Reflections

Before we close this volume it may be well to look back on what has been written, and to consider the practical lessons which may be gathered from the whole. It is alow, unworthy, and profitless thing to read history only to gratify curiosity. If our errors, both theoretical and practical, are not corrected, and our hearts not made better by such an exercise, we have carried it on in vain.

And what is it in these scenes which has been presented to us, but the wickedness of the oppressor, and the virtues of the oppressed; the triumphs of power over piety in one view, and of piety over power in another?

I. I%e reality, the power, tJie beauty, of true religion, — Let us turn from the defects, the inconsistencies, the hypocrisies, of professors of Christianity, as these things are too frequently seen in the day of prosperity and the sun-shine of liberty, and which have such a tendency to produce not only revulsion and disgust, but suspicion and scepticism, to contemplate, in contrast with all this, genuine religion, during the dark night of adversity, when it can only be heard by the clank of the prisoner’s fetter, or seen by the light of the martyr’s flame. Here there is truthfulness, sanctity, and conscience, if nowhere else, and withal a power, compared with which the tyranny that has been the guilty cause of the scene is but as brute force compared with almightiness of virtue. There is no inconsistency here — no hypocrisy here — but a living embodiment of conscience arrayed in the beauties of holiness. To see men, who, in what many would consider the veriest trifles, trifles in their estimate not worth the cost of a single sigh, or to be upheld by the expenditure of a single tear, exhibiting the constancy of martyrs at the dictate of conscience, and going to bonds, imprisonment, and death — how strikingly in all this is seen not only the grandeur of Christianity, but the evidence of its truth! Infidelity likes not to look upon the martyrs of our faith, but chooses to dwell rather upon its insincere professors. But if it can bear upon its weak disordered vision the full blaze of such effulgence, we bid this evil spirit look upon the saintly virtue of the sufferers for conscience sake. Let the facts of the gospel be disproved, its evidences discredited, and its arguments answered, if they can. Still how are its effects as set forth in the pages of its martyrology to be dealt with? This noble army of martyrs, how are they to be beaten down, driven from the field, vanquished; they who rise, every one of them, a living witness of the truth, power, and glory of Christianity?

Be this the first lesson we learn, from the scenes which have come before us, and which come before us from every similar scene. The sufferings of Christians from Pagans; of Protestants from Papists; of Nonconformists from Episcopalians; of Episcopalians from Presbyterians: all equally shew the same transcendant excellence of our holy religion. They tend to keep up the power and dominion of principle, the sovereignty of conscience, the vigour of rectitude. They are the lofty dykes which

s2

260 THE BI8E Amp 8PBEAD OF

keep out the ocean of sm, and prevent the church as well as the world, from being covered with a turbid deluge of expedience, utilitarianism, faithlessness, axid hypocrisies. Persecution, then, while on- the one hand it exhibits in itself the odiousness of vice, calls out with no less power and effect the beauty of virtue. It is in the pages of our martyrology that Christianity is enshrined in her highest sanctity and her most awful majesty; it is there that its friends see in it most to love and admire, and its foes most to fill them with dread and dismay.

II. The next thing, surely, which must strike us is, the character and extent of persecution, — Intolerance, by whomsoever exercised, is a deadly evil. It transvenoms all the kindly feelings of the human bosom into the dregs of malignity, and is marked oftentimes by the most ferocious cruelty. Men naturally amiable, lose all their own softness and tenderness of disposition and become morose, severe, and relentless, under the influence of bigotry. The usual expressions of sympathy, commiseration, and charity are withheld, and all the emotions of pity are extinqnished. And what is still worse, all this is done under the sanction of religion; and Christianity is thus made to operate in the very opposite way to that so strikingly described in the beautiful imagery of the prophet, and iQStead of the lion being changed into the lamb, the lamb is transformed into the lion. Men never go to greater lengths in sanguinary violence, than when they become cruel under the alleged command of religion. That surely must be hateful to God which is opposed to his own nature as a God of love, and to the spirit of his law, which commands us to love our neighbour as ourselves.

