ers can be sufficiently secured barely by men's saying that they consent to the substance of our Catechism and Confession of Faith, and differ only in some small circumstantials, leaving it to them to judge what those circumstantials are: for a man may suppose or pretend that the ten commandments are the most substantial part of the Catechism, and that the doctrine of the divinity and satisfaction of Christ, original sin, &c., are but mere speculative circumstantial points, upon which no great weight ought to be laid. Such persons ought at least to declare what particular articles they do except, so that others may judge whether they are mere circumstantials or not.

"But then it is difficult, if not dangerous, to give up any one proper doctrine or article of faith contained in our Confession, for all the articles of faith in a system or body of divinity have a necessary relation to and connexion with each other; whoever, therefore, gives up any one article of faith, must, if he is consistent with himself, give up another which has a necessary connexion with it or dependence upon it, and so on till he gives up the whole. Indeed, some men seem to be partly in one scheme of religion and partly in another; but such men are always inconsistent with themselves; although for want of accurately tracing their own ideas they are not always sensible of it.

"Some men will pretend to consent to an article of faith, and yet believe nothing of it, in the true grammatical construction of the words, and the meaning of the composers; e. g.: Some who pretend to consent to the thirty-nine articles, by original sin, and the corruption of human nature, mean nothing but bodily weakness and sickness; and by its deserving God's wrath and damnation, mean nothing but bodily sickness and pain, and the temporal miseries of this life.

"So the meaning of that article, according to them, is that Adam's sin is the occasion of our undergoing bodily sickness and weakness, which deserve bodily sickness and pain.

"Condescension, charity and unity, are very excellent things, when applied to promote the ends of the gospel; and therefore it is a pity they should upon any occasion be perverted to destroy it.

"But condescension has no more to do with articles of faith than with propositions in the mathematics. And though a man ought in many cases to give up his own right or interest, yet he cannot in any case give up the truth of God revealed in his word.

“Charity is but another name for love, and the consequent effects of it, in believing or hoping the best concerning any man, which the nature of the case will allow; and considering how apt corrupt nature is to intermix self-interest, passion and prejudice with matters of religion, it is a virtue which, in that view, ought to be much insisted upon: but charity no more consists in inventing or believing new terms of salvation unknown to the gospel than it does in believing a sick man will recover, when the symptoms of

death are evidently upon him. Such charity as that is the greatest uncharitableness, as it tends to lull men in security to their eternal destruction.

66

Unity in a joint-declared consent to the great and fundamental principles of religion, and practice of the duties of it, is a matter of great importance: but without such a consent unity is founded upon nothing, and can never answer any of the great ends proposed in the gospel. Men must be agreed at least in the object of their worship, whether it be the eternal self-existent God, or a mere creature: and in order to maintain this unity in the Christian church, there always have been public creeds and confessions of faith (all agreeing in substance) to which all, especially the teachers, have given their joint consent.

"Neither can those who adhere to the ancient doctrines of the Christian church, be properly called a party: that odious name properly belongs to each of those particular sects, which, from time to time, oppose those doctrines, and thereby make themselves a party.

"The Bible is indeed the only foundation of our Christian faith; and all the question is, in what sense we are to understand it: but so far as any regard is to be had to the judgment of great and good men in expounding of it (and I think it is an argument of great self-sufficiency, if not self-conceit, to have none at all), yet the number and quality of those who have at any time opposed these doctrines bear no comparison to the vast number of martyrs, and other eminently wise and good men, who have constantly maintained them. And the opinion of Arius, Pelagius, Socinus, Arminius, Foster, Chubb, Taylor, and all their followers, are but as the small dust of the balance, when put into the scale against the opinion of the whole Christian church in all ages.

"But I am free, that every man should examine for himself, and then openly declare what he finds.

"For my part, I have critically and carefully, and I think, with the utmost impartiality, examined into the doctrines contained in our Catechism and Confession of Faith, and believe they are fully and plainly contained in the sacred oracles of truth, perfectly agrecable to reason, and harmonious with each other; and that most of them are of the utmost consequence to the salvation of the souls of men. And therefore look upon myself in duty bound to do all that lies in my power, to continue and propagate those doctrines; especially in the college committed to my care, since that is the fountain from whence our churches must be supplied.

