ger is not seldom to be apprehended, that the distraction of judgment-the difficulty of choice amongst the various parties in the Lord's household may keep many a willing heart in suspense, and serve as an apology for procrastination, until the hour of decision has gone by, and perhaps until the very day of grace has departed.

Under these circumstances, it is no wonder that the choice of the awakened mind is commonly a matter of custom, or of caprice, or of personal partiality. The convert desires to devote himself to Christ, and seek his favor in the way of his own divine appointment; but instead of patiently examining which of the various denominations around him agrees best with the Apostolic Church, he determines his selection in favor of that particular sect in which he was brought up, or which happens to be most convenient, or with the minister of which he may be most pleased. Manifestly, however, this course is not reconcilable with sound judgment or right reason. It is the express command of the Apostle that we prove all things, and hold fast that which is good.' And if this precept was necessary at a time when there was but one controversy in the Church, how much more necessary must it be when there are so many!

But perhaps the most simple mode in which we can demonstrate the importance of this point, is the following. If we had lived during the ministry of the Saviour upon earth, and desired to come unto him that we might have life, it is plain that we should have approached him in person, and have left all that we might follow him, as did his other disciples. Before he ascended into heaven, he constituted the Apostles his representatives, saying expressly, 'Behold I give unto you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted to them, and whose

soever sins ye retain, they are retained.' As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.'. "Whoso receiveth you receiveth me, and whoso receiveth me, receiveth him that sent me.' 'Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel', 'Teaching all nations, and baptising them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, and lo! I am with you alway even to the end of the world.' Of course, had we lived in the days of the Apostles, our only mode of coming to Christ would have been to come to them, his appointed representatives, professing our penitence and faith, receiving baptism, and uniting ourselves to their visible communion or fellowship.

Suppose, however, that we had lived in the age next following the Apostles, when the Church was no longer favored with their personal ministry, but only with the ministry of those whom they had ordained to succeed them, is it not plain that we should have come to Christ by uniting with these successors of the Apostles, who were thus set in their place and acted by their express authority? And if, in that age, we found some societies called Christian, who had departed from the Apostles' doctrine or fellowship in any respect, should we not have avoided them, and preferred uniting with those Churches which continued faithful to the Apostolic rule in all things? And should we not have considered ourselves bound to act upon the same principle, whether we had lived in the second age after the Apostles, or the third, or the fourth, or the nineteenth century of the Christian era?

But now that Christendom is divided into so many sects, is not the path of our duty the same, although the mode of discovering it may be more troublesome? Are we not still required to use all the diligence in our power to select our Church according to its adherence to the Apostles? And if,

through presumption, or carelessness, or indolence, or the gratification of fancy, or the mere influence of prejudice or habit, we decline this investigation, do we not expose ourselves to the charge of wilful neglect on a point which may, for aught we know, be of unspeakable importance to the spiritual welfare, not only of ourselves, but of the whole Israel of God?

I am well aware that men are apt to save themselves the trouble of this examination, and satisfy their consciences by saying, it is all the same thing what church they join, if they are only faithful and sincere. But they do not talk thus on any other subject of comparison. Even if it be taken for granted that the various sects are only so many ways to the same place, yet there must be a ground of selection among them. One way must needs be the best. Even if it be conceded that the various sects are only as so many houses in the same village, yet it ought not to be a question of indifference which of these houses we should choose to make our home. These illustrations, however, do not meet the question fairly, because no sober minded reader of the Scriptures can believe, that the Apostles formed a variety of Churches, such as we see at the present day, filled with mutual dislike and animosity. Nor can it be denied, that the promises of Christ were given only to the Apostles, and to the Church of their planting. The way prescribed by them, was one way to the kingdom of heaven-not many. The body which they intended the disciples of Christ to form, was one body-not many. And although I shall not dispute the title of any society of professing Christians to be accounted a part of the catholic or universal Church—nay, while I prefer the most liberal definition of the term, and rejoice in the hope that the Church above will include the true hearted amongst them all-yet I cannot in honesty

conceal that there must be both sin and danger in despising the rule of Apostolic conformity, and in presumptuously placing upon an equality in the sight of heaven, those who cannot commune together upon earth.

A wise man, receiving medicine for the body from the hands of his physician, keeps close to all the directions of the prescription. Can he be wise in the judgment of God, who deals less prudently with the medicine for the soul? The bodily medicine may cure, it is true, even when many of the directions are disregarded; but would any man of prudence venture upon the experiment, if it could be helped? So the doctrine of the Gospel may save, when many of the Apostolic rules are overlooked, but who would trifle with a question of such solemn moment, or exchange a sure promise for a probability?

But the difficulty presented by this question, may require farther reflection before it is fully understood. Let us, then, endeavor to ascertain, whether the common doctrine that all denominations are equally safe, will bear examination.

The respectable society of Friends, frequently called Quakers, are well known, as professing Christianity, and as being on some points remarkably zealous followers of the precepts of the Gospel. Their love of peace-their order -their patient endurance of persecution—what more lovely exhibition of practical religion have modern days to boast, than this remarkable people have displayed in these particulars? But they have adopted the erroneous idea that a purer dispensation of the Gospel was committed to George Fox, the founder of this sect, which superseded in some respects the directions of Apostolic rule, and hence they have no order of the ministry, no water baptism, no administration of the communion. Their women are allowed to teach in public equally with men, and they are strong opponents in

all these points, of the Church established by the Apostles. Now is it competent for us to say, that the pious and sincere Quaker shall be cast out of the kingdom of Christ, on account of these serious errors in his system? God forbid. We are not the judges of our fellows. Nay, it is the voice of the Redeemer himself which saith, Judge not, that ye be not judged.' On the other hand, shall we admit that the pious Quaker is on an equality with those, who, being equally sincere, have retained faithfully the whole system of the Book of God? Surely not, for this would be an absurdity. It is preposterous to say, that the man who is in error can be on an equality with him that is not in error. It is preposterous to say that he who departs from the rules of the Christian Church, is as safe, as he who diligently keeps them. Consequently, while we behold the Quaker with all benevolence of feeling, and willingly praise every thing in his faith and practice which accords with the Word of God, we hesitate not to declare, plainly and unequivocally, that he has fallen into error on the points specified; that in this error, we cannot take any part, nor can we give it either allowance or encouragement; while, nevertheless, we do not undertake to define the peril to which it exposes him before God, but leave him to that tribunal before which we must all stand, at the day of final retribution.

The Swedenborgians are another sect, not so generally known, but, in some respects, equally peculiar. They discard the Trinity, insisting that there is but one Person in the Godhead, although they differ most decidedly from the other opponents of the Trinity, because they conceive our Lord Jesus Christ to be the incarnation of that one Person, the Father Almighty, and therefore not only worship and adore him, but him alone. Their leader in this and a great