each other their purposes and plans, and plan together the wisest distribution of their several resources, there certainly is nothing unreasonable or unfair. The only possible objection is that it is impracticable. And to all doubt

ers and sceptics on this point I have the irrefutable answer, It is practicable. We are actually doing this very thing in Maine.

The movement originated with a Methodist. Rev. C. S. Cummings, a delegate to our Congregational conference in 1890, in his communication to our body lamented the serious evils of denominational rivalry in small towns, and earnestly advocated the substitution of co-operation for competition in the prosecution of church work. Our Congregational conference at once appointed a committee of conference with other denominations upon the subject. A conference with representatives of the Baptist, Free Baptist, Methodist, and Christian denominations was held at Brunswick, December 15, 1890. We published a platform of principles, and agreed to bring the matter to the attention of our respective denominations at their next annual meetings. In 1891 we met again, at Waterville, reiterated our principles, held a public meeting, and mailed a full report of our proceedings to every pastor in the state. We voted to ask our denominations to send delegates to a meeting the following year with authority to form a permanent commission on the basis of the principles announced in our platform. In 1892, at Lewiston, we formed such a permanent commission, with constitution, officers, and committees. One committee was charged with the duty of collecting statistics concerning the needs of rural districts in the state. To another was assigned the work of keeping our principles and aims before the public by contributions to the secular and religious press. An executive committee, consisting of one member from each denomination, was appointed to settle questions of comity arising during the year, and to give advice in the name of the commission on such cases as might be referred to them.

The main points in our platform are as follows: "No community in which any denomination has legitimate claims should be entered by any other denomination through its official agencies without conference with the denomination or denominations having said claims. A feeble church should be revived, if possible, rather than a new one established to become its rival.

"The preferences of a community should always be regarded by missionary agents and individual workers.

"Those denominations having churches nearest at hand should, others things being equal, be recognized as in the most.