pects of the christian into a skepticism, from which there could be no recovery. On the contrary, the test he gives is plain and familiar. Mark his words:" Ye shall know them by "their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of "thistles? Even so, every good tree bringeth forth good "fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evii fruit. A good "tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree "bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth "good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Wherefore "by their fruits you shall know them." And the apostle John says, "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether 60 they are of God." And how are we to try them? The sequel plainly shows, that it is by the coincidence of their doctrine with that of the gospel. The like was also the method prescribed under the former dispensation by the prophet. "To the law and to the testimony," says he, "if they speak "not according to this word, it is because there is no light in "them." A very different mode of trial would now be assigned by a zealous patroniser of the hierarchy, popish or protes

tant.

There is a memorable incident, and entirely apposite to the point in hand, which is recorded by two of the evangelists, Mark and Luke. John said to Jesus, " Master, we saw one "casting out devils in thy name, and we forbade him, because "he followeth not us." Jesus answered, " Forbid him not, for "there is no man who shall do a miracle in my name, that can "lightly speak evil of me. For he that is not against us is "for us. "" The apostles still retained too much of the Jewish spirit, not to consider more the party than the cause.

"He

followeth not us,' '-a reason which to this day, alas! would be thought the best reason in the world by most christian sects, and by every individual who possesses the spirit of the sectary. From Christ's testimony we have ground to believe, that what this man did, was done with an intention truly pious; not to make dissension, or form a party against the disciples, but to promote the common cause. And what was so done, would probably be productive of the great end of the christian ministry, the conversion of the hearers to the faith, love, and obedience of the Messiah.

But even where so much cannot be said of the goodness of the intentions, we are not warranted to decide against the uti lity or success. The apostle Paul observes, that whilst some preach Christ of love, others do it of envy, and strife, and contention. This, I imagine, is the scriptural, I say not the ecclesiastical, notion of schismatical teachers. For that alone is schism in the sense of the holy writ, which wounds charity,

and which, in order to unite christians more closely to a sect or faction, alienates their hearts from one another, and consequently from the interest of their common master; or which detaches them, in respect of love, even though outward unity should not be violated, from the whole community of chris tians, in order to attach them more firmly to a part. The former only, those who preach out of love, the apostle regards as true; the latter, those who preach out of envy and strife, he considers as pretended preachers, or heralds of Christ. Yet he adds: What then? Notwithstanding every way, whe "ther in pretence or in truth, Christ is preached, and I there"in do rejoice, yea, and will rejoice." Would he have said so, think ve, if a defect, either in the mission, or in the dispo sition of the minister, could have rendered their ministrations ineffectual to the hearers? In those days of the church's infan cy, when the far greater part of the world was Jews and Pa gans, such teachers as the apostle speaks of, though bad men themselves and uncommissioned, might have been instru mental in converting infidels and idolaters to the faith of Christ. But there had been no subject of joy here, if the conversion of such, however sincere, and their participation in the ordinances of religion, however piously intended by the participants, had been, according to the doctrine of our anta gonists, rendered ineffective by the defects of the instrument. The very success of the preaching of such unauthorized pretenders would, in that case, have been a fitter subject of grief to the apostle, than of joy, as the unhappy proselytes might, by an apparent conversion to Christ, have been lulled into a security much more fatal than the unbelief in which they were before. His joy, on the contrary, was a demonstration of his sentiments, that the people might receive spiritual benefits whatever exceptions there might be to the ministry. I own the case is, in many respects, worse with the modern authors of division, the founders of new sects, in countries where christianity is universally professed, and where there is free access by the scripture, both to its doctrines, and to its precepts, It is hard to conceive to what the disciples of some recent sectaries can be made proselytes, unless to uncharitableness, hatred and calumny against their fellow-christians, and that on the most frivolous or unintelligible pretexts. For neither idolatrous worship, nor the exaction of unlawful terms of com munion, are so much as pretended. If, according to our Lord's criterion, we are to know the tree by the fruits, the evil fruits above-mentioned, the invariable effects of such divisions will be thought more analogous to the nature of briers and thorns, than to the fruit of the fig-tree, or of the vine.

H

However, even of such contentious teachers I would not presume to say, that they may not occasionally do good, though there be but too great reason to dread that the evil preponde rates. And even here I am to be understood as speaking of the first authors of such unchristian separations. I know too well the power of education, and of early prejudice, to impute, equal malignity to those who may succeed them whether teachers or disciples. But to return

To assign to the Messiah, or rather, under that colour, to procure for themselves a worldly kingdom, was not an errour peculiar to the Jews. The same evil principle, which in them proved the cause of the rejection of the true Messiah, proved quickly among the Gentiles, who acknowledged him, the source of the grossest corruption and perversion of his institution. After it became the aim of church rulers to secularize the kingdom of Christ; they uniformly had it for their object, in exact conformity to the example the Pharisees had given them, to remove the attention of men from things spiritual and essential, to things corporal and circumstantial. And in this, as in all other corruptions, they have but too well succeeded. The more effectually to answer this purpose, they have not scrupled to introduce such dogmas, (of which that. I have been examining in this lecture is an example) as tend to subvert the spirit of the gospel, and are inconsistent with the veracity of God.

