Spirit, full of blasphemy and impiety. In the same manner the Quakers meet together to worship Christ and pray for the Holy Spirit, while they lie under the sin of rejecting the Holy Sacraments. But both are perfectly unconscious of any sin or loss of truth in their systems. Any one who has been present at their worship has seen that there is no indifference, no appearance of doubt or hesitation; and that their worship is conducted as securely and confidently as if the whole Christian community were of their opinions. Now what security have those who reject the Apostolic Ministry and Tradition of the Church that they are not likewise rejecting and resisting Christ's institution, and an essential portion of His truth? Experience of men's minds shows the determination with which each party in politics and philosophy, as well as in religion, adhere to their principles; and that opposition and difference of opinion seem to increase their confidence. For, indeed, nothing is less rational than men's faith. Party spirit, interest, pride, and inclination, which have no connexion with reason or the discovery of truth, are the main causes of the belief and opinions of most men. How lamentable, then, is the condition of mankind in relation to truth! When it is rejected, the mind is unconscious of its loss, and generally plumes itself as on an accession of wisdom. The truth received from tradition once given up, the mind must enter on the sea of doubt and inquiry, in which conviction is attainable only to a few who are learned and studious. The mass of mankind, incapable of national investigation of religious creeds or doctrines, are obliged to rely on the opinions of their teachers and communities for truth, although they see nothing but variety, controversy, and opposition of religions, and all communities exhibit equal strength of conviction and assurance; although, whatever creed be true, numerous religions must be erroneous and impious.

This is certainly a lamentable and perilous condition; and it is heightened by the consideration that while all religions are equally insecure, and liable to the sin of opposing some truth or institution of Scripture, each pretends to have some great and peculiar advantage. The Socinian boasts that his faith is purely rational,-that he has dismissed from his creed all mysteries and contradictions,— observing, and with truth, that if the Lord wished His Church to believe such doctrines, He would have provided means to prevent mistake or error concerning them. The Quaker boasts that he has rejected all forms, ministry, sacraments, and has reduced religion to direct and simple communion between the soul and the Holy Spirit. One system would appropriate the term EVANGELICAL as peculiar to Calvinism; and another, in direct opposition to it, would lay claim to the RELigion of the HEART as distinguishing its devotion. So that the system which is true has no apparent superiority, and each party alleges some peculiar advantage sufficient to preserve the attachment of its members, and greatly to strengthen that natural adherence to party which in itself is a complete blind to the understanding in the inquiry after truth.

The religious history of mankind since the Reformation is an exemplification of these observations. Not one single truth, after all the inquiry which has taken place, has been so established as to obtain universal credit. The old religious parties, with various fluctuations, still continue, and new ones constantly arise. Rationalism and Socinianism have gradually increased; religious feeling and observances decay among the lower classes or mass of the people; and even religious teaching has adopted a secular air, and that spirit of experiment and novelty which distinguishes the present age. The condition of mankind with regard to religious truth is therefore not only deeply calami

tous, but permanent. The systems and principles of popular religions have nothing to lead to the hope of unity in religious truth: three hundred years' experience shows the gradual progress of error among the learned and the wise, and the decay of religious principle and observances in the simple and the ignorant.

Now although each religious party should be too confident to harbour any doubt of the truth of their own creed, it does not seem unreasonable in them to afford a patient attention and examination to a system which the grievous errors of other parties, and the popular indifference to religion, give a strong ground for supposing to be necessary, or at least advantageous. Could men judge of their religious condition without being influenced by party spirit, power of association, and early instruction (which when erroneous is prejudice), it does not seem unreasonable that they might abate much of their assurance, and, weighing the amount of opposition to their sentiments, might even admit the probability that their creed is not perfect, that some portion of Divine truth or some Divine institution is omitted, or not fully set forth. Considering, therefore, the manner in which the unlearned are obliged to adopt religious truth,-that Nature has left them no other means of attaining it than tradition, receiving and following what is delivered to them; -considering also the difficulty of recovering a truth once lost or rejected—the uncertainty of mankind-the fatal errors of a great proportion of professing Christians-the indifference and neglect of the populace, who are losing all reverence for sacred things, and the hopelessness of improvement from the long experience of gradual deterioration, it might be an act of mutual charity, if not to adopt, at least to give a patient hearing and trial to a system which promises complete renovation of the character of religion in the repression and extinction of irreverence, disunion, and error, and in the authoritative intro

duction and general adoption of strict, united, and penitential worship and devotion. Why should novelty be attractive, when its fruits are error, disunion, and irreverence, and antiquity be so repulsive? When we see the state of religion so distracted and insecure, why should we refuse to hear patiently the system of ancient days, and deliberately examine whether our calamities are not caused by the rejection of a portion of the faith and institutions which then prevailed? It is difficult to characterise the spirit which scorns and declaims against an inquiry so interesting and instructive, and which perchance is essential to us as the only cure of the imperfect—and if so, therefore sinful-systems of popular religion. And if this spirit be at variance with humility, charity, and reverence, it is not less a contradiction to reason to enter upon the inquiry with aversion and opposition. Certain it is, that where the inquiry is to ascertain whether the Church now enjoys the full graces and institutions it possessed in the time of the Apostles, it is a contradiction to all reason and religious feeling to entertain a reluctance to admit a belief of what would be so full of advantage to Christians. Where the inquiry is to ascertain whether the wonderful gifts, authority, and privileges which the Redeemer conferred upon His Apostles be continued in the Church, it is to be feared that reluctance and opposition to admit their continuance proceed from the secret sense of having opposed or violated them, or from unwillingness to obey and follow them. Indeed a pious mind might well acknowledge and repent the sinfulness of such a disposition, even were there no ground for the belief of the doctrine.

As a religious principle, if true, its effects are most extensive and powerful. If there be one Catholic and Apostolic Church, it is the most practical of all truths; for belief in it is the adoption of a positive prescribed rule of faith, life, and worship, on sacred authority, which it is a religious duty to

obey and fulfil without deviation or dispute. And as no doctrine is more practically important, so none is more exposed to objections and rejection, from the pride of reason, insubordination, or love of indulgence. Those who have rejected this truth, if it be a truth, are involved in the greatest possible difficulty, and have almost insurmountable obstacles to contend against. It must therefore be by a most especial grace and blessing of God that this truth can be recovered by those who have cast it from them. Indeed this principle, if it be scriptural, is above all truths; for it includes all truths, and keeps from error in faith or worship those who receive it faithfully. If it be true, it is the greatest of all privileges—the highest condition of truth, devotion, and security in which the soul of man can be placed. The writer fearingly, but deeply and thankfully, has embraced and enjoys this truth; and would call men to examine it, and participate in it with the Church, and the Saints and Martyrs of the pure and unschismatic ages. He knows how easy is to heap up objections,-to explain away proofs,—to deride the holiest mysteries as bigotry and prejudice: the sacred character and nature of the Saviour are so treated daily by the presumption, and even by the learning, of men. But if the confidence of a single member of the Church is by his means strengthened in the conviction that the Church exists now as Christ's institution, in the possession and exercise of the authority and graces which it enjoyed by the Lord's gift in the time of the Apostles, he will not esteem his labour misapplied. If there should be any willing to receive and obey the Apostolic Church as the Redeemer's institution for the guidance of His people in His faith and service, but unable to overcome objections, or see it as positively proved and declared in Scripture, let them remember that" if any man will do His will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God," (John vii. 17), and that by devout and peni

it