organic law of the Church. For this reason it was sent down to the several Classes for action at their annual meetings in spring.

The German Reformed Church is now sufficiently large to call for such a change in its polity, as will provide for a full and regular representative union of its various sections. At present, the Eastern and Western Synods, although living under the same constitution and using the same doctrinal and ritual standards, are very loosely united by the simple exchange of one delegate at their annual meetings. In the year 1844, a Triennial Convention was formed, which originally embraced also the Dutch Reformed Church, with the view to constitute a closer bond of union and to carry on more efficiently the work of missions, especially in the destitute fields of the West. When the Dutch Church saw fit to withdraw, the two sections of the German Church were more closely drawn together, and the Convention was held between them every third year. The last one met at Winchester, Virginia, in October 1856, and proposed several important suggestions to the respective Synods for consideration. Among these was the plan of merging the Triennial Convention into a regular Triennial General Synod with full legislative power. For, as the Triennial Convention was merely an advisory body and consisted only of a small number of delegates, it could not be expected to accomplish much and to carry out the purpose, contemplated in its original formation. That a closer union between the two Synods should exist, is now generally felt in the West as well as in the East. The plan above alluded to was, therefore, favorably received by both Synods, and will no doubt be carried into effect at no distant day in some form or other.

But now the question arises: Shall we not at once originate a General Assembly after the fashion of the Old School Presbyterian Church, which should meet annually and transact the general business of the Church as the highest legislative and judicial tribunal, to which the separate Synods shall be subordinate? This plan meets with no

favor thus far among us. Too much centralization is always dangerous to freedom in the Church as well as in the State. Large deliberative bodies are expensive and apt to become unwieldy, cumbersome and unmanageable. The idea as proposed by the Convention at Winchester and more fully matured by the committee appointed for the purpose, is rather to save the relative independence of the two Synods, and to provide simply for a General Synod which is to meet every three years only, in some central locality, to take the place of the separate synodical meetings for that year, and to transact the business of both jointly, without constituting thereby a higher judicatory.

The only serious difficulty in the way is the double amount of business, which would thus come before that body and would perhaps require more time than the delegate would be willing or able to spend. It strikes us, that it will be necessary to leave all sectional, subordinate matters with the separate Synods as heretofore, and to limit the business of the Triennial Synod to general questions and enterprises of the Church, which affect the constitution, or relate to the preparation and publication of the standard works of the Church, such as the catechism, liturgy, hymn books, Sunday-school books, &c., also the home and foreign missionary cause, the correspondence with sister churches, especially those in Europe, and disputes which might arise between the several Synods. In this way the Triennial Synod, owing to the character of its business and the larger number of its delegates, would after all become, if not a higher judicatory strictly so called, yet a more important body than either of the separate Synods.

But it is impossible and useless at present to speculate about the precise character of this contemplated assembly. It will gradually define itself at the hand of actual experience. Life produces its own forms, and the soul shapes the body. It is never wise to legislate too much and too Let the future take care of itself. God rules history, also the history of the German Reformed Church

far ahead.

in the United States, and this should be enough to inspire us with faith and confidence in the future.

We have no doubt, that the several Classes will adopt the general principle here involved and agree to try the experiment, which can do no harm. In this case the first Triennial Synod would convene, God willing, in the year 1860, and the second in the year 1863. The latter year should be celebrated, as the third centennial of the Heidelberg Catechism, by some noble movement for the benefit of the Church at large, and by the preparation of a standard critical edition of that excellent Catechism in the German, Latin and English languages.

CHANGE OF NAME.

The report on the Triennial General Synod proposes also a double change of name, the one relating to the two Synods, the other to the Church at large.

