own volitions. Has the Head of the Church granted to her members any RIGHT to disturb the political arrangements he has established? or did he not command all his followers, to maintain the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of peace? to be "of one accord, of one mind?" to "speak the same thing?" to "stand fast in one spirit, with one mind ?""

The reader may well ask whether Dr. M. does not sustain the policy he starts by some argument? Certainly. I shall state one or two things, as a sample.

1. "The union of Christians in a church state, must, from the nature of things, be a voluntary act; for if it were not so, it would not be a moral act at all." I suppose that he means, that every man must do his DUTY willingly-with all his heart, soul, mind and strength. This no one questions. Slavery is a miserable thing. There is, how much? morality in doing a duty by force. But does it follow, that, because human beings do their duty from a willing mind, they may divide into various associations, which is not their duty? This is Phaeton driving the chariot of Phoebus. Sin, committed in a voluntary manner, thus becomes sanctified by volition, until a bolt of wrath drives the transgressor to perdition.

But I have a question to ask here. Does Dr. M. mean to say, that it is not a man's duty to attach himself to the church of Christ, unless he does it voluntarily? Or, is the sinner's volition, and not the law of God, the rule of his duty? May he consider Jehovah a hard master, and lay up his gift in a napkin, and do no wrong? The citizens of the United States owe allegiance to the government-civil government is an ordinance of God-we must be subject to the higher

powers. May any one of these citizens, happening to be in a bad humour, or CHOOSING his own way, decline that allegiance? and thereby do no wrong? Or because he should cheerfully acknowledge the government, has he therefore a RIGHT to attach himself to a party, erect a government within the constitutional limits of the government of the country, and make laws for himself? Or may any of the members of any of the states, so act towards the state authority, because they CHOOSE to do so? Who may erect a monarchy in the heart of the republic? or supersede the supreme power by his own voLITIONS?

2. Sectarian theologians are generally apt to represent the relation between a human being and the church of Christ, as simply depending on mental volitions. He is supposed to APPLY, and the church to RECEIVE him. Dr. M. is very free in representations of this kind, in maintaining his doctrine of voluntary associations. But it is my DUTY to observe the ordìnances of Christ's house; and it is the DUTY of the church not to interfere with me. I may indeed be a reprobate, and then it is her DUTY to cast me out. The Master has given law to regulate such a case. That matter is not under dispute. I am not a reprobate. My character is good. Not being an official man, I cannot baptize myself. It is then the DUTY of the minister of the sanctuary to baptize me. By what RIGHT does he refuse me? The Saviour commanded me to eat the bread, and drink the wine in remembrance of him. Who has any RIGHT to prevent me from doing what the Lord commanded me? He told his disciples to go and preach his gospel to every creature; why should I not ask-CALL· a minister to

preach to me? Did the Master ever place it at the option of the church; whether I should or should not do these things? He has constituted the church as his servant to urge me to do these things, not to prevent me. And even if disagreement on various subjects might be suspected or be actually knownhe commanded her not to trifle with my conscience. -"Him that is weak in the faith receive not to doubtful disputations. judgest another man's servant?" And yet Dr. M. and those who agree with him, talk about judging, and receiving and refusing, as though they really had the

RIGHT.

you, but

Who art thou that

It may be replied, that Dr. M. has said that under such circumstances, the church of God would be a miserable Babel. He has said many things, which as a freeman I choose to examine and try, that it may appear whether they are of God: and I cannot be put off by embellishment, and exaggeration, and hyberbole. It is to be questioned whether he has ever looked calmly and coolly at the matter. No disrespect is intended in this remark. Theologians have talked so much and so long about uniformity, and have been so much infatuated by their ideas of ecclesiastical power, that to suggest the idea of the wheat and the tares growing together, is in their esteem, perhaps, the very vilest of all heresies. Then their glance is altogether one-sided. For look at the church now. Begin with the papacy, and number up the different sects; and if Babel means confusion → confusion of ideas, and language, and interests,— is not the church a Bubel now? The reader will please not put me away from my question, nor

the question from himself:where is the RIGHT? WHO gave it? to WHOM has it been entrusted? by which I am prevented from doing the DUTY, which the King and Head of the church has assigned to me. How have ministers and the church escaped from their own DUTY to receive me, and to treat me with all the urbanity, and kindness, and affection, due to a brother? Take away these voluntary associations, in which certain classes of Christians agree to walk together in "church fellowship," and which the Lord Jesus never commanded, but which his word has most pointedly forbidden, and all difficulty is gone. Every christian then finds his place; every minister then knows his duty; and the church becomes what the Lord intended his church should be, a brotherhood betokening its heavenly origin by mutual love, the praise and beauty of the whole earth.

I feel myself constrained here to inquire what is the CHURCH? To what political association, in its most general sense, is that term applied? The fair and full consideration of this question would lead, I ap prehend, to the conclusion, that the CHURCH and the ELECTION are the same thing. God's saints, or sanctified, or elect ones, whom he has separated from the rest of the world, whom he has chosen in consequence of the idolatrous defection of mankind after the flood, to accomplish the purpose of his will, and has consecrated as his official agents to proclaim and preserve truth in the world,- these constitute his CHURCH. whole Jewish NATION was his CHURCH, under the former economy. And gentile NATIONS, who have received the gospel, and are called by the name, of his Son, are now his CHURCH, Hence Peter's strong

The

and expressive language-"Ye are a chosen generation, an holy nation, a peculiar people."

It is against this CHURCH, that Jesus says, in strong figurative language, "the gates of hell," or Hades, or the grave, "shall not prevail." He seems to quote a figurative allusion of Isaiah, who said "Hell from beneath is moved for thee to meet thee at thy com-. ing it stirreth up the dead for thee, even all the chief ones of the earth; it hath raised up from their thrones all the kings of the nations. And they shall speak, and say unto thee Art thou also become weak as we? Art thou become like unto us? Thy pomp is brought down to the grave, and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee. How art thou fallen from heaven O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations."* The gates which were the places of public resort in ancient times the gates of Hades, the grave- or hell, shall not be crowded with chief ones and kings, to triumph over the CHURCH, as fallen, and say "Art thou become weak as we? Art thou become like unto us? THY pomp is brought down to the grave; and the noise of thy viols: the worm is spread under thee, and the worms cover thee. Thou art brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit." Christ's kingdom is an everlasting kingdom. It shall not pass away as other kingdoms have fallen. The church shall live while her head lives. The Jewish church remained, according to the promise, until Shiloh came, notwithstanding her priesthood was most

* Is. xiv. 9, 15.