Persecution is as impious as it is cruel; for it not only opposes every precept of the New Testament, but invades the prerogative of God himself, by assuming a right to punish those who have committed no offence but against Hinif and whom he has reserved for his own exclusive scrutiny into their character, and for his own penal visitation. Heresy is a sin, of which the criminality can be measured by Him alone, who is the infallible Judge of truth, and of the human heart. Beligion is a matter which lies solely between God and the individual conscience; of which God alone can take cognizance; and persecution, therefore, is a usurpation, or an attempt at it, of the attributes and prerogatives which belong exclusively to the Most High. It is a vain endeavour to ascend into his throne, to wield his sceptre, and to hurl his thunderbolts.

Nor is it altogether free from an air of the ridicxdousy for surely man scarcely ever appears more foolish than when attempting to legislate for the opinions and the conscience of his fellow man, and to make laws for the soul which lies so entirely beyond his cognizance and his inflictions.

And then its own history shews how useless it is. Truth is immortal: the sword cannot pierce it; fire cannot consume it; prisons cannot incarcerate it; famine cannot starve it; all the violence of men stirred up by all the power and subtilty of hell, cannot put it to death; in the person of its martyrs it bids defiance to the will of the tyrant who persecutes it; and with the martyrs* last breath, predicts its own full and final triumphs. The pagan persecuted the Christian; but yet Christianity lives. The Papist persecuted the Protestant, but yet Protestantism lives. The Church of England persecuted the Nonconformist, and yet Nonconformity lives. Nonconformists persecuted Episcos 3

3C*2 THE RISE AND SPBEAD OF

palians, jet Episcopacy lives. Truth, when persecution is carried to its extremest length of extirpating heretics, may be extinguished in one place, as the Reformation was in Spain and Portugal, but it will break out in another, as it did in Germany and England. If opinions cannot be put down by argument, they cannot by power. Truth gains the victory in the end not only by its own evidences but by the sufferingB of its confessors; the flames of the martyrs’ stake have thrown over it an awful glory, which while it enhsted the sympathies of men’s hearts, has excited their admiration and produced conviction in their judgments. The passive power of the sufferer has subdued the opposition of the spectator, and led him to conclude there must be something divine in that which produced such a scene.

This double crime against God and man has been more extensive than many suppose. Its root is the selfishness of our depraved nature. We have all something of it in our corrupt hearts. How ill we bear contradiction. While engaged in argument with those who oppose our views, how many risings of indignation do we feel, especially if we are worsted and wounded in the conflict. What would we do, if we could, to silence an antagonist, especially when the struggle is carried on with one supposed to be inferior to ourselves, and before others; is there no kindUng wrath, no petty malignity, no paltry wish that we could stop his mouth? There, in that state of mind is persecution in its seminal principle and germ. This in the full strength of magisterial office combined with mistaken views of the Old Testament dispensation, and of the province of the magistrate, is persecution full grown. And what public bodies have not been guilty of it by turns, in a greater or lesser degree? People that boast loudly of their attachment to relous freedom are often persecutors. In proof of this we need only look to the democratic rationalists of Switzerland, and to the infidels of Germany, by whom with all their cry for liberty, evangelical religion is persecuted in one way by mobs, and in the other by law. But we may look nearer home, and find in the contempt and scorn, with which professors, of this same creed are treated, a similar spirit, though not always carried to the same extent, nor expressed in the same outrageous manner. How much bitterness and wrath are cherished by many high churchmen of the present day towards Nonconformists. How much of exclusive dealing; of refusal of public charities; of dismissal from places of trust and emolument; of determination not to admit dissenting tenants to farms; of vilifying misrepresentation of Nonconformists in public prints; of contumelious conduct in private life, is ever going on; and what is this but persecution? What would not the persons who act thus do if they could, in the way of abridging our liberties, and punishing our nonconformity? Nor am I quite sure that all Nonconformists are quite free from the charge of bigotry and intolerance, if we may judge of the tone and spirit, with which some of them carry on the struggle against establishments. Every departure from the line of calm. Christian, and courteous discussion, into coarse, vituperative, and insulting language; every attempt to hold up good and conscientious men to scorn and contempt, by impugning their motives, and judging their hearts, because they are supporting, injuriously it may be, yet ignorantly, a bad system of poHty, is also a species of persecution, which neither reason nor revelation can justify. The faithful page of history exhibits nearly all parties involved in this sin, though not in an equal degree. But wheresoever and with whomsoever found, it is a sin of the deepest die, and most criminal in those who live in times and countries of greatest light

III. This sketch proves the danger of entrusting the civil magistreUe with power to interfere with matters of religion or in other words, the aXL yniJt invariable and necessary tendency of religious establishments to originate a spirit of intolerance and to carry it out in the way of legalized persecution. An unestablished church may be intolerant in spirit, but it cannot be pfersecuting, at least in the way of inflicting civil pains and penalties, or depriving the subjects of the realm of any of the rights and immunities of citizenship. This cannot be done but by the power of the State. And it is, therefore, only when the Church is supported by the State that it can be, in the usual meaning of the word, a persecuting church. Take the sword out of the hand of the Church of Rome, and its councils and decrees, and anathemas, are all innocuous, mere brutum fulmenj thunder and lightning upon paper. In all its antient atrocities by the auto-dafe it pretended to clear itself of the guilt of putting the heretic to death, by handing him over to the secular arm, without which indeed its bloody sentece would have been but a sentence. The testimony of history proves that the Romish Church is not the only one which, when it had the power of the State at command, employed and abused it for the purpose of persecution; nor is the Church of England the only one that has imitated the example of the Church of Rome; for we have seen in pursuing this history, that neither Presbyterianism nor Independency could be safely trusted with the sword of the magistrate, since both have employed it for the purpose of persecution. No matter what system of religion is in the ascendant, give it the power of the state, and it will employ it, or be strongly tempted to do so, unless restrained, to crash the liberty of the dissidents. We see this exemplified, as we haye already remarked, in the rationalism of many parts of the continent of Europe, than which nothing is more intolerant. And we are entirely persuaded’ that if infidelity could wield the sword and the sceptre, notwithstanding its boasted attachment to freedom, the liberties of spiritual Christians would not be safe for an hour. Political power is a dangerous thing in the hand of religion. Men, from mistaken views, may, by employing it to suppress heresy and to encourage sound doctrine, think they are doing God service, and be conscientiously wrong. Mr. Baptist Noel, in his recent work on the Union of Church and State, truly remarks that “The Union tried through long centuries of misrule, and found everywhere to be potent for evil only, should at length give place to Christ’s own spiritual law of liberty, through which alone his churches can accomplish their beneficial mission to bring the nations of the earth into the service of the Redeemer, and to make all intellects and all hearts tributary to his glory.”

It will, probably, be replied to this, that persecution though generally an adjunct of state religion, is not invariably nor necessarily so, as is proved by the toleration of our own. We willingly concede the fact that our establishment was among the first in the history of the world to set the example of toleration. But then it may be asked, whether toleration itself is not, with all its blessings, in one view, a refined and subtle species of persecution, by placing its subjects below the tolerating party and representing them in effect, as an evil that can be just borne with and permitted, which is to exist by the exercise of a generous forbearance; so that the elements of intolerance may be detected even in toleration itself. Abridged liberty is persecution, and the “Toleration Act” has still left the liberties of Dissenters incomplete in many respects; and even this boon of toleration is denied to the ministers of the church; for, however clearly convinced a clergyman may be of its errors, and however conscientious in his secession, he cannot at present escape from her communion without exposing himself to civil pains and penalties, and will not be allowed to do so in future without degradation.

Nor is this all, for though toleration is the law of the land, it was granted rather by the state than the church, as is evident from the hct that the canons which still regulate ecclesiastical discipline, excommunicate all who dissent from the established religion. Practically, these obnoxious rules are abandoned, but not really.

Moreover, as long as the right of the civil magistrate in religious matters is allowed, liberty of conscience must ever be a contingency dependent upon the spirit of the age, and may at any time be destroyed if intolerance should gain the ascendant in the legislature. It is very improbable, certainly, but not impossible that changes may take place in the views, spirit, and temper, of the legislature, very unfriendly to religious liberty; and we cannot observe the workings and animus of the Puseyite party in the Church of England, without feeling there is ground if not for alarm yet for vigilance and caution. Let that party be dominant, and the full unrestricted liberties of neither the Dissenters nor the Methodists, no, nor of the Evangelical Clergy would be safe. So that there seems to be no absolute protection of religious liberty, no certain exemption from the evils of persecution, but by taking religion itself as a matter of legislation out of the hands of the civil magistrate and leaving it for its support to the zeal of its friends and the blessing of its divine Author. No unestablished church can be a persecuting one, in the way of inflicting civil pains and penalties, whatever it may be in spirit and desire; all established ones in a greater or less degree have been so. And it is an instructive and impressive fact and worthy of consideration, that it is the union of the Church and State, or, in other words, the support of religion by secular power, which in Pagan, Mahommedan, and Popish countries, forms at this day the greatest obstacle in the way of spreading the gospel of the great and blessed God.

