hood without religious instruction, is to imperil all-conscience, character, salvation!

Again, youth is the seed-time, the time for planting the principles that are to influence and give character to future life: why, then, should the most commanding and powerful of these be left out, until the actual business of life leaves neither room nor taste for it?

But as intimated, it is impossible to be neutral. Something must be taught-religion or irreligion-morality or immorality-belief or unbelief-worship or no worship. If we were to be perfectly taciturn upon the subject, our practice would preach and teach for us.

The man of religious feeling exclaims, 'Of these alternatives we cannot hesitate which to choose.' We must teach something. What shall it be?-Sectarism? By no means. We have a Bible. Its history, events, precepts, promises, predictions can be taught without any scholastic theory, any more than if none such had ever existed. This is susceptible of ample demonstration; but this is not the point now. It is decided, Religion is to be taught. The question now is, When?

When arrived at 21? The soil is then sown. Generally at that period the whole ground is pre-occupied-the heart is full of other matters. Why, then, give the world, the flesh, and the devil twentyone years a start of us! This will not bear a moment's argument. We must begin with the first indications of thought. We must plant the fear of God-his greatness, goodness, holiness-his omnipresence, justice, truth, and faithfulness, as well as his mercy and compassion in the untrodden soil of the infant heart, as soon as we can reach it by word or deed-by precept or example. We must believe and practise what Solomon has taught "The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom""To depart from evil is understanding”—and "Train up a child in the way he should go”!!

But our theories begin to impinge us here. Shall we teach our infants to pray? Shall we command or forbid them? Neither, perhaps, is fitting or consistent. We should neither make hypocrites nor formalists of them; but we should deeply imbue their minds with the majesty, glory, and excellency of God, and teach them how he may be worshipped, praised, invoked; and in their presence, and with themselves, alone, pray to God for them; and most familiarly present them by name before the Lord. But if, as will sometimes happen, their feelings should prompt them to pray, what then? Repress them not. If thy son desire to thank God, or to ask a favor in the name of his Son, forbid him not; nay, rather encourage him. Remember it is written, "Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings thou hast perfected

praise!" The sweetest hosannas that ever echoed in the streets of Jerusalem were lisped from the lips of children, and accepted by the Lord in person! How sweetly did their little tongues warble "Hosannah to the Son of David! Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord!"

But some theorist will say, 'You take the work of conversion into your own hands, and think to educate your children in religion as in science.' It is enough to say to such neglectors of their duty, 'Parents, bring up your children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.' And if any one can bring them up in the correction and instruction of the Lord without deeply imbuing their minds with these views and sentiments, he must have some other book to guide him than the Book which contains our religion. The Lord has not commanded impossibilities. We may do this thing; we may cause our children to know the holy scriptures from their earliest years; and thus the unfeigned faith of the parents may, by the prayers and the favor of God, be transmitted to their children's children.

Much depends upon the manner of this infant teaching, as well as upon the matter. No fables, speculations, theories, nor probabilities ought to be named to them. Facts, events, precepts, promises, threatenings ought to be stated with earnestuess, confidence, and authority, as though there was no doubt of them. Very much depends on this. Dr. Paley has made full as many sceptics, perhaps, as Christians, by his use of the words probable, moral certainty, and an unbecoming diffidence and modesty. This is not the spirit, manner, or custom of certainty, of assurance, of confidence in any great matter. Teach your son nothing in religion or morality, of which you have not the fullest assurance; and then teach it as one that has the authority of truth. I know of nothing more essential to successfully communicating the first principles of religion, than this manner.

Upon the whole, this good and great work is scandalously neglected and misunderstood; and the consequence is, no nation ever hastened to destruction with more rapid strides than ours. It is, with me, as evident as truth of holy writ, that when parents neglect their duty, or when family discipline is neglected, there is nothing in any other institution on earth fully to compensate it. The training of children rationally and religiously in the fear of the Lord, so far as my personal knowledge and information extend, is more neglected in the United States than in any Protestant community on earth. We Christians must reform-greatly reform. We must bring our infants-our little ehildren to the Lord, remembering that he said, "Suffer little children to come to me." He will still bless them. Let us dedicate them to TOL. IV-N F. 6*

the Lord, and bring them up for him. He has long since asked the first born-the first fruits of every thing; but he now under Christ asks for all our children. But I must leave something for another number.

A. C.

PARTYISM.

THERE is no evil of the present day more to be deprecated, and to be avoided, than that of partyism in the Christian kingdom; and to such an extent has it obtained in these latter days, that Christianity, in matter and form, has almost been exiled from the world; and although millions are to be found who are called Christians, as distinct from Jews and Pagans, yet scarcely a vestige of original Christianity can now be found exhibited on earth. The diligent student of the word of God in vain attempts to find in the New Testament the sectarian parties which now constitute all (I was about to say) of the church of Christ on earth. He sees among us separate and distinct organizations, voluntary associations, party names, different creeds, arrayed in hostile attitude against each other; and while in the spirit of pride and self-sufficiency each believes that his own party is in the truth, he denounces all the others as being in error. Thus mutually hating and being hated is the order of the day, and the necessary result of the present divided state of Christianity in the world.

In the New Testament we see a most attractive object presented before us in the church of Christ united and compacted in every part, like a well-formed, full-grown, healthy human body. The spirit of union and of brotherly kindness are among the most striking features; and nothing awakens so much concern and meets with so prompt a reprobation as the idea of schism or division in this divine institution. In all the Epistles this subject is adverted to, and exhortations of the most solemn and impressive kind are laid before the brethren. It must be obvious that the occasions for divisions in the primitive church were greater and of a more serious character than those which exist in the present day. We venture to affirm that no sectarian institution now on earth could give the one-tithe part the reason for separation from the body of Christ, as could the Jewish converts in the original churches, for separation from the Gentile Christians, or the reverse; and yet with what jealousy did the Apostles guard this point, and how sedulously did they labor to preserve the unity of the spirit by the bond of peace. In the apostolic age no separation was made on this account; and, indeed, none obtained until the times of Adrian, when the Nazarenes seceded from the Christians, very much to their own prejudