a storm, which would not affect a substantial, and consolidated edifice.

It may further be inferred from the apostolical account of the dissensions at Corinth, that THE

QUESTION-WHEN DOES SEPARATION IN WORSHIP AND COMMUNION INVOLVE THE GUILT OF SCHISM?CAN BE DETERMINED, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE WORD OF GOD, ONLY BY A VIEW OF THE NATURE AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. Had the Corinthian schisms gone on to factious separation, this issue would not have destroyed, but rather have still more completely marked their character. They would, then, have been schisms, with the aggravation of an actual development and consummation of their final tendency. Even though separation, had it taken place, might, at once, have hushed the storm of parties, yet it would, in itself, have been a new evil; especially as shewing, more decisively, the violence of the schismatical spirit, and the hopelessness of that mutual reconciliation, which was the true remedy for these unhappy strifes, among Christians who professed to be united, in the faith and practice of the gospel. That such reconciliation actually took place, we have reason to believe, from the epistle of Clement, written half a century after these lamentable events.

Had separation, however, ensued-had the unity of the Corinthian church received its final

blow, by actual division, the guilt would, of course, have rested with the authors, the fomenters, and the finishers of the mischief; on whichever side they were found, or to whatever party they belonged. Had the separation occurred on account of the favoritism and partisanship, occasioned by the overweening fondness that was cherished towards the different ministers, the evil would have lain at the door of all the contending parties; perhaps equally; perhaps in different degrees. Had the disorders at the Lord's Supper proved so incurable, as that no remonstrances, not even those of an apostle, availed to repress them, and had they led to a division of the disorderly portion of the society, from those, if such there were, who remained peaceable, and consistent—a division, either by means of a factious secession on the part of the former, or by an act of christian discipline on the part of the latter: or, had these orderly and quiet members of the church, either peaceably withdrawn, hopeless of the return of departed charity, after they had made long, and painful, though useless endeavours, to restore it; or had they been ejected by a predominant faction, for the very reason that they were not factious ;can it be doubted, for a moment, where would have been the blame?

It may safely be affirmed, that wherever separation, in worship and communion, takes place in an

uncharitable spirit, it cannot fail to involve more or less, of what may be termed schismatical. Grant that there may be cases in which separation is allowable, or even desirable, or incumbent; still the manner of effecting, or maintaining it, may be such, as to tincture it with the stain of schism. Let us suppose that some of the first Gentile converts, intimidated by the bold assertions of the judaizing teachers, had superstitiously submitted, against their own unbiassed convictions, to unite with Jewish Christians, in certain acts of Mosaic worship and observance-these converts, when they became more fully aware of the liberal and catholic genius of the gospel, in relation to things external, as explained by the apostles,' would have done wrong, in not using the 'liberty wherewith Christ had made them free' from 'the yoke of bondage.' But had they, while thus declining further to participate in ceremonies and customs to which they conscientiously objected, made the attempt to force the Jewish believers to relinquish their convictions of duty, or passed harsh judgments on them for not so doing; their conduct could not have been defended from being of a schismatical character-because uncharitable, and calculated to lead to dissensions among Christians. It should never be forgotten, that conduct of this description, breathes the true spirit, and the essential nature of schism.

1 See Part i. chap. viii. section ii.

2 Gal. v. i.

Separation in worship and communion, or from christian intercourse, can take place, only in three ways; either by external necessity; or by excommunication; or voluntarily. Persecution, illness, or removal to a distant place, as they originate in External Necessity, may be causes of separation admitting no remedy. Excommunication, or the cutting off of one, or of any number of individuals, from church-communion; and Voluntary Separation-exemplified in the withdrawment of such individuals, of their own accord,—or in the dissolution of a christian society, for whatever cause, by the act of its own members :-are separations involving moral considerations, and are either lawful or unlawful, according to circumstances.

That there are many cases, in which separation by excommunication does not imply guilt on the part of the christian church by which this last act of discipline is performed, is universally agreed as is evident from the practice which has uniformly prevailed. Nay-a christian society, making no provision for the exclusion of the unworthy, and for securing purity of communion, would evince a departure from the apostolic spirit, utterly fatal to the design of the christian institute; which is, the preservation of the church, as distinct from the world. For nothing can be more indubitable in the history of

Christianity, than that in the apostolic churches, all the members of each society were personally united, in the maintenance of discipline. This is evident, both from apostolic precept, and precedent; * and has never, that we are aware, been denied. The civil legislative authority, and the system of ecclesiastical courts, which, from the time of Constantine, began to confound all things, divine and human, in one mass, became, it is true, especially in the West, the shadow of the simple, but effective moral discipline of the ancient apostolic church. But before this change took place, which, in its progress, paralyzed the right arm of Christianity-before arbitrary laws, and temporal penalties, against spiritual offences, were substituted for the solemn voice of the christian assembly-nothing was so fearful, on earth, as that verdict, which was doubtless, often, a faithful echo of the voice of Christ himself. The numbers by whom it was uttered, would be a greater security for its justice, than though it had been left to the private feelings of one, or a few individuals: united suffrages would give it greater weight; and when it emanated from a society of holy men, whose moral worth was such, as to exemplify 'how awful goodness is; the very circumstance of the sen

* 1 Cor. v. 4. 5. 11. 13. 2 Cor. ii. 5-10. 2 John 9. 10. 11. See also pages 45. 46. 157. 158, above.