all

The first had been suggested already by the Triennial Convention at Winchester, and can be made without difficulty. The Eastern Synod is now officially called the "Synod of the German Reformed Church in the United States" (originally "of North America," was added), the Western, the "Synod of the German Reformed Church of Ohio and adjacent States." The former title is too comprehensive, the latter too inconvenient. tinction of "Eastern" and "Western" Synod would answer At present the common dispurposes. But this may not be the case in a few years. For, if the German Reformed Church is to progress on the principle of historical development, as we hope and trust she may, we will have in the course of time Synods of the East, of the South, of Western Pennsylvania, of Ohio, of Indiana, of Illinois, of Iowa, of Wisconsin, etc. This matter will have to be settled by the first General Synod in 1860, according to the state of things which may then exist. The second change is of a more difficult and critical character. It is proposed to substitute for the comparatively recent name "German Reformed Church," the original name Evangelical Reformed Church" as our general denom

inational title. On this subject a special committee was appointed by the Synod of Allentown in 1857, which recommended to the Synod of Frederick, to send this subject down to the Classes for their consideration. The Western Synod has already committed itself in favor of the change, and the Synod at Allentown has so far done the same, in ordering the new German Hymn book to be called "Gesangbuch der Evangelisch-Reformirten Kirche," etc. It is thought that the latter title, besides being older and more appropriate in itself, would suit the present condition of the Church much better, since a large portion of it has ceased to be German, and become altogether English as far as the language is concerned, and would be more favorable to its extension in a prevailingly English country like ours. But great caution is necessary, before we can think of making this change general and embodying it in our Constitution. Indeed we are by no means settled in our mind as to its propriety and desirableness. The Dutch Reformed Church, a few years ago, attempted a similar change for similar reasons, but saw fit, after mature deliberation, to abide by its old title.

Theoretically and historically considered, the problem could be easily solved. It is an indisputable fact, that the proposed name, Evangelical Reformed, or Reformed without any addition, is the original historical name of the Church, and is uniformly used in the ancient and modern catechisms, liturgies and hymn books in Germany and Switzerland, and in our own American hymn bookst except the

*

*We will give here the titles of a few of the more recent German Reformed hymn books, as specimens to prove this fact:

"Auserlesene Psalmen und Geistliche Lieder fuer die evangelisch-reformirte Kirche des Kantons Schaffhausen. Schaffhausen, 1841."

"Auserlesene Psalmen und Geistliche Lieder fuer die evangelisch-reformirte Kirche des Kantons Aargau. Aarau, 1844."

"Gesangbuch fuer die evanglisch-reformirte Kirche des Kantons Zürich. Zürich, 1853."

"Evangelisches Gesangbuch fuer Kirche, Schule und Haus in Basel-Stadt und Basel-Land. Basel 1854."

"Reformirtes Gesangbuch. Elberfeld, 1853."

The same is the case with the Liturgies of the various cantons of Switzerland and the different sections of the Reformed Church in Germany.

For instance, the one printed at Germantown (our copy gives no date), and the one printed in Sumneytown, which is still used in Philadelphia and many congregations of East Pennsylvania.

last, and in the charters of several of our congregations, both German and English. In Europe people never speak of a German Reformed Church, but of the Reformed Church simply, or of the Reformed Church of Germany, of Switzerland, of France, of Holland, of England, of Scotland, etc. The term German Reformed is evidently of American origin and was introduced at a time when the whole Church used the German language, and with the view to distinguish her from the surrounding English Reformed or Calvinistic denominations, and also from the Dutch Reformed Church, with which it was so closely connected in its early history. The latter fact accounts for the German official title "Die hoch-deutsch-Reformirte Kirche, which still figures on the title-page of our German Minutes of Synod. It was evidently chosen with reference to the Dutch Church as the nieder-deutsch-Reformirte Kirche. But this is a very singular terminology. In Germany itself, the distinction. between hoch-deutsch and nieder-deutsch is by no means equivalent to the distinction between German and Dutch or Hollaendisch, and is not used in an ecclesiastical sense at all, but simply with reference to the two dialects of the German language, the one spoken in the Southern, the other in the Northern parts of Germany. The term hoch-deutsch ought, therefore, to be dropped from the Minutes at once, and the simple deutsch substituted for it, as altogether sufficient and in fact already generally current in the Church.

But the question assumes a different aspect, if we view it in its practical bearing. The title Deutsch Reformirt, and German Reformed, however unusual it may sound to the European ear, has become historical and to some extent necessary in America. It was not arbitrarily invented, but grew out of the peculiar relations of our country, for reasons similar to those which led to changes in the titles of other ecclesiastical bodies, which derive their origin from Europe. For the use of the simple title Reformed, which, in itself considered, is decidedly the best, even without the addition of Evangelical, would imply on our part an improper and intolerable presumption in a land, where we