These  are  natural  and  effective  departments  of
benevolence,  as  is  seen  in  other  branches  of  the
Church.  Were  we  now  projecting  our  work  on
a  clear  field,  we  should  probably  lay  it  out  in  pre
cisely  these  three  departments.  A  popular  vote
throughout  our  churches  would,  with  little  doubt,
declare  for  these.  To  remodel  the  sevenfold
structure  of  a  century  may  be  more  difficult  than
to  build  threefold  from  the  foundation;  yet  the
designs  in  this  case  do  not  differ  radically,  and
the  alterations  would  be  almost  confined  to  inter
nal  partitions  and  rearrangement  of  space  and
sentiment.  Some  such  consolidation  of  our  work,
under  the  direction  of  the  National  Council,
would  answer  admirably  the  crescendo  call  for
thorough  systematization  of  our  Congregational
fellowship.  The  purpose  extends  to  the  achieve
ment  of  national  unity,  and  is  as  urgent  there  as
at  nearer  points.  The  demand  is  not  merely  to
approve  individually  and  locally,  but  also  to  con
trol  in  our  representative  organizations  the
[148]


National  Unity

agencies  which  we  entrust  with  our  funds  and
business.  This  demand  may  be  mistaken.  The
desired  unification  may  prove  unmanageable.
But  if  it  should  appear  to  be  the  mature
judgment  of  the  churches,  we  should  not  shrink
from  the  application  of  our  principle  of  evolution
and  progress.  The  chief  desideratum  is  a  thor
ough  study  of  the  situation  in  the  best  of  spirit.
It  is  time,  of  course,  to  repeat  the  ancient  and
honorable  reminder  that  such  a  national  body  as
'  is  now  being  described,  set  at  the  Liberty  Not
head  of  the  Congregational  repre-  Threaten«*
sentative  system,  does  not  threaten  the  lib
erties  of  the  churches.  It  declines  legislative
and  judicial  functions.  It  has  no  authority  to
intrude  into  the  private  affairs  of  a  single  church.