Of a very different character and tendency are some sentiments I have lately met with concerning the spiritual kingdom of the Messiah, in the Sermons of Mr. Comings, prebendary of St. Patrick's, Dublin, now deceased. They convey an idea of the church truly rational, enlarged, and sublime; such as strongly distinguishes it from all the pitiful and contracted pales, so uncharitably erected by the different sectaries of all known denominations, popish and protestant, established and unestablished: for it is not a legal establishment, as some vainly imagine, or any thing merely external, that either makes or unmakes a sectary in the scriptural sense: it is solely the spirit by which a man is actuated. But without any further comment, I shall leave this author to speak for himself, by giving you his own words. In my judgment, he unfolds his conceptions on this subject with uncommon energy. It may not however be improper to premise, that the words in the gospel, to which the preacher specially refers, are these: (Luke xvii. 15, 19.) One of them, when he saw that he was healed, turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God, and fell down on his face at Jesus? feet, giving him thanks; and he was a Samaritan. And Jesus answering, said, Were there not ten

cleansed? But where are the nine? There are not found that returned to give glory to God, save this stranger. And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way, thy faith hath made thee whole. "Thus you see, though the Jews learnt no humility, no gra❝titude, yet the Samaritan, ignorant as he was then thought, "misinformed as he is now reckoned; yet the Samaritan was deeply impressed with both. The Almighty himself taught "him, and he was obedient to the divine instructor. The "pride of religion would make the Jews brand him with the "factious name of heretick or schismatick; but were he here"tick or schismatick, he offered to heaven as grateful a sacri"fice as was ever laid on the altar at Jerusalem by prophet or "by saint. The contentions about the forms of religion de 66 stroy its essence. Authorized by the example of Jesus “ Christ, we will send men to the Samaritan to find out how "to worship. Though your church was pure, without spot (6 or imperfection, yet if your heart is not turned to God, the "worship is hateful, and the prayers are an abomination. "The homage of the darkest pagan worshipping he knows "not what, but still worshipping the unknown power that "formed him, if he bows with humility, if he praises with gra“titude, his homage will ascend grateful to heaven; while the "dead careless formality of prayer, offered up in the proudest "christian temples, shall be rejected as an offering unholy. "For think you that the Almighty esteems names and sects? "No: it is the heart that he requires; it is the heart alone "that he accepts. And much consolation does this afford to "the contemplative mind of man. We may be very ignorant “in spiritual matters, if that ignorance cannot be removed, "and yet may be very safe. We may not know in what "words to clothe our desires in prayer, or where to find language worthy of being presented to the majesty of heaven. "But amidst the clouds that surround us, here is our com"fort: in every nation, he that worshippeth with humility, "worshippeth aright; he that praiseth with gratitude, praiseth "well. The pride of establishments may despise him, but "the wisdom and the righteousness of heaven will hear, "and will approve him. It was to the humble thankful Sa"maritan, though separated from the true church; yet it was "to him alone, because he alone returned to glorify God, that "Jesus Christ said, Arise, go thy way, thy faith hath made thee "whole. Thus, in a moment, vanished and became of no ef “fect, the temple of the Jews, built by prophetick direction : "its ritual given by their illuminated legislator: all gave way "to the profound humility, and the sublime gratitude, of what "they called an unbeliever, of what Jesus Christ called the

❝ only faithful servant of God among them." Permit me only to subjoin, to the above quotation, what is particularly apposite to the subject now in hand. Let us but reflect who were at that time the sacred ministers, the teachers and the priests of the Samaritans? In the very beginning of their defection, in the revolt of the ten tribes under Jeroboam, the sacred historian acquaints us, that this idolatrous king cast out the priests of the Lord, and made priests of the lowest of the people, who were not of the family of Aaron, or of the sons of Levi. And of the same character they still remained. No order of

men, existing at present in the christian church, can give any evidence of a divine right compared with that of the tribe of Levi, and of the posterity of Aaron in the Jewish. Yet this passage, in relation to the humble, the pious, and the thankful Samaritan, may show us effectually, if we be capable of being taught, that, under no dispensation of things whatsoever, can the validity of God's covenant be made to depend on the ministry, or his promises be rendered ineffectual to the humble believer, and grateful worshipper, on account of any defect in the priesthood. We see that such defects were no obstruction to the efficacy of the humble Samaritan's faith, or the acceptance of his person. Arise, go thy way, thy faith hath made thee whole.

Thus much I thought proper to premise, in regard both to the nature and to the consequence of the question about the government instituted by the apostles in the church. I next proceed to the examination of the fact. And in this it is my purpose to proceed with all the candour and impartiality of which I am capable; and to speak out boldly what appears to me most probably to have been the case, without considering what sect or party it may either offend or gratify. I am sensible that, in historical inquiries of this kind, it becomes us to be modest, since we must know, that persons, both judicious and candid, have mistaken; for, on all the questions that arise from the subject, there have undoubtedly been men of this character on the opposite sides. It is comparatively of little moment, whether we approve most the monarchical, the aristocratical, or the democratical form of church government, or to which of the three we have thought it our duty to subject ourselves. The only errour that is here of consequence, is, when people are led to consider this as a ground of disunion, or, which is still worse, of alienation of affection from those who, though differing in this particular, have received the like precious faith with themselves; when they think themselves warranted by this difference in unchurching their brethren, as the phrase is, that is, in pronouncing them to have