of Christ, may indispose christians for the patient study of the bible, and render doctrinal discussion dry and irksome. There is no path of usefulness free from the snares of the enemy. If the temptation of doctrinal study is to practical inactivity, the temptation of practical activity is no less to mental inaction in the investigation of doctrine. It is easier to give away a bible than to explore it; easier to send preachers to the destitute, than to treasure up what is heard and to read at home; and much easier to read the weekly herald of glad tidings, than by searching the scriptures daily, to grow in knowledge and in

grace.

The charitable efforts of christian denominations at approximation, though well intended, and proper to be made, are not entirely unattended with danger. There is at the present moment, probably, more unscriptural catholicism in operation, than there is of bigotry; and though it establishes no inquisition, and kindles no fires around its deluded victim, it may be extending the dark empire of death over the souls of men, as really as papal despotism. There is a licentious liberty of conscience, as destructive to the soul as a despotic lording over it. A strong course of public opinion has commenced its movement from the extreme of bigotry to that of total indifference to doctrine; nor, unresist ed, is it likely to stop, until it has reached its ruinous destation, undermining foundations, a sweeping ancient land-marks away. This danger admonishes the churches to stand

SIR,

THERE are indications that a movement is begun in the christian world, : which will not cease, until real christians shall be united in visible fellow. ship. The distance, however, at which even the Lord's hosts have encamped from each other, and the consummation of their union in one, is an event so desirable, that there inay be danger lest some should put off the harness, before controversy for the faith is superceded by a requisite unity of sentiment.

So difficult is it, also, to adjust the terms of approximation, between christians of different denominations without a sacrifice of truth, that it would not be strange if the pioneers, who first explore the untrodden interval, should sometimes lose their way, or in their zeal to amalgamate, should attempt to unite those whom God has not united; and to bring even christians together with a precipitancy too great, to consist with a solid and enduring compact.

It was more than a century before the rights of christians to differ, were practically adjusted; and a considerable period, if not a century, may be demanded to adjust practically the obligations of christians to walk in fellowship.

The subject of Catholicism, discussed by your correspondent D. Christ. Spec. No. xi. p. 562, is undoubtedly among the most interesting, important, and difficult subjects, which claim the attention of christians at the present day; and if he

has erred in some respects, it may be no more than the writer of this may be found to have done, in his attempts at correction. Believing how ever the truth of what he advances, he submits it to the scrutiny of the christian public, not doubting that a candid investigation of the subject, will terminate ultimately in the fellowship of all real churches of our Lord, upon scriptural grounds, however many may first lose their way in attempting to conduct them to the point of union.

Catholicism, as defined by your correspondent, consists in "a disposition to extend the hope of salvation and the peculiar affections due to the family of the faithful, to such as differ from us in their religious opinions."

This definition is defective through omission, rather than as including any thing positively erroneous. By a disposition to extend the hope of the gospel to such as differ from us, D. cannot be understood to mean, a disposition to believe them to be christians, and to love them as christians, without evidence of piety. Such a disposition is unauthorized by the bible, and the manifestation of it in hope, would be presumption on our part, and might be destruction to our neighbour. Nor by "disposition to extend the hope of salvation," &c. can D. be understood to mean, that benevolence of heart merely, which disposes us to perceive and candidly to weigh the evidence of piety, afforded by those who differ from us in opinion; for a benevolent readiness to perceive and appreciate our neighbour's evidence of piety may consist with an entire want of evidence in his favour, and an overwhelming weight of positive evidence against him.

By catholicism then, D. must intend a disposition to appreciate the evidence of piety which those furnish who differ from us in opinion, and to extend to them christian affection, according to the degree of evidence and of moral excellence manifested.-But this essential part of a correct definition of catholicism, viz. that it be oc

casioned and justified by credible evidence of piety, D. has omitted. The consequences of this omission will unfold themselves as we proceed.

That my ideas may be reduced to some method, I shall subjoin in the form of propositions, some of the sentiments advanced by your correspondent, with a few remarks on each in their order.

1. The belief of revealed truth is immensely important, as it is indispensable to justification.-2. The belief of every revealed truth is not essential to salvation.-3. There are doctrines which so form the essence of the gospel, and which as seen by an omniscient eye, are so involved in faith in Christ, that the rejection of them is the rejection of Christ.-4. No line of separation is drawn by inspiration between the essential and non-essential doctrines. Nor 5, Between those precepts which may, and those which may not, in any case be transgressed without losing every evidence of possessing a spirit of christian obedience.-6. We are not authorized to decide what is the faintest glimpse of truth, which in any case, may possibly be connected with the exercise of faith and holiness. In our ignorance, therefore, of what degree of error may be consistent with the lowest degree of faith and holiness, we find a ground for the exercise of catholicism."

To the first proposition I am happy to yield my unqualified assent.

But by revealed truth as the "instrument of regeneration," I am constrained to understand a much greater proportion of the truths revealed in the bible, than can possibly be included in a "faint," (none can tell how faint,) "glimpse of truth." THE TRUTH is a phrase employed to designate the entire system of revealed instruction, and when we read that men are begotten and are sanctified by THE TRUTH, the fair inference would seem to be, that the predominant influence, at least, of the system, is concerned in the event, and not merely some glimmering ray wander

ing athwart the darkness of the mind. We do not call one or two rays of light THE SUN; nor ought we to denominate a few scintillations of truth, struck from their orb and wandering in darkness, THE TRUTH. There would seem to be then, as indicated by the language of revelation, a departure from revealed truth as a whole, beyond which the few truths carried into exile are not THE TRUTH, by which men are begotten and sanctified, while those left behind are THE TRUTH, which is the power of God to salvation.

