be divided at all, the sects might about as well be twentyfive as five. But this is not all. The church of Christ is still made up of all these differing sects, and all the private members of these sects, are but members of the one body whose head is Christ. And their sympathy for each other ought to be like the sympathy existing between the different parts of the same body. But under this system, though living in the same neighborhood, they have little knowledge of each ott.er. Each has his own meetings to attend, his own preachers to hear, his own books and papers to read, and his own brethren to converse with. There is a systematic, organized contest between them, and the breach is incurable. The arguments which they learn and read are one-sided; few opportunities occur to compare views, and when they do occur, each is interested to magnify rather than dissipate the differences, and almost insurmountable obstacles are in the way of their agreement. Their children are educated to division, and to believe it necessary, and the fairest prospect that this system of promoting harmony among brethren presents, is division, constantly increasing, and every day confirmed, through the whole Christian world, to the end of time.

Again, in favor of union against division it is argued that the expense of division is too great. Several of their number must remain to care for these little flocks, when if they were united, one could do it quite as well, and the rest might be preaching the gospel to the perishing. They are commissioned to preach the gospel to every creature in this new world, and what right have they, in obedience to a wicked, contentious spirit, to waste the labors and strength of several of their number, while millions are perishing for lack of knowledge? If these converts have the least adequate conception of the value of souls, will they not cry out against such prodigality and rejoice to endure each other's weaknesses, while a soul remains ignorant of the way of life? But again, they must have as many different meeting houses as there are sects, and they cannot be built without a great struggle; and then they will often be poor things, or the churches will be in debt, and almost interminable evils will result. They must all have ministers, but they are poorly able to support them, and must either have foreign aid, or their ministers must leave caring for souls, to care for their own bodies.

But to this one ventures to reply, that these different sects will provoke one another to emulation. When they see other denominations growing up around them, lest they should be

left far in the back ground, they will give more abundantly and labor more faithfully, and thus in the aggregate much more good will be accomplished.

On the other hand it is admitted that this spirit of emulation will exist, but it is replied that it is one of the worst results of the system. All that is done from such a spirit, is not benevolence, but selfishness; not virtue, but sin. The same spirit that would give or labor that its own sect might equal or excel another, would be equally gratified if the same result should follow from the failings or misfortunes of the other. It would characterize and vitiate efforts to promote revivals in its own sect, and oppose efforts for revivals made by other sects. In all places of moderate size, where different sects exist, this spirit of jealousy, emulation, and rivalry, is the greatest obstacle in the way of the work of the Lord. Besides all this, whatever is gained by this spirit of emulation is lost and more than lost, by a sense of weakness and inefficiency which results from the same system of division. But we have not done with the waste of this system. Each different sect must have its own missionary societies, and tract societies, and book concern, and for all these there must be different sets of officers and agents, their separate reports must be published, and each organization would cost nearly as much of time, strength, and money, as would the whole combined in one. And what is worse than all, the strength of these several sects, which ought to be spent in united and incessant war upon the enemy of all righteousness, is half spent in the suicidal work of defending themselves against the attacks of each other.

Another argument in favor of division, the gravest and most earnest, remains to be considered. This plan of union, it is maintained, is a plan of frittering away and giving up God's most sacred truth. I can never, says one, admit to my church, or retain in it, persons who will not bring their offspring to the holy ordinance of baptism; nor I, says another, those who will mock the Lord by singing hymns of uninspired composition. And I, says another, can never commune with those who will not follow Christ into the water. Others exclaim, I can never lay my ordaining hands upon the head of an American, nor I upon a Calvinist, nor I upon a Pædobaptist. I am responsible to my Heavenly Master for the exercise of the sacred trust committed to me, and I can never compromise my conscience, or God's eternal truth, to gratify the feelings of a man.

O, most pure, most conscientious men! You acknowledge that these ministers of other denominations are ministers of Christ, sent out by him to preach his truth, though they will do it imperfectly. The Spirit of God attends their labors, and souls are given them as seals of their ministry and stars in their crown of rejoicing. Yet you, for conscience sake, withhold from them your cheerful approbation and hearty God-speed. You believe that these different denominations are churches of Christ, planted and watered by his Spirit, and that he admits to his churches, with all their imperfections, members whom you, from reverence to his sacred truth, will keep out, or turn out from yours. You believe that he is in those feasts of love which you do not enter, and that he heartily communes with those who are too imperfect to commune with you. Away with that superstitious reverence for orthodoxy which for truth and purity's sake will exclude from a church admitted to be imperfect, those who, it is fully believed, will be found amidst the holy throng in heaven, though they die the next hour after their exclusion. If confessions are ever made, or pardons craved in heaven, surely they will be made and craved, when the bigot, cured of his intolerance, shall meet before the throne of God, the injured brother whom he has separated from christian fellowship and sympathy on earth.