IV. May we not also learn how much there is in the circumstances and spirit of the times to shape and modify the power and even the disposition to persecute. — There are some who will not take this at all into consideration in the way of accounting for, or extenuating the sin of intolerance. And it is admitted that, with man’s own reason within, and the New Testament without, it is extremely difficult to allow of any palliation of the guilt of persecution; but at the same time, when we see men of acknowledged piety, and even humanity, becoming persecutors, and hunting their victims to prison, and to death; when, for instance, we behold Calvin consenting to bum Servetus, and Cranmer urging Edward VI. against all the revulsions of his lovely spirit, to sign the death warrant of Joan Bocher, we must admit that even good men may be so far influenced by the spirit of the times as to do that from which in other and happier circumstances, their enlightened minds and renewed hearts, would recoil with horror. Persecution itself, is the same unchanged and unchangable form of iniquity in every age. It stands like Lot’s

268 TPE RISE Ainp SPBEAD OF

wife, a pillar of salt, an object of divine vengeance, o£ human abborence, and of awful warning to all generations; but it depends in some measure upon the circumstances in which men are placed how fiEur they see its horrid form, and trace upon it the marks of divine indignation with which it has been scathed. The atrocities of the auUhda-fe the mysterious horrors of the inquisition, the fires of Smithfield, the persecutions of the Puritans by the Tudors and Stuarts, admit of no excuse, scarcely of the least palliation; but we may ask, would these things be perpetrated either by the Church of Bome, or the Church of England now? Would Calvin have burnt Servetus now? Or Socinus have caused the imprisonment of Francis David now? If not, then, so far we admit that some small extenuation is to be thrown into the scale, when weighing the criminality of persecution in by-gone days, compared with what would be the guilt of those who should practice the same things in these days of greater light and liberty. Why, even Paul himself, that once dreadful persecutor, and afterwards glorious apostle, when alluding to his dark career, puts in this as a mitigating circumstance, “I did it ignorantly in unbelief.” While, then, we pour out the vials of our indignation upon the persecutors who lived in the ages of intolerance; while we admit that there is still in those who are our contemporaries too much of this dreadful spirit, and in whom it is more guilty because of the light of the age, let us not charge the crimes of by-gone times upon all the followers of the same systems of church government, who live in our day. Let us not say that every Papist would bum us at the stake if he could; and that every clergyman of the Church of England would silence and imprison Nonconformists if it were in his power.

The times must and do modify the spirit of sects, when they may not yet change their theoretic systems. Canons, creeds, and decrees may still be preserved like ecclesiastical mummies, long after the spirit that once animated them is departed. Some, perhaps, will be ready to say that instead of being reduced to the ex-animated condition of mummies, these persecuting systems are only in a state of mesmeric slumber, from which they may be roused by the same spirit of the times that brought the sleep over them. Granted. And, therefore, it were well that the very bodies themselves should be put by death and buried beyond the power of resuscitation.

V. We may surely felicitate ourselves on the times in which it is our happiness to live. — The night of intolerance, whatever shadows, clouds, or mists shall linger after the sun haa risen, has passed away, never, we hope, to return. Nonconformists have yet, of course, something to complain of, and something to seek after. The existence of the union between Church and State is to them an evil in theory and practice, and many of the consequences which flow from it, are to them, an oppression, and no one ought to blame them, if by the meekness of wisdom, and by the force of persuasion, and in no other way should it be attempted, they seek its dissolution. It ought, however, to be to them and is matter of unspeakable thankfulness to consider the glorious change which has come over this country since the revolution in 1688. Thanks be to the men who struggled for their liberties to bonds, imprisonment, and death; thanks to the -patriots, who by the act of toleration muzzled and chained the savage spirit of persecution; thanks be to the senators who since then have protected us in the enjoyment of our rights, and have continually enlarged them; thanks be to the monarchs who have determined to maintain that act inviolate; thanks to the British nation which has acknowledged oar claims; but above all, thanks to the King of kings, by whose patronage and power, the only patronage and power we invoke, these blessings have been bestowed upon us, and continued to us.

That there are some high church bigots who grudge us our liberties and would infringe, if not destroy them, if they could, may be well supposed, when we observe the bitterness of their language, and the arts of calumnj and detraction, and the intense malignity to which they descend in their publications. But the great bulk of the Church of England look upon us, we would fain persuade ourselves, in another light than as the objects of dislike, fit only to be the victims of legal persecution. Our right to religious liberty is conceded, though it were well, if in addition to all that has been done, the persecuting laws and canons were expunged, the one by the State, and the other by the Church, instead of being covered over merely by an act of toleration. Even these dead bodies of intolerance should be buried out of sight, and put away as memorials of an age, which we should all desire to forget.

It is impossible to deny, and equally impossible not to exult, that a better feeling has been springing up between the advocates and opponents of establishments, which, under God’s blessing, must be traced partly to the growth of civil and religious liberty, and partly to the rise and spread of evangelical religion in the church. Over that blessed revival, so obvious and so extensive, though somewhat checked of late by the spread of tractarian opinions. Dissenters have rejoiced as much ais the pious members of the church, in which it has occurred. This is the more disinterested, and the more demonstrative of the good feeling by which the Nonconformist body is actuated, inasmuch as it has unquestionably led to an efflux to the National Establishment of many of the more wealthy members of their body. The time has arrived when Churchmen and Dissenters are seen side by side on the same platforms, advocating the same religious institutions, and in many cases drawn by the attracting power of the Evangelical Alliance into still closer bonds, despite the controversy which is still going on, and must go on, concerning the question which distinguishes them from each other. The British and Foreign Bible Society, and the Religious Tract Society, have had no small share in the diminution of the spirit of bigotry, and the increase of charity.

VI. How important is it, while we all keep up an enlightened, and even an active zeal for our denominational principles, that we unite with it a spirit ef sincere and fervent charity, — The question between the advocates and opponents of religious establishments, is not among the mere nugcB of controversy; on the contrary, it is a serious and momentous subject. One party views establishments as the will of God, and essential in the present state of things to the maintenance of national religion; the other considers them as opposed to the New Testament, and essentially corruptive of the nature, and obstructive of the process of true religion. There cannot, therefore, with these opposing sentiments be any cessation of the conflict between the two parties, or any truce between them*. Allegiance to truth, to God, and to conscience forbids it. The advocate of each is contending according to his own view for truth, and against error. Each ought to contend. But then, as truth is important, so is lave. If truth ought not to be sacrificed for charity, so neither ought charily to be sacrip ficed for truth. The man who would never oppose error, but allow it to run its mischievous career, for fear of violating charity, is wrong in one extreme; while the man who would do nothing to assist charity in its peaceful and tranquillizing efforts, for fear of compromising truth, is wrong in the opposite extreme. He only is right who fears to be sUent in the cause of tnith, but equally fears to be uncharitahle in the cause of love.

It were well if in this controversy as in all others, the opposing parties would in imagination sometimes change places, and each look at the subject of contention with his opponent’s eyes. If the Dissenter were to borrow the Churchman’s eyes, and endeavour to see how the question of establishments appears to him: and the Churchman were to borrow the Dissenter’s eyes and see how the voluntary principle appears to him, how differently wQuld the matter appear; and when each laid down his neighbour’s spectacles and took up his own, much reason would both find, if not to alter their opinions, yet to maintain them, not, indeed, with less firmness, but certainly, with greater charity.

It is also forgotten by many that, from the very constitution of our nature, we are much more in danger of offending against love, than we are against truth. Men are far more proud of their intellect than of their affections, and therefore are £eu: more jealous of what would impugn the credit of their understanding, than of what would disparage their hearts. Hence, they are far more likely to trench upon what concerns the latter than the former. Our chief solicitude, therefore, on account of this very tendency, should be, not to neglect the meekness and gentleness of Christ. There is no gre&t danger of our being lukewarm about our creed, but the danger is imminent of our being careless about our Christian temper.

Nor ought the importance and pre-eminence of love, according to the apostle’s decision, to be forgotten. From the moment when the blessed Paul established the superiority of love over faith, men have been trying to invert ike order and to establish the pre-eminence of fedth over love. The least article of faith, though it relate to the mode of a sacrament, or what is far less, the form of a clerical habit, or the posture of a devotee, has been thought of sufficient importance, and felt to be of sufficient power, to interrupt the exercise and destroy the very existence of love.

