allowance during the whole period of his illness, and would thus enable him to preserve for his family some part of his early earnings, even if it were the will of providence that this sickness should be of long continuance, and should at last end in death.

The sequel is melancholy but in structive. Neither of the brothers ever recovered their health. Their

bodily frames, weakened by protracted fever, could not resist the attacks of the disease lurking in their constitution; and, after lingering between three and four years, sometimes flattered with the hope of returning health, but never able to resume their occupations, they both rapidly declined, under the influence of the wet and unhealthy weather of the winter 1821, and, in the beginning of the following spring, died both in the same week, and were both buried in the same grave. "Lovely and pleasant were they in their lives, and in their death they were not divided."

On examining the affairs of these two brothers, they were found to have been materially affected by the different views on which they had respectively acted, relative to the Friendly Society. David, who had eighty pounds in the bank when the fever seized him, having received a great part of his support during his illness from the weekly aliment allowed by the club, had not found it necessary to draw much more than the yearly interest of bis little capital, and left his family in circumstances of comparative comfort; whilst George, who had made no such provision, had been under the necessity of spending the greater part of his savings in providing for his own wants and that of his family; so that, after payment of his doctor's bill, and his funeral expenses, his widow and children found, in the bank, a reversion of little more than twenty

pounds. Such was the difference at last in the provision made for these two families; a difference arising, as I have reason to believe, entirely from the operation of the Friendly Society; for, in point of expense, and of industrious habits, no person could ever discover any distinction between them.

FOR THE CHRISTIAN INSTRUCTOR.

Thoughts on Church Parties.

Ir is not at all to be wondered at, that men should take different views of a subject, and range themselves on the different sides of a question. In the case of speculative truths, or where the point to be established is merely problematical, various modes of reasoning may be adopted, which will naturally lead to corresponding conclusions. And, every thing else apart, the love of power, whether in possession or in pursuit, may inflame the mind, and inevitably lead to faction and party-spirit. But that the members of an established church, who have subscribed the same creed, who have solemnly promised submission to the same rules of government and discipline, and among whom no hierarchical excitement can almost exist-that such should be divided into two, I had almost said, intolerant conflicting parties, is a kind of phenomenon that cannot be so rationally accounted for: and the fact in this is no less obvious than in any other case, where principles may, in some measure, justify its existence.

These parties have long been known by the invidious epithets, Wild and Moderate. But, I believe, the less offensive discrimination at the present day is, Moderate and

Evangelical. The evangelical party are those who aim at preaching the Gospel according to the Scriptures, who daily and regularly worship God in their families, and who la bour to enforce strictness and purity in doctrine and discipline, and in all the duties of the pastoral office. The moderate clergy, again, are distinguishable by a conduct, in some respects the very reverse of this. They inculcate what they call a rational religion; that is to say, a religion no doubt revealed, but cut and fashioned according to their own taste and judgment. They have family worship once in seven days, at least in that portion of the vineyard where my lot is cast; and, in their great hatred of fanaticism and love of charity, they wish to discountenance all religious duties not absolutely necessary; and to soften and do away, as far as possible, the rigours of ecclesiasti cal correction and discipline. This is the outline of those distinguish ing features by which the two parties may be recognized; and surely nothing, in fact, can appear more inconsistent or absurd. We can account for persons taking opposite ideas according to their respective feelings and convictions. But with the members of our body these feelings and convictions are all settled and harmonized before their admission into the church. With them there is not only one master and one faith, but there is one confession of faith, and one rule for the direction of their conduct, whether public or private. How then do they come in the end to differ so widely and materially, after all the professions of amity and unanimity, all the solemnities of the closest and most cordial at tachment? It would appear that there has been a want of candour and honesty somewhere: and as the evangelical party have stuck to their principles, the other must

have abandoned theirs; or rather, as they had never made up their minds upon the subject, or formed any fixed, coherent, scriptural system of belief, they confessed or subscribed any thing that was required of them, and still preserved their original habits, the result of indifference and inattention. This is no doubt a heavy charge against a certain class of our order-a charge not far short of disingenuousness and ignorance. The first part of this charge is perhaps less aggravated; because, it is committed, not against a full conviction of the truth, but in consequence of an utter unacquaintance with it; which renders the transition to any confession more simple and easy. Still, it is unfair, and, at least, politically unjust, to become candidates for the privileges and immunities of a socie ty, without studying to be acquainted with the rules of that society, or feeling any desire to comply with them after the object is gained.

