conceptions which Latins formed of this Gospel, a Latin religion; out of the conceptions which Greeks formed of it, a Greek religion; out of the conceptions which Goths formed of it, a Gothic religion. These religions were at variance with each other. Within each of them there were elements of continual strife. They had no force before the Islamite shout, 'There 'is one God; a man is His prophet and the conqueror in 'His Name.' That mighty and living message could only be encountered by nations which confessed an actual King-one with man, one with God-as the bond of their fellowship. But the Islamite faith lasted on. For the West, while it could organise its polity and fight its battles in this Name, must have its religion, its schemes of drawing nigh to God, its methods of propitiation. In the Lord's Prayer and the Creed, the name of the Eternal Father confronted the mere ruler who was represented by Caliphs and Sultans. He was hidden from the people by mediators visible and invisible. He from whom all grace and love proceed was continually presented to the conscience as the great object of its terror, in the very likeness of the Evil Spirit. His perfect Image was of necessity darkened, as He was darkened. The Saints or the Virgin-generally some local virgin-must persuade the Son to persuade His Father not to punish crimes. which it was infinitely desirable for the order of society, for the cause of righteousness, that He should

punish, to ask toleration for sins by which His children were enslaved. Against this Latin religion came forth the Gospel, 'God has made peace with us in His 'Son. We may trust the Son absolutely to put away 'sins. Indulgences are the devil's gifts, not His.' But the Gospel of Luther became the religion of Lutheranism. It was opposed by the religion of Geneva, by the religion of Zurich, by the religion of England. Each nation has been great while it has acknowledged Jesus as a King; each sect has been great when it has accepted a Gospel of Christ, and protested against some religion which was hiding Him from men. Each nation has become separate from every other when it has boasted some system of religion, and has rallied round that. Each sect has become narrow and persecuting as it has set up its own religion, and has called that the religion of Christ. And yet every nation has borne witness of the truth by shewing that it must prefer its own king, an actual man, to any system whatsoever; each sect has borne witness to the truth by shewing that the name of its founder was dearer to it, and a greater security for its continuance, than any system of opinions. The Latin Church has borne witness to the truth by confessing that its religious system must go to pieces if there is not a Bishop who is also a King (it signifies little whether he is the best or the worst man on earth, whether his government is the model of the Divine Government or

A

concentrates in itself all the baseness, tyranny, and corruption that is diffused through the Governments of the world) to declare what the religion is, and to bind those who profess it into one. All these are testimonies to the need of a living Head. Nor till the Head of Humanity is proclaimed will the insufficiency of the partial heads be felt, will the counterfeit universal head shrink into nothingness.

These facts, then, are indeed of unspeakable value. They shew that Religion in the original Roman sense, as expressing obligation to some unseen ruler, is grand, sacred, imperishable. But what the obligation is, must be determined by the character of the ruler. If that is not righteous, or if the righteousness is not declared so that it may be known, the religion will become identical with superstition, with the mere dread of a power which can do the worshipper mischief. It will be supported by the State for its own purposes, the statesmen all the while mocking at its pretences. If the State, as in the case of Rome, becomes a despotism, ruling over many tribes which profess different religions, some of these will be treated as lawful, some as unlawful. Such as obviously interfere with the civil order will be put down; the rest will be protected, as affording a help more or less useful in keeping those who adopt it in subjection to the visible emperor. Only if there should be the announcement of a kingdom based on a foundation exactly the

opposite to his, toleration will inevitably be changed into persecution; the kingdoms must fight till one of them fall. Such is the history of the struggle which occupied the first centuries of the modern world. It was not a struggle between a Christian religion and another religion, or a multitude of other religions. It was the struggle between a kingdom which was grounded on the dominion of a man raised to be a God, with the announcement that the true King of men is one who, being in the form of God, took upon Him the nature of His subjects, that He might deliver them from all their oppressors bodily and spiritual. Is there such a one? Is the kingdom real or imaginary? That has been the question in all periods; that is the question now. Mr. Carlyle has taught us how, in every age-in this democratic age as much as any— the demand of men is for a king; how any one who has exercised any influence over his fellows has come forth to meet that demand. He has made us acquainted with some of these kings; the best of them have surely been those who have confessed a kingdom of which they were only ministers; he asks reverence for them as for men who bowed to eternal laws. They died, and left the world, he thinks, very bare and sorrowful. Very bare indeed, if there is not a King who entirely obeyed and fulfilled the eternal laws, and who is not dead but alive. Very sorrowful, if the best message it can hear is this: You have

'been dreaming for the last three-quarters of a century 'of a common humanity. You have been utterly unable to realise it without a head, a king. You 'have been convinced, by evidence more and more 'overwhelming that he who professes to be the Visible 'Head of humanity has no power to bind its limbs together; he cries for the help of earthly monarchs 'to uphold him. Philology and criticism have been 'trying to connect the present with the past; every

man feels that connection, and confesses one with an 'interminable future. And now hear and understand! 'Criticism and philology have clearly ascertained that 'there is no Head of humanity, no one who binds the 'ages together; no Prince of the kings of the earth.' The news may be very loudly proclaimed. For some reasons I have given already, for others I may state presently, it may eagerly be welcomed. Our unbelief has been anticipating it, and preparing for it. But it will not have the kind of success which those who send it forth anticipate. Men will have a Christ of some kind. He may be a mob Barabbas, he may be a Cæsar. We may make our choice between these Christs, we may try them alternately. Either must have more reality and more influence than a Galilean Thaumaturgist, who feigned to contend with death and was overcome by it. But the tyranny of each will at last be intolerable. The cry for deliverance will again arise; God will shew who is His Christ.