Men forget that zeal for truth, unmixed with love, is the very essence of persecution. The thirteenth chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, had it been universally studied, understood, and practiced would have kept all persecution out of the world. We should never have heard of the inquisition, the prison, the scaffold, or the stake as a punishment for error, and a support of truth, if that beautiful portion of God’s word had been constantly borne in mind. Just in proportion, therefore, as men in the support of their opinions indulge in malice, wrath, and all uncharitable ness, they cherish the spirit and evince the character of persecutors. They are persecutors in a small way, and would deal in it more largely if the law did not prevent. Whoever, I repeat, seeks to degrade an opponent as well as to confute him — to insult him by scorn as well as to answer him by reason-^to make him appear ridiculous as well as erroneous — to wound his feelings by irony and sarcasm, as well as to convince his judgment by argument and persuasion — who, in short, is not satisfied with demolishing the system he upholds, bat aims to crush him personally to the earth: such a man may be a conqueror, but he must be content at the same time to add to this, the character of a persecutor. Let us, then, while we all contend for truth, contend for it in the spirit of love. The weapons of our warfare cannot be laid up like the sword of Goliah, by the side of the ark, but must be in constant use. That man is an unworthy member of any church who is not prepared in a right spirit to contend for it against those who would seek its destruction. He who has not love enough for the truth to defend it, has not, whatever he may say, a true and proper love of any kind. The smallest particle of truth has a value not to be estimated by gold or diamonds. I should be sorry, indeed, if it should be imagined from anything written in this volume that its author was indifferent to sound doctrine. Truth and charity stand related to each other, as the foundation and the superstructure; charity without truth is baseless, and truth without charity is but a foundation. I hold the importance of right sentiments, and that man is responsible for his belief. Pope’s hacknied couplet, in the sense he intended it is a dogma of unbelief, soaked with infidelity to its very core.

“For modes of faith let graceless zealots fight. His can’t he wrong whose life is in the right.”

My deliberate belief is, that the esential characteristic of Christianity is pabbom for sinful man, thnmgh a divine Mediator and grace renewing him by the Holy Spirit, subduing yet exalting him; piercing yet comforting him; humbling him as nothing before God, yet making him mighty against all evil — first, within his own bosom, and then in the wide world around him.

So I read The Book. T judge not others; to their own master they stand or fall. I presume not to limit the mercy of God, or to ascertain how far beyond the boundary line of truth it may extend to the votaries of error, it is enough for me to say that, without a belief of essential truth, I should not feel that, in the scriptural sense of the term, I could lay claim to the character of a Christian, or that I was safe for eternity. With these views, therefore, I hold it to be as important to contend earnestly for the faith once delivered to the saints as it is for ch£uity, but at the same time to maintain the contest with “the meekness and gentleness jof Christ.” The law of Christianity requires not only that truth should be spoken in love, but heard in love; charity is as obligatory upon the respondent as upon the appellant. If there are some who violate charity by the manner in which they oppose any given system, there are others who equally violate it by the manner in which they defend it. They cannot endure to have their opinions called in question in ever so mild, candid, and courteous a manner. Even the voice of charity, however soft and mellifluous her tones, offends them, if she venture to speak against their favourite system. This betrays a weak head and a weaker heart, and indeed betokens a conviction so slightly rooted as to be in danger of being blown down by the faintest breeze. He is a man of feeble virtue, who cannot bear to be told, however kindly, of his faults. To account a man our enemy because he calls in question the correctness of our views, though he do it ever so respectfully and candidly, is as much a breach of chanty as it is to speak against opinions in bitterness and wrath. How are the jarring sentiments of mankind to be harmonized? How is the divided church to be made one? Only by this speaking to one another

T 2

1276 THE RISE AHm SPBEAD OF

in loTe — by this discussion in friendly controyersy of our differences — by this willingness to have our erron exposed and refuted, if errors we baTe. Away, thcxt, with that morbid spirit whidi makes us waspish, petulant, and implacable, when our opinions are controverted. The Church of Christ can never be tuned to other mnsie as long as this spirit preyails. It is the prevalence of love that in fact must prepare us lor the prevalence of truth. The best way to harmonise all minds is to reconcile all hearts. When men have, placed their hearts under the government of charity they are best prepared V> discuss the question ‘’What is truth?” And admitting, as all must do, that it is desirable that men should be brought into more oonsentaneousness of opinion on religion, we must at the same time believe, that while he does something towards this, who oontroverts error, and shews what is truth, he aiso does something who keeps down the heats of party, thus scattering the clouds of prejudice and the mists of passion, and producing that serene and transparent atmosphere of charity in which the sun of truth most brightly shines, and can be most clearly seen.