The sacredness of the institution, and the importance of its concerns, and of administering them aright, must enhance the criminality of the previous, too facile, accommodating principle, and of the subsequent remissness as to the means of acquiring a more steady and conscien tious interest in every thing that pertains to it. The full amount of the demerit thus combined must appear of considerable magnitude indeed to the most common but attentive observer. Let him see it as it really is. Let him see a candidate for the most sacred office to which man can aspire, solemnly confessing and acknowledging all the rules and doctrines necessary for admission to that office, and for the faithful discharge of its duties; and then, when duly invested, virtually and literally renouncing these obligations, and the pure evangelical standards to which he had promised obedience,would he not consider

that person as devoid of candour and honesty? And if he were still better acquainted with the nature of the case, he would stigmatize him as ignorant of his profession, of its duties, and principles.

You might suppose it would be as natural for these raw unfledged theologians to pin their faith to the one side as to the other; to the standard of evangelism, as to that of rationalism and moderation. So it is. But they are prevented by a sort of pride, originating in selfignorance, and by the apparent difficulty of comprehending evan gelical truths. Were they to de. vole more of their time to the Scriptures; were they once roused to a deep sense of the human con dition, and of the adaptation of the Gospel remedy in all respects to the exigencies of man, then would they embrace the formerly despised, misunderstood Christian doctrine, as the faith which was once delivered to the saints.

Is it to be inferred from this, that a just comprehensive knowledge of the Scriptures will operate as a death blow to rationalized Christianity, the mixed up creed of the moderate party? Yes, a renunciation of this usually accompanies edifying and enlightened views of the Christian dispensation.

To speak of personal experience on this subject, or of any change of opinion I myself have undergone, or of the causes which led to it, may savour too much of vain glory. But it is doing no more than justice to the sacred cause to state, that the more I inquired into the scheme of grace, as a whole, or in parts, I became the more attached to that pure evangelical doctrine which is taught by a respectable portion of our church, But the fact does not rest upon a solitary point of evidence. No. From a long and close intimacy with many of my brethren, I have been enabled to

VOL. XXII. NO. II.

mark and to trace the changes of religious sentiments and opinions, and I have uniformly perceived that, as an intimate acquaintance with the Scriptures prevailed, the tendency to a sound faith became manifest; that a right knowledge of the subject, and proper views of it were generally united; in a word, that the sound divine was the person who understood the subject best, and who bestowed upon it the greatest share of attention. The result of my observation rests upon a wide basis, and is authenticated by the general tenor, as well as by the peculiar doctrines of our faith.

Whether it be owing to a more prevailing spirit of inquiry, or chiefly to a more remote cause, operating powerfully through the medium of human instruments whom God hath raised up in his church, the tendency to evangelical principles is certainly gaining ground, both among the ministers and the people, and affording a happy presage of that pure gospel era, when the professed followers of Christ shall live together as one body and as one Spirit-in the unity of the faith, and in the bond of peace.

But in addition to the real points of discrimination, which are of a religious nature, there is also an imaginary or fictitious one, of a political character, and of a paramount influence. That is to say, all those who do not act and vote with the moderate party, are considered as men of suspected principles, and as disaffected both to church and state. Had it been insinuated, or even asserted, that the evangelical clergy were enemies to tyranny and oppression, and to despotism in every shape, whether in the hands of one or of the few; of Dr. — alone, or in conjunction with Principals, and other learned dignitaries, the charge might have been somewhat true; and the truth of it could be account<<

N

ed for in the mild and benevolent spirit of the Gospel, to which they are attached, and in that common participation of constitutional rights and privileges to which every member of our church has an equal title. This is just such a consistency and reasonableness of character as we would expect from well principled honest men.

But the charge is of a deeper and more aggravated nature. It is a charge of disloyalty and disaffection; an accusation equally revolting and false. How can ministers of the Gospel pretend to be the teachers of Christian love and charity, when they are so industriously loading their fellow-labourers with a reproach which they know to be unfounded, and which, if believed, would ruin their usefulness and respectability? This is no doubt their object; and there are simple wellmeaning ministers, especially in the more distant provinces, with some of whom I am acquainted, who have sucked in moderation as the true milk of the word, that consider radicalism and evangelism as terms of similar import. Such illiberality, or rather such credulity, arising from a circumscribed sphere of observa tion, is certainly unbecoming the enlightened character of a teacher of religion.