With the second and third propositions I am also happy to accord. The belief of every truth revealed is not essential to salvation, and yet there are truths revealed, which so "form the essence of the gospel, that to reject them is to reject Christ."

The fourth proposition, viz. That no line of separation is drawn in the bible, between the essential and nonessential doctrines, or can be drawn by man, neither my time nor limits will permit me to affirm or deny, with that extent of investigation, maturity of thought, carefulness of discrimination, and evidence of truth, which the difficulty and importance of the subject demands. I only say, that until better instructed, I believe that the scriptures have done more to discriminate the essential from the non-essential doctrines, than your correspondent seems to apprehend, and by far too much to justify the unqualified assertion, that no line of separation is, or can be drawn, and that to make the attempt does no good, but much evil. I am not disposed hastily to assume untenable ground, but neither can I consent to abandon ground as untenable, until, inch by inch, it is fairly taken from under my feet, lest by a too hasty dereliction, positions essential to the defence of truth are abandoned. The entire subject of the fourth proposition is therefore deferred for further consideration and future discussion, as God shall per

mit.

The fifth proposition, viz. That God has not drawn a line between those precepts which may, and those which may not, in any case, be transgressed without extinguishing all evidence of piety, may possibly be true, if it have respect only to the perpe tration of a single crime, as in the case of David, or Peter; but is most fearfully untrue, as it respects, habitual immoralities. Of these, God has given a long catalogue, in one of which no professing christian can live and not forfeit, utterly, his entire evidence of piety. "Be not deceived, neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adul terers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God."-As your correspondent D. however, admits the equal obligation to believe cardinal doctrines and to perform cardinal duties, and we have specified many immoralities, which exclude from beav en, we perceive not how the analogical inference is to be avoided, that many cardinal doctrines might be named, the real and deliberate rejec tion of which, would equally annihilate evidence of piety and exclude from heaven.

To the sixth proposition, viz. that none can decide how faint a glimpse of truth may be made the means of regeneration, and that in our ignorance of what degree of error may be con sistent with the lowest exercise of faith and holiness, we find a ground for the exercise of catholicism, we cannot accede. Because it assumes ignorance as the ground of catholicism, which as we conceive, can be exercised only on the ground of evidence, and because between the premises laid down and the conclusion drawn, there is an impassable gulph. The premises are; it cannot be proved to be impossible that A. is a christian, and the conclusion is, therefore it is positively to be believ ed that A. is a christian, and he is to

It assumes the principle that all men are to be regarded as christians whom we cannot prove to be destitute of piety, and that catholicism is to be exercised until it is proved to be impossible for the object of it to be a christian; a rule of judging, which applied in courts of justice would acquit every criminal, and prostrate the laws of the land. The evidence on which convictions turn, in civil tribunals is not certainty of guilt, not the impossibility of innocence, but such evidence suffices as produces conviction in the minds of twelve hon

est men.

I know not how to prove it to be impossible that most of the hearers of the gospel, who make no pretensions to religion, should be the subjects of piety, but surely they can have no claims upon our charity, or qualification for membership in our churches, until they furnish some positive evidence that they are pious.

The ground, the only ground of catholicism, is credible evidence of piety. This on the ascending scale may be indefinitely augmented up to moral certainty, but the moment evidence of piety falls below the point of credibility, the claims of catholicism are at an end, as really at an end as if it were impossible for the subject to be a christian; for catholicism includes a decision of the understand ing in favour of a man's piety, upon credible testimony; and to bring in a favourable verdict in the absence of credible evidence, would be presumption. Even did the want of credible evidence imply no degree of positive

"There is room without derogating in the least from the importance of truth to extend the hope or the possibility of salvation, and with it, the peculiar affections due to christians, to those who reject some of what we esteem the important truths of the gospel." This extract is subjoined lest I should be thought to urge the consequences of D's opinion beyond the fair meaning of his language; but by the extract, it will be perceived that the obligations of hope and christian affection are held to be commensurate with the possibility of salvation.

Were it admitted then, that we are not authorized to decide upon the degree of aberration from christian doctrine and practice, which may possibly consist with the existence of picty, it will not follow that our catholicism is to pursue the vagrant from truth and righteousness, in all his mazes of darkness and impurities of transgression holding on to the skirt of his garment or pressing him to our bosom as a christian brother, until he can demonstrate to us, that he is a vile apostate from truth and rectitude; for though we might not be called to decide, how far he might wander with the possibility of holiness, we can easily set bounds which he cannot pass with the credible evidence of holiness; and the moment he should step over the bounds catholicism would stop, however she might cast after him a lingering look of benevolent desire and in the absence of absolute evidence against him, might forbear to pronounce, peremptorily, his doom.

Were it now demanded of me to give a definition of catholicism, I should say, it consists in such complacency in holiness as inclines the subject of it, to look beyond the honours and interests of his own denomthe evidence of piety afforded by all ination, and to weigh in just balances who name the name of Christ, and to render to them confidence and affection in accordance with the evidence

of piety which they afford.

The radical cause of uncharitableness among real christians is a localiselfishness, and which prevents kind ty of feeling and interest which is intercourse and opportunities of witnessing the evidence of each others