wicked? Has she a ready ear for such as would gladly correct her cherished falsehoods, and show her just how far and verily she has mistaken the words of other men for thoughts of Jesus; or does she curl her lips in scorn of Reason's voice, renewing still her mythologic tale of brimstone fires for all that doubt whatever she believes?

Consider her method of instruction. See how she evades the common art of teaching, and the usages of schools for secular information. She does not address the understandings of men, but utters rigid dogmas, beginning with an exhortation to faith, and always ending with some frightful picturing of the wrath of God that follows infidels. Consider, too, her everactive zeal, her stubborn will to make the world believe her little "word of God." See how she bids her missionaries fly to foreign shores, compass every isle, traverse every land, and tell in every various human tongue the precious echo of two thousand years ago. See how she makes her proselytes: when words of love or fear avail not to convert, how ready her resort to modes of force and stern implements of authority. How pliant all her "ministers of grace,"

few years ago, to turn from mercy's work and serve

-

occasions of severity — go from saving souls to killing men, as it seemed in malice, but verily to cut faith's way by all the horrid arts of that grim monster now called "the Man of Sin." I don't confound Ecclesia with him: he the treacherous power, she the unconscious instrument; he the seductive beast, and she the deluded victim; his the bold arrogance, hers the blind conceit; his the wrong, and hers the great mistake. Christianity is the co-working of Priestcraft and Superstition, and it is never easy to say which of the two predominates in the Church. This is the best reason that I know of why she, calling her lore a mystery above all human wits, has never intimated a desire to see it unraveled; always ready to swear to the identity of her religion and the Gospel of Jesus, yet denouncing every attempt to compare one with the other.

Clergymen have always claimed to be the only authorized public expounders of the Gospel. They have ever professed to be called and qualified for this office virtually by Jesus himself, who is said to have imparted the sacred unction of priesthood to his twelve

apostles, and thence to their ordained successors to the end of time; thus constituting the Christian Church the exclusive vehicle of salvation. Paul seems to have given rise to this ecclesiastical pretension, or at least to have sanctioned it, in his letters to Timothy and to the various churches of his time, in calling them collectively" the pillar and ground of the truth," and in his frequent declaration of being "called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ." The Church has partaken largely of the spirit of his saying, "If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that have received, let him be accursed." Sects have multiplied nevertheless, till versions of Paul's religion differ exceedingly. What then? Among all the bickering daughters of Zion there is no name but Jesus. Each claims to be the only orthodox, and each repeats of all the rest the same anathema.

Such are the praises of Zion;
Such is her goodly Profession,
And such the look of her calling;
She vaunteth the favor of Jesus;
But hath she a like of his spirit?
Hath she put on his example?

ye

CHAPTER III.

CHARACTER OF THE CHURCH.

"Do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.”—MATT. XXIII. 3.

In our estimation of men it is wise to distinguish what they are from what they profess or are reported to be. It is not the name of Jesus that we love and

revere

not what the world has said of him, or he

of himself, but the otherwise attested truth of his life,

the essential beauty of his self-hood. So the mere fame or ostentation of any person excites not our admiration, but rather our contempt, without a corresponding character.

Here is a piece of human wisdom which merits a general and unrestricted application to the subject of our present study. In judging of institutions and social bodies, we ought not to exercise less sagacity and scrutiny than in adjusting our views of personal

character. There is but one rule for forming a correct opinion either of individuals or societies; and that is one which no ecclesiastic can with any grace ignore. It was in reference to religious pretenders that Jesus said, "Ye shall know them by their fruits; " and there is no other valid way of determining whether Christians are sincere in calling him their Master.

Let this rule be applied to the Church. Let us judge the saints, not as they the world and one another, by sectarian shibboleths, but, even as their own Lord is expected in the end to reward them all, "according to their works," and I more than conjecture that she will seem all at once too little for her Reputation; by Profession too grossly imposing, or in Character basely deficient.

It is a notable fact, and ought to be notorious, that the so-called "Bride of Christ, the Lamb's Wife," is shamefully wanting in fidelity to her glorified Lord. The Church both belies her reputation and violates her profession, and the ears of all her adherents should tingle with her loud reproach. The most remarkable traits of her character are presump