To this it is replied we do not shut them out from Christian fellowship and sympathy! Let them go to those of their own stamp where they will be heartily welcomed, and will receive the unconstrained sympathy of congenial hearts. is in kindness to them that we take this course.

It

This seems plausible, and friendly, and one is almost tempted to be satisfied with it. But listen, Whose fellowship is it that this brother seeks! The very fellowship from which you exclude him. The church of his choice, is the very one from which he gives you the power to shut him out. You do not debar him from another church, for you have no power to do it. But with the recommendation which your act of exclusion gives him, you send him in search of a church after his own heart. Where that church is to be found, or whether to be found at all, is a matter that you are not concerned to know. Or if you suppose you know, who made you the judge what church would suit your brother best.

Again it is said, "We do not shut him out of the church; he shuts himself out, by refusing to assent to its creed. Very well, by what authority was a creed adopted, and by what

authority is it rigidly enforced, a part of which a true Christian, aye, a large majority of true Christians, cannot believe? By what authority does a church exclude from its communion, and thus account as a heathen man and publican, one who is not charged with any sin, but as even believed to be a devout and conscientious Christian? Is it said, a heretic after the first and second admonition is to be rejected? True; buy why? Because such a one is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned of himself. But to call a man a heretic who values every doctrine essential to christianity; as he does his own soul, is not employing words as Paul does. If the power of excommunication in the church is to have any good moral tendency, whatever, it must be applied to its only legitimate end, a separation between the friends and enemies of God, and not between his friends.

Here the discussion ends. The converts have assembled to consummate their organization. The twelve are to communicate the result of their consultation. It is left now with every reader to decide what their conclusion ought to be. Should they divide these Christians into sects, and thus introduce a principle of division, which is to extend, with their sanction, throughout the new world? Or shall they adopt a creed which shall test as far as a creed can, the piety of the various applicants, and unite them all together, exhorting them to love each other as brethren, and bear with each other's weakness and errors on points of minor importance? On this subject, I am persuaded there can be but one voice. Under these circumstances all would go for union. But this granted, many are ready to inquire, what has it all to do with this world, where circumstances are so different? This is now to be shown.

And

First then, it follow that divisions among Christians, if ne cessary at all, is always to be regarded as a necessary evil, and not a good in itself; and when ever spoken of, is to be lamented, as a sad state of things, which the selfishness, bigotry, and intolerance of professed Christians has brought about, and not defended as a wise and desirable arrangement. this glorious union should be constantly before us as the "beau ideal," toward the realization of which we should be constantly aiming. And all efforts tending in that direction should be favorably regarded, and not frowned upon, as tending to a result both visionary and undesirable. And this, let it be understood, is the great point at issue between the friends of sect, and the friends of union. The question is not, how can

such a state of things be brought about, but granting that it could be brought about, would it be desirable?

There are now, in the United States, about twenty-five denominations of christians, each embracing in its creeds all the articles of faith adopted by the Evangelical Alliance, or in other words, all that any of them believe essential to the existence of piety and growth in grace. And they are kept thus separate partly by their forms of church government, but mainly by their differences of opinion on subjects of comparatively small importance. The question now is, if all these fragments of the church of Christ, could by any means be persuaded to blot out of their creeds all but these fundamental doctrines of Christianity, and gradually be consolidated into one glorious body, would it be a desirable accomplishment? The foregoing arguments relate to this question. A few words more on this subject shall suffice.

There are connected with the evangelical churches of the United States about thirty thousand ministers. In many places there are two, three, four, or five, where one could perform the work quite as well. We are safe in saying that if all these denominations were united in one, half the ministers could be spared, and the work be better performed than it is now. Here then we have the astounding fact, which should fill us with grief and shame, that, in these United States, while the hosts of the man of sin, urging their way in one unbroken body, are threatening to overwhelm us, and the heathen world is perishing for lack of knowledge, fifteen thousand ministers with the means of their support are sacrificed to maintain a system of sectarianism, originated and perpetuated by nought but bigotry and intolerance. Assuming that such a union of the different evangelical churches as here proposed would be desirable, a few suggestions by way of showing what can be done to bring it about will close this article.

First, then, if these views were generally prevalent throughout the country, I would recommend that a mass convention, composed as nearly as possible of all the evangelical ministers and delegates from all the evangelical churches in the United States, should assemble in some central place, and after a season of becoming congratulation and due deliberation, should put forth a manifesto, and publish it in every nook and corner of the land, portraying in lively colors the evils of sectarianism and the glories of Christian union, and closing up with a list of recommendations similar to the following: