churches? Its condition calls loudly for healing measures for prosperity within her palaces can result only from peace within her walls. The church of Christ is not the pool of Bethesda, whose salutary virtue depends on the troubling of its waters: if it were, all might hope to be healed, without lingering long in its porches; for there is no want of angels to perform the benevolent office of disturbing its tranquillity. No, in the present case, we need an angel of peace to descend, with power to rebuke the wind and the sea, and to say, with effect, to the raging waters, Peace, be still.' For the disorders which we deplore, the only remedy that can be prescribed, and could it be adopted, would not fail of success, is a spirit of candor, and moderation, and charity which thinketh no evil.

The increasing light which is spreading its beams around us, aided by the Father of lights,' it is confidently expected, will,-gradually, no doubt, but certainly, convince us of the importance of uniting in defence of those fundamental doctrines which we all believe, in the practice of those duties which we all acknowledge, and in the exercise of that mutual charity, which we are called upon, by the most powerful considerations, to cultivate. Of this union, we may, at no distant day, feel the importance, and the necessity. Should that spirit of unbelief, and of hostility to the gospel, 'which already works in the children of disobedience,' again rear its horrid head, and make a last, desperate attempt against the Lord, and against his anointed,' we should, then, find it necessary to lay aside our party animosities, and minor differences, and unite all our efforts, in defence of our common faith. Who can tell, but divine providence will permit, what circumstances seem already to indicate, infidelity to prevail, to such an extent as to alarm Christians of every sect, and convince them of the absurdity and the danger of their mutual dissensions! Nations, when invaded by foreign enemies, forget their party feelings, and their domestic feuds; and unite,

as a band of brothers, in defending their altars and their firesides. Christians, it is hoped, will adopt the same wise policy; and make the defence of the gospel a common cause. Perceiving the whole system assailed, and the very foundation threatened, they will feel, that our holy religion, as understood by any sect, is infinitely important. They will cling to it as their last hope; and gladly obtain aid and assistance from Christians of any denomination. The orthodox will feel, that the time demands such auxiliaries as Locke, and Lardner, and Price, and Priestley, though now branded by them with the odious appellation of heretic: and the liberal will rejoice in the aid which may be abundantly furnished from the ranks of orthodoxy.

Before concluding this discourse, it will not be deemed improper to obviate the objection against the truth of Christianity, arising from the diversity of sentiment existing among its friends; and from the numerous sects and parties into which they are divided.

This objection, though frequently brought forward, with great confidence of its strength, will, when impartially examined, appear to be extremely feeble. The argument against the truth of our religion, derived from the diversity of opinion, and the perpetual contentions existing among its friends, proves nothing, because it proves too much. By the same argument it may be proved, that there is no truth in the opinions which people entertain relative to any subject; nor in any of the principles on which people act. Christians differ no more in their religious opinions, than mankind differ in opinion relative to every other important subject.

Turning our attention to the subject of medicine, we perceive, that the masters of the healing art are no less divided in their opinions relative to the theory and practice of physic, than are divines relative to certain controverted points in theology. Lawyers maintain endless disputes about the sense of common and of statute law. Statesmen and politicians turn the world upside down

with their contentions about liberty and the rights of man, and the principles and the measures of civil government. Philosophers have their different sects and parties. They explain, in a variety of ways, the properties of matter, the laws of motion, and the phenomena of nature. It would be endless to point out all the absurdities resulting from the argument now under consideration. Admitting that we must reject, as false and useless, every opinion or notion in which men are not universally agreed, mechanics must abandon their occupations, because they differ in regard to the rules of their respective arts: husbandmen must let their grounds lie uncultivated, because they differ in their opinions respecting the principles and the practice of agriculture: men must engage in no business or pursuit, until every body is agreed as to the most correct method of procedure: and even the traveller, when directed to different roads, by different persons, must stand still, relinquish his journey, and retrace his steps. An argument which leads to conclusions so absurd, is a miserable one, and must be abandoned.

Finally, after contemplating and deploring the evils which result from the animosities and contentions and divisions prevalent in the christian world-and I fear, that to contemplate and deplore them is all that we can dowe must feel, deeply, the importance of following after the things which make for peace;'-of permitting no difference of opinion to produce an alienation of affection, towards those with whom we ought to be united in the bonds of friendship and christian charity.

How happy would it be, if all the friends of religion would think more of those important doctrines in which we all agree and we certainly do all agree in the most important-and less of those minor doctrines about which we differ! By cultivating a spirit of peace and charity, we should honor and promote the cause of that holy religion which we profess, and become qualified for that better world, where we shall know, by happy experience, 'how good and how pleasant it is, for brethren to dwell together in unity.'

BY REV. ORVILLE DEWEY, NEW BEDFORD, MASS.

ON SECTARIANISM.

I CORINTHIANS, III. 3.

For while one saith, I am of Paul, and another, I am of Apollos, are ye not carnal?

FROM these words, you will anticipate the subject of my discourse. It is the spirit of sectarianism, which is here condemned, and against which I shall take the apostolic warrant for speaking freely. And let me add, that when I say this, I have not in my mind the idea of evil that attaches to some remote people, or some other people than ourselves. I do not mean to preach against the sectarian spirit of any particular sect or party. But I mean to preach against my own, and yours, and that of every body else. Sectarianism altogether and every where I would contend against.

But first let me endeavor to point out more particularly what I understand by a sectarian spirit. That those who think alike should value each other's opinion and society on that account, and so far as that consideration goes, is nothing surprising nor objectionable. This does not constitute them a sect. Men think alike on a great many subjects of business and of science without forming a party, for the promotion of their views.

Now what is it which will make of a number of per

sons agreeing in opinion, a party or a sect?-for in showing how a party originates and grows up, we shall go some way towards defining it.

In the first place, the giving them a name will have a tendency to produce this result. A common name operates upon many minds as a kind of mutual pledge. There has been an extraordinary propensity in religious matters, to this giving of names. There cannot a dozen of men adopt a peculiar set of views, but forthwith they are denominated Hopkinsians, or Swedenborgians, or by some other title in the extended nomenclature of christian sects. Next to giving a name, in its tendency to form a sect, is opposition. This binds men together, and makes them act for the common defence. And then, when a name is fastened on a party, and an opposition is created, —then, a wide scope is given for passion and prejudice: then come dislike, anger, scorn, variance and slander.

From this account of the rise of sectarianism, you might expect it to be one of the discriminating features of a sect, that it would forsake general and generous considerations for those which are partial and limited; that its members would give up a portion of their individual freedom, to the creed or the conduct of the whole body. The question of the sectarian is not simply and only, what is true in faith or right in action, but what does the party believe, and what is expedient to be done for the party? This last question often involves a still worse; what are our opponents doing? and what shall we do to counteract them? So that the whole christian action of a country, if it can be called so, is often shaped and directed by these party considerations. And men verily think they are doing God service, when they are only laboring in the service of their own prejudices and passions.

This account of sectarianism, though very brief and general, may serve as a sufficient basis for the remarks which I have now to make upon it.

I. And the first remark I have to offer is, that sects are not NEEDED, to answer the great purposes of christian action.