a cataract-a jaundice:-it distorts-darkens— discolors everything. The denominational schismatic may see little glory even in a martyr's crown, unless it has been worn by one of his own name; while great moral delinquencies are thought to be atoned for, by great usefulness to the party, as such; or even by great party zeal. A man's party is the multiplied image of himself; and complacency in it, is often nothing more than an act of self-admiration. On the other hand, the faults of the party are so much the faults of individuals -that the partisan is seldom more conscious of them, than of his own; and they are consequently oftener overlooked or forgotten, than amended. This sectarian spirit, would have rejoiced, a century ago, to have brought the catholic soul of Whitfield into the trammels of a sect; and to have monopolized the labours of that apostolic man-whispering, as it did, in his ear. We are the people of God-you must confine yourself to us'! The tendency of a spirit so unworthy of Christianity, is plainly to give offence': and if no contention result from its manifestation, the credit is due to the charity of others.

Closely allied to this narrow-minded exclusiveness, is the SPIRIT OF PARTY PROSELYTISM-another aspect of the schismatical temper. This was a remarkable characteristic of the Judaizing zealots; who desired to make converts, that they

might glory in their flesh.' It had been well if those whose sincerity is far less disputable, had never imitated this vain-glorious proselytism; which sacrificed charity to an external rite. This spirit has also troubled' the modern church, by engendering sectarian enmities and strife. It is true, there are occasions when it may be a Christian's duty to state his opinions, and his reasons for them—even on minor points; and, possibly, in the presence of those who are known to differ:-and the more advanced all parties are, in charity, the less will be the danger, in such a case, of offence being either offered or received. But a restless desire to enlist the followers of Christ under our bannerto fix on them the badge of our party, is unworthy of our allegiance to Christ, as head of the universal church. It may also often involve the taking of an unfair advantage of one who is weak,' and who ought not to be received to doubtful disputations.'

6

The apostle Paul became all things to all men,' and' servant to all,' that he 'might gain the more:'-but the proselytist seems chiefly anxious to add to his sect; and scarcely to consider those as gained,' who are not gained to his ranks. Hence the youthful convert has sometimes been beset by different parties, in a manner resembling an election-canvass-rather than dealt with, in the catholic spirit of the gospel: as though his sal

vation depended on his seeing it his duty to come among us.' How decided, then, the evidence of his Christianity! How important-how desirable-that he should not hearken to unauthorized teachers,' but to 'the church'-or that he should make up his mind to be proposed at our church-meeting,' for fellowship with us-or that he should take up the cross,' and submit to the ordinance' (of baptism by immersion)—or that he should attend our class-meetings'-or join our connexion.' That this spirit of sectarian zeal greatly tends to produce schismatical uncharitableness, is but too evident. Even the appearance of proselytism to a party, is likely to bring into collision, feelings and interests which have little in common with the great objects of Christianity; and which too frequently manifest that they derive but little consecration from being so closely connected with it.

It is easy for zeal, untempered with charity, and animated by party spirit, to break forth into ANGRY PUBLIC CONTROVERSY, another decided form of schism. Not that controversy is, in itself, necessarily unchristian; since it may be conducted with charity and it has often proved exceedingly useful, serving to vindicate the truth, and to illustrate its power. Hence it has been well said, that while the love of controversy is hateful, the fear of it is pusillanimous.' But on the spirit in which

it is conducted between Christians, everything depends. When controversies are intemperatewrathful-acrimonious-they are tempests in the church; which instead of overspreading the world, as with an atmosphere of peace, is rent with the thunder of angry passions, and betrays the violence of the elements which it cherishes within its bosom. Had controversy always appeared as charity contending for truth, it would have purified the church, without dividing it. But when fiery spirits take the lead in a war of words—when the pulpit and the press are transformed into polemical batteries, from which invectives are poured forth with all the heat of a political debate-the church of Christ becomes the scene of an unnatural conflict, in which truth is sacrificed to prejudice; a spiritual victory is sought by carnal weapons; reason is exchanged for railing; and the world mocks at the degradation which the church is inflicting on herself, and exclaims:

'Can heavenly minds such high resentment show!' Further the controversial attitude which christian bodies sometimes assume towards each other, may readily lead to the schismatical error of

TREATING CERTAIN DENOMINATIONAL PECULIARITIES WITH MARKED CONTEMPT. The allusion is not here to gross and palpable extravagances, as the dreams of the theosophists, or the ravings of

Jacob Behmen; nor to the impostures and delusions which have sometimes appeared under the name of religion. The holy vial at Hales-the Rod of Grace at Boxley-Darwin Gatherin— weeping images of Jesus-St. Andrew's finger, pawned for forty pounds—and similar absurdities -may justly be exposed. But even in these cases, the Christian should rather weep over follies which may have a disastrous influence on the eternal destinies of men, than be coutent with ridiculing them. Even the Romish ceremonies and errors, taken as a whole, are matter of remonstrance, rather than of contempt: for, wherever conscience, however erroneous, is concernedcontempt and ridicule are, at best, but dangerous weapons; and require to be used with extreme circumspection.

But where are charity and candour, when Protestants are found despising each others decent and conscientious practices-practices, maintained in sober judgment, and utterly beyond suspicion of hypocrisy and imposture? In such cases, all contemptuous jest and banter, is clearly a violation of the law of love. Of this spirit, however, there have been numerous exemplifications. Where is the charity of him, who, because he himself is attached to the practice of free prayer in the church, pronounces all forms to be supersti* tion'—' will-worship'—' and ' formality'? Or