munion with God, and the mainspring of their happiness both in this life and that which is to come. Hatred, and her whole brood of envyings, strifes, clamours, jealousies, discords, are from hell-the undisputed progeny of SatanCharity, with her gentleness, kindness, long-suffering, mercies, meekness, and the whole train of personal lovelinesses and social graces, are from above; the fair and guileless offspring of the "Father of lights." The very end of the Redeemer's mission-the ultimate object of his doctrines, his precepts, his example, his tears, his sacrifice, was to overthrow the reign of malice, and to rear upon its ruins the empire of love. For this purpose was the Son of God manifested, that he might destroy the works of the Devil. But God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God and God in him. On the contrary, he that loveth not, knoweth not God. Thence the emphasis of those memorable words of the LORD JESUS; Hereby shall all men KNOW that ye are my disciples, if ye have LOVE one to another. In fact, the religion which he has instituted and which his Spirit teaches, is the only religion upon the face of the earth which makes LOVE its principle. Even Justification by faith is related to love as a means to an end. It is he who believeth God," that worketh righteousness, and loves his neighbour.

In this divine quality of their religion the primitive Christians shone forth with a lustre which eclipses and darkens the church of modern days. That there existed then, as there exist now, whisperings, and backbitings, and evil surmises -that Jealousy raised strife, and ambition parties that the simple followed where the crafty led that Zeal often lent herself to vain glory rather than to godly edifying; while Truth frowned and Charity wept, is very certain. Absolute freedom from those ungracious tempers which divide and alienate even the wise and good, is for the heavenly state. It belongs not to flesh and blood: to men of "like passions ;" and those passions too often sinful.

Yet with all her imperfections on this point; with all the wranglings and schisms which sprung up in her bosom, the primitive church, as a whole, presented a family picture which should make us blush; and would make us blush, if we had not, by inveterate habits of collision, and by the artifice of bestowing hallowed names upon unhallowed things, rid ourselves, in a great degree, of Christian shame. That which was the exception among the "elders," seems to be the rule among the moderns. Their concord was the rule, their disagreements the exception; our concord is the exception, our disagreements

the rule. We should feel it to be a cruel satire, were any one to say of us, as the Pagans did of the early believers, "Behold, how these Christians love one another!"

In this fraternal affection did they account much of their unity to consist. Their most distinguished men laboured unweariedly to preserve and promote it: and did not hesitate to pronounce the violation of it to be a practical renunciation of Christianity itself.

As the truth of this representation is generally admitted, since it is every where the theme of Christian panegyric, no authorities are quoted to support it: for it would be idle to prove what nobody denies. Yet if the reader should be at all sceptical, he shall have his doubts removed by what is to follow-the proof of some other matters necessarily involving the proof of this also. Its use in the main question before us will be seen in due time. Proceed we, then, to inquire,

2. By what the primitive church considered her unity as liable to be broken.

It may not be amiss to begin, after the good old way; and shew, negatively, what she did not reckon as breaches of unity. In this predicament, she comprehended all varieties of opinion and observance which do not subvert the founda

tion of evangelical truth and order. All which do not impeach a man's claim to the character of a sincere disciple of the Lord Jesus. Whatever they were, within these limits, they did not, in her judgment, dissolve the bonds of her union by none of them was it impaired.

Not by a difference in rites and customs in worship

Nor by imperfections in moral disciplineNor by diversities in the form of governmentNor by dissonant views on subordinate points of doctrine.

1st. Not by a difference in rites and customs in worship.

That there were discordant practices even in the Apostolic church itself, is clear from the records of the New Testament; and equally clear that they were not allowed to interrupt the harmony of her communion. A great part of Paul's argument, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, ch. xi. concerning the decorum which the sexes ought to study in their modes of dress when engaged in public worship, rests upon the habits of society. Now these, in so far as they interfered neither with the ordi-. nances of worship, nor with pure morals, might very innocently vary in various places. He winds up his remarks, after freely giving his

opinion on the question of propriety at that time among the Corinthians, by saying, If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such CUSTOM, neither the churches of God. "A contentious man," it is Calvin's comment; "A contentious ́man is one who wantonly stirs up strife, regardless of the prevalence of truth. Such are all they who, without necessity, carp at good and useful rites," &c. From the words of the Apostle one thing is plain; viz. that matters of secondary moment, relating even to the worship of God, are no justifiable cause of " contention" among Christians.

Does this construction appear too bold and too broad? It shall be confirmed by Paul himself. Wide differences of opinion and practice existed between Christians in his time about the distinction of meats and of days which were established under the Jewish dispensation. The discreet Apostle, aware of men's propensity to bend every thing to their own rule, with very little regard to the feelings of others; and to array their uncharitableness in the livery of zeal for religion, interposes to prevent the sacrifice of one party to the rashness or vanity of the other: telling them that they might both serve God acceptably. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord: and he that regardeth not the