"And I hope that all the ministers of this colony, according to the recommendation of former synods and later general associ ations, will be careful and zealous to maintain and propagate the same in all our churches: that they will clearly and plainly preach all the doctrines contained in the sacred oracles of truth, and especially the more important of them, summed up in our Catechism and Confession of Faith; that they will not endeavour to

conceal or disguise any of these doctrines, nor shun to declare the whole counsel of God. That they will be careful not to introduce into the sacred ministry any but such as appear to be well-fixed in these principles upon which our churches are established. It is a pleasure to me to observe, that no person, who has lately been licensed to preach as a candidate, lies under any suspicion of that

nature."

ESSAY VIII.

CHRISTIAN UNION.*

THIS appears to be the work of a pious, intelligent lawyer, who was removed by death a few weeks before it issued from the press. It is dedicated to "The Reverend David Abeel, American Missionary to South Eastern Asia ;" and breathes, throughout, a spirit of fervent attachment to the honour and kingdom of the Redeemer. No one, we think, can peruse this volume without receiving an impression of profound respect for the piety and benevolence of the author. And while we suppose it impossible for a judicious mind to adopt all his views and anticipations, we are still willing to believe that what he has written cannot be read without some profit. His apparent soundness in the faith; his zeal for the honour and spread of true religion; and the animating hope which he cherishes of the speedy union of all who bear the Christian name, can scarcely fail of warming the heart of every reader who wishes well to the progress of the religion of Christ in our revolted world.

We do not differ from our author as to the desirableness and importance of "Christian Union." If the invisible Church consists of all those, throughout the world, who are united to Christ by faith and love; and if the visible Church consists of all those, also in every part of the world, who profess the true religion, together with their children, it must, in the very nature of things, be, that each is one. All real Christians belong to the former. All professing Christians belong to the latter. Now, as there is but one Christ, and but one true Religion, it is manifest that the body of Christ can be but one." We, being many, says the apostle, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. Again, he asks, The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we, being many, are one bread, and one body; for we are all partakers of that one bread. Now ye, adds he, in the same epistle, are the body of Christ, and members in particular.

Originally published in 1836, in review of "Christian Union; or an Argument for the abolition of Sects." By Abraham Van Dyke, Counsellor at Law.

Of course this unity, though in a sad degree marred, is not wholly broken by diversity of denomination. All who profess the true religion, however divided by place, by names, or by form, are to be considered as equally belonging to that great family denominated the Church. The Presbyterian, the Methodist, the Baptist, the Episcopalian, the Independent, who hold the fundamentals of our holy religion, and who, of course," hold the Head," in whatever part of the globe they may reside, are equally members of the same visible community; and if they be sincere in their profession, will all finally be made partakers of its eternal blessings. And the more closely they hold the "unity of the spirit in the bond of peace" and love, the more decidedly they are ONE, and one in a sense more richly significant and precious than can be ascribed to millions who boast of a mere external and nominal union. They have one Head, one hope, one baptism; they "all eat the same spiritual meat, they all drink the same spiritual drink," and will assuredly all meet in the same heavenly family. They cannot all meet together in the same sanctuary here below, even if they were disposed to do so; but this is not the worst. They are not all disposed thus to meet. They are not all willing to acknowledge one another as fellowmembers of the same body. Yet, in spite of this blindness and infatuation in regard to their own relation to each other, they are still one, in a sense, and to a degree, of which they themselves are not conscious.

66

We also concur with the author of the work before us in our estimate of the sin and mischief of every measure which is unfriendly to this unity, or which tends to make "a schism in the body." Nothing," says the eloquent Robert Hall, "more abhorrent from the principles and maxims of the sacred oracles can be conceived, than the idea of a plurality of true churches, neither in actual communion with each other, nor in a capacity for such communion. Though this rending of the seamless coat of our Saviour, this schism in the members of his mystical body, is by far the greatest calamity which has befallen the Christian interest, and one of the most fatal effects of the great apostasy foretold by the sacred penmen, we have been so long familiarized to it, as to be scarcely sensible of its enormity; nor does it excite surprise or concern in any degree proportioned to what would be felt by one who had contemplated the church in the first ages. Christian societies regarding each other with the jealousies of rival empires, each aiming to raise itself on the ruin of all others, making extravagant boasts of superior purity, generally in exact proportion to their departures from it, and scarcely deigning to acknowledge the possibility of obtaining salvation out of their pale, is the odious and disgusting spectacle which modern Christianity presents. The evils which result from this state of division are incalculable. It supplies infidels with their most plausible topics of invective; it hardens the consciences of the irreligious; it weakens the hands of the good, impedes the efficacy of prayer, and is probably the