The chiefs of the moderate in. terest, then, have succeeded in imposing upon, and misleading, a certain class of their own order, and in filling them with delusive uncharitable notions. But among the laity the high in rank and office, the effect has been more availing and powerful. If a question, for instance, of doubtful issue is to be agitated in the General Assembly, or the honour of filling the chair to be contested, then every nerve is strained; and, as a last resort, recourse is had to plots and trea. sons. Suspicions and inuendos fabricated in the seat of church

power, or rather in the focus of church politics, are thence artfully circulated and kept alive, till the landed interest take the alarm, and cling to the moderate side, as they did to religion itself, in the phrenzy of the French Revolution, to prevent church and state from becoming the prey of factious men. What abuse of power! What delusion and weakness! It is almost incredible that the great landholders, characters of the first distinction both as to rank and liberal acquirements, should be so hoodwinked as to become mere partytools in the hands of a few prelatical, designing, churchmen. Of what are they afraid, or of whom? Is it of those Gospel ministers among whom they reside, of whose life and doctrine they approve; yea, who are admitted into their confidence, and into their families, as the messengers and the servants of God? Yes. These are the labourers whom an ambitious and a persecuting junto hold up to their terrified imaginations, as concealing things dark and portentous, under the mask of religion and zeal for the service of Christ. If a delusion so unaccountable, so anomalous and degrading, has ever taken place, it is to be hoped that the detection of its fallacy, and of the unjustifiable means by which it was effected, will defeat any succeeding stratagem of a similar deformity; and that the judges, the rulers, and chief ones of our land, will not allow the private relations of amity and peace to be any more disturbed by intriguers in church politics;, or their confidence to be withdrawn from ministers whom, in their hearts, they pronounce faithful.

The office of a Christian minister is very different from that of a politician. It requires the complete dedication of the whole talents of soul and body to its most sacred and important duties; and the moment he

abandons that high ground, to grovel among intriguers, the enemies of peace and truth, then he forfeits his character, and justly becomes an object of distrust and aversion. We ought not then to flatter our selves that we can be truly respectable, while acting so completely at variance with our profession, or that we can build any lasting fame on so sandy a foundation. Let some well known domineering leaders rest assured, that aristocracies and dictatorships, usurped in our church, will be disowned by those who wish to assert the purity and independency of that ecclesiastical establishment for which our fathers bled, and which, we trust, will be the boast of their children, even for ever.

A NORTH COUntry Minister.

FOR THE CHRISTIAN INSTructor.

On the Abrahamic Covenant, &c.

(Concluded from our last, p. 12.)

THUS we behold a plan graciously formed by the Supreme Being, and gradually developed in successive ages, the ultimate design of which, in this world, is to bless all nations and all families of the earth, with the knowledge of God, and of the way of salvation. The plan consists of a variety of parts, each of which is designed to promote the accomplishment of that which succeeds it, and all of which tend to secure the illumination of mankind in the present world, and their everlasting welfare in that which is to come. Keeping in mind this view of the covenant we have been contemplating, we shall be better able to answer a question which presents itself to our attention. "Why," it may be asked, "was the knowledge of the true God, and of his gracious

intentions with respect to the world, communicated at first to an indivi dual, and afterwards confined, in a great measure, to the inhabitants of one country? Would it not have been more worthy of the Divine justice and goodness to have published among all nations those truths in which all were interested?"

Considering these questions as the cavils of infidelity, which is ever disposed to censure what is contained in Revelation, merely because it is found there, it might be sufficient to meet them with the irrefragable evidence, that the facts were as we have stated them, and with the challenge to prove that there was any injustice in their being so. But it is an instructive, as well as a pleasing employment, to trace the designs of Providence, nor can the faculties of a human being be more nobly exercised than in observing the manifestation of the wisdom of God in all his dispensations to men from the beginning to the end of time. It may be of use, therefore, not only for removing our doubts, but for enlarging our ideas of the divine intelligence, to inquire into the intention of that arrangement, by which one nation, the descendants of one progenitor, were consti tuted the peculiar people of God.

From what we have already stated, it is evident that this constitution is represented in Scripture as part of a plan formed for the benefit of all mankind; and, conse quently, that the intention of Providence in separating the Jews from the world was, that, through their instrumentality, other nations might be more effectually enlightened, and the knowledge of the Saviour promised in the covenant with Abraham more completely diffused and established in the earth. The necessity of such a plan will be manifest when we contemplate the religious history of the world previous to the calling of Abraham. Its value and im portance we can better appreciate