And let us consider who are those who ought to be regarded as our brethren and saints upon earth, all who are true and earnest seekers after God and goodness. These are not all bound up in the narrow sects and parties whose names are almost endless amongst us. The grand old churches, Greek and Roman, will swell the numbers of these truly elect ones. We shall have in the Communion of Saints the pious Catholic, be he priest or layman, the thousands of good men and women belonging to the Greek and English Established Churches, the excellent of all the Nonconformist bodies, so-called Infidels, be they good men, and true to truth and righteousness, the faithful Unitarian, and the pious Theist, all are worshippers of goodness, of righteousness, and of God. Neither is this communion confined to Christian lands; the devout Mahometan, the pious Parsee or Hindoo, yea, the poor African, bowing sincerity to his wooden fetich, is alike amongst the number. We plume ourselves upon our superior knowledge and culture; but, in the eyes of an infinite God, are we not very much alike, and all need higher teaching.

Let us look for a moment in imagination upon this glorious band, this Communion of Saints, all bowing consciously or unconsciously, before the great Eternal. "Men of clean hands and a pure heart, who have not lifted up their souls unto vanity, nor sworn deceitfully." Men of every clime, colour, and variety of character, yet in the main, and according to their light, true men, loyal to truth, uprightness, and manly godliness, according to their training and mode of thought.

But too well I know that vast numbers who read this paper will be astonished to find the poor heathen, and Jews and Infidels regarded as belonging to the Communion of Saints, and will scowl and shudder with true Pharisaic pride. The Catholic will say there is no salvation out of his Church; the Evangelical will say the same, and each look askance at the other. Does it not show that all the light and knowledge is not confined to Christian lands. There is much bigotry and ignorance abroad, even amongst professors of the Christian creed. Is there anything amongst the Mahomedans, or Parsees, or Hindoos, or poor Africans, more monstrous than the

dogma that a priest can, by a sort of magical incantation, turn a piece of bread into his God, and worship it—or than the dogma of the Infallibility of a book full of marvels and miracles that belong to the infancy of every new religion. Then, as men worship God, the source of all wisdom, all purity, all truth, all goodness, all beauty, and righteousness, let them seek to embody these in their lives, and endeavour with all their soul and strength to spread them abroad amongst all men.

If Religion consists in love to God and love to man, and this Communion of Saints is but the embodiment of it, then how much requires to be stripped off the present popular Theology, before the great beauty and attractiveness of Religion is seen. The lives, too, of its professors need to be purged of a great deal that is sour and repulsive. All beauty in action, word or conduct ought to be cultivated. Kindness and charity to the poor, to the afflicted and to the down-trodden, should be shown, with gentleness and consideration. Ignorance and prejudice ought to be guarded against, and youth instructed carefully, not in worn-out dogmas, but in vital, life-giving truth that will make them wise, and warm their hearts for active usefulness. Theology should be made consistent with good sense and taught as in accordance with the highest reason, and men, revering the highest moral qualities in the Godhead, would seek to make these revered and venerated amongst all men. Then would the Communion of Saints approach perfection.

Edward F. Elliott.

LOVE'S EVANGEL.

"And turn from martyred saints and sinners hairy,
To the sweet portraits of the Virgin Mary."-BYRON.

Friend. I was so much surprized just now to hear you say that you objected to make a statement on oath, knowing that you are not a Quaker, and being equally certain that you cannot be that illogical thing an Atheist, that I must ask you for an explanation.

Myself. You are welcome to it, and are right in supposing that my objection does nor arise from Quakerism, or Atheism as I understand it. I object to take the Christian oath because I do not believe in the Christian presentation of God.

Friend. On what grounds do you reject it?

Myself. On moral grounds. He is a Moloch whom nothing but blood could appease from the beginning. He required the life of an innocent lamb from Abel, because Abel's mother ate an apple which had been placed to tempt her, rejecting the more rational and beautiful offering of the fruits and flowers of Cain. Since then, countless happy and innocent lives have been sacrificed at his cruel shrine; even Abraham's only son and Jephtha's daughter had to be offered, and the murders culminated in the appalling sacrifice of his own beloved only Son! I turn from his temples with horror and execrate his altars! The conception of such an object for worship is hideous and immoral, the outcome of ferocity, the fatal legacy of barbarism and ignorance.

Friend. But can you suppose that such an ideal of God, or such a literal interpretation of Scripture, now holds amongst intelligent persons? I, for one, have always considered the stories to which you allude as legendary, and have rather taken the ideal of the Jehovah from such noble texts as "The sacrifices of God are a broken heart; a broken and a contrite spirit, O God, thou wilt not despise ;" and again, "Thou requirest not sacrifice, else would I give it thee; thou delightest not in burnt offerings. For all the beasts in the forests are thine, and so are the cattle upon a thousand hills."

Myself.-Pardon me, but these texts only prove that the Poet Seers of all ages have rejected the false religions that have at

divers times and in divers manners been imposed upon the majority of mankind, and that the free utterances of noble natures are the only divine voices that the world has ever heard. Christianity presents to us a God omnipresent and omnipotent, who can put down evil if he chooses, but who does not choose, and on the contrary insists on the sacrifice of the innocent for the guilty. The ideal is unjust, cruel, monstrous ! Out of an unjust system, justice cannot result. The foundation is rotten, and the fabric must fall.

Friend.-Oh, but pause! Consider! Sacrifice is a necessary element in the progress of the world. Facts are cruel but stubborn things; only through sufferings, through martyrdoms, have reforms been effected; only out of such discipline has come perfection. Gold must be purified by fire.

Myself. Now you speak well and truly. This is a struggling world; virtue only triumphs by unceasing, unwearied contest with vice, justice with injustice, good with evil. Divine are those only, and worthy of homage, who fight evil, even unto death, and counting the cost, give up their all rather than the right. It is written "Whosoever will save his life shall lose it," and these are they who, losing their lives in one sense, win life eternal in the hearts of their fellow-men. There is no God who can help the right and will not; no Moloch who delights in the slaughter of our noblest and sweetest. They are sacrifices to the immoral exercises of power, to the cruel necessities, to the sensuality, to the unreasoning vengeances of Man and of Nature. The Kingdoms of Heaven and of Hell are within us, and we realize them as we allow the inspirations of Love, or the promptings of hate. These sanctify or brutalize our lives, and the sooner we get rid, once and for ever, of the God-ideal of an irresponsible, omnipotent, supreme Being the better for our morals and our manners. The greater the power the greater is the responsibility, the deeper should be the moral sense; otherwise "Power is a desolating pestilence, polluting all it touches."

Friend. But if you do not believe in God, what do you mean when you speak of the inspirations of Love? By whom inspired?

Myself. The Source of Love is the secret of the universe; we cannot fathom it; and, pardon me, but I have not denied the existence of any or many Gods, or their possible connection with it. Who am I that I should name or number invisible powers? I am not on those terms. I merely reject the Christian Ideal as immoral, mischievous, and an example that cannot be followed, for, should you or I attempt to sacrifice a son or a daughter for the salvation of the King of Burmah, or any other worthless rascal, we should be very properly hanged, or shut up in a lunatic asylum, Yet the χχχίν

moral aspect of an action cannot be altered by calling the individual perpetrating it a God instead of a man.

Friend. With much startling truth in your demonstrations, you hurt me when you anathematize the Christian Ideal. Is not that Christ, the perfect Love, the divine Word, the Lamb slain · from the foundation of the world?

Myself. A divine Ideal truly; a lovely life, and an unfading example of the Innocence sacrificed by Guilt in every age. When the perfect Love of such an Ideal is understood, when a pure Morality rules the world instead of a false religion, then indeed may we hope that wars will cease, and the reign of Justice and Peace begin. Protestantism has been scoffingly called the worship of Christ, and Roman Catholicism the worship of the Virgin. In their best phases this is right of each, and shows how Love instructs the heart of Man to choose the loveliest, despite the false lessons and cruel burdens of his religious rulers.

Friend. I am glad that at least you reverence the Son of Man.

Myself. Say rather the Sons of Men. In life is the revelation of Divinity, and thrice blessed are those who, having been Love's pleaders, have resisted evil, even unto death. The halo round the heads of these divine persons is seldom visible except as a crown of thorns, but their martyrdom entails an eternal shame, and the redemption of the world depends on the final triumph of Love. For Love only is at once immortal and divine.

C. B. X.

DR. KAINES ON POSITIVISM.

An interesting series of lectures by Dr. Kaines is now in course of delivery at the Positivist School in London. These are also being published in the columns of the Secular Review, a journal which, though the organ of a party, is conducted on broad and comprehensive principles, and gives currency to a greater variety of intelligent opinions than, perhaps, any other Newspaper in the kingdom. Dr. Kaines' lectures must have been very interesting to those who heard them and to the large circle of readers who have already seen them in print. It would be well, however, if, when they are completed, the author could be induced to give them still further publicity in a collected form, at a low price. Positivism is rather a topic of the time just now, and, while it is