I cannot more ipropriately or more impressively close this volume than by the following quotation, from the works of Mr. Robert Hall: —

“That union among Christians, which it is so desirable to recover, must, we are persuaded, be the result of something more heavenly and divine, than legal restraints, or angry controversies. Unless an angel were to descend for that purpose, the spirit of division is a disease which will never be healed by troubling the waters. We must expect the cure from the increasing prevalence of religion, and from a copious communica tion of the Spirit to produce that event A more extensive division of piety among all sects and parties will be the best and only preparation for a cordial union. Christians will then be disposed to appreciate their differences more equitably, to turn their chief attention to points on which they agree, and, in consequence of loving each other more, to make every concession consistent with a good conscience. Instead of wishing to vanquish others, every one will be deirous of being vanquished by the truth. An awful fear of God, and an exclusive desire of discovering his mind, will hold a torch before them in their inquiries, which will strangely illuminate the path in which they are to tread. In the room of being repelled by mutual antipathy they will be insensibly drawn nearer to each other by the ties of mutual attachment. A larger measure of the spirit of Christ would prevent them from converting every incidental variation into an impassable boundary, or from condemning the most innocent and laudable usages for fear of symbolizing with another class of Christians. The general prevalence of piety in different communities would inspire that mutual respect, that heart-felt homage, for the virtues conspicuous in the character of their respective members, which would urge us to ask with astonishment and regret, why cannot we be one? What is it that obstructs our union? Instead of maintaining the barrier which separates us from each other, and employing ourselves in fortifying the frontiers of hostile communities, we should be anxiously devising the means of narrowing the grounds of dispute, by drawing the attention of all parties to those fundamental and catholic principles, in which they concur.

“To this we may add, that a more perfect subjection to the authority of the great Head of the Church would restrain men from inventing new terms of communion, from

T 3 lording it over conscience, or from exacting a scrupulous compliance with things which the word of God has left indifferent. That sense of imperfection we ought ever to cherish, would incline us to he looking up for superior light, and make us think it not improhahle that, in the long night which has hefallen us, we have all more or less mistaken our way, and have much to learn and much to correct. The very idea of identifying a particular party with the church would he exploded, the foolish clamour about schism hushed, and no one, however mean or inconsiderahle, he expected to surrender his conscience to the claims of ecclesiastical dominion. A larger communication of the Spirit of Truth would insensibly lead Christians into a similar train of thinking; and being more under the guidance of that in&llible Teacher, they would gradually tend to the same point, and settle in the same conclusions. Without such an influence as this, the coalescing into one communion would probably be productive of much mischief: it certainly would do no sort of good, since it would be the mere result of intolerance and pride, acting upon indolence and fear.”

“During the present disjointed state of things, then, nothing remains, but for every one to whom the care of any part of the Church of Christ is intrusted, to exert himself to the utmost in the promotion of vital religion, in cementing the friendship of the good, and repressing, with a firm and steady hand, the heats and eruptions of party spirit. He will find sufficient employment for his time and his talents, in inculcating the great truths of the gospel, and endeavouring to * form Christ’ in his hearers, without blowing the flames of contention, or widening that breach which is already the disgrace and calamity of the Christian name. Were our efforts uniformly to take this direction, there would be an identity in the impression made by religious instruction; the distortion of party features would gradually disappear, and Christians would every where approach toward that ideal beauty spoken of by painters, which is combined (^ the finest lines and traits conspicuous in individual forms. Since they have all drank into the same spirit, it is manifest noticing is wanting but a larger portion of that spirit, to lay the foundation of a solid, cordial union. It is to the immoderate attachment to secular interest, the love of power, and the want of reverence for truth, not to the obscurities of Revelation, we must impute the unhappy contentions among Christians; maladies, which nothing can correct, but deep and genuine piety.”

BIRMIN’GHAM: PRINTED BY J. W. SBOWELL, TKMPLE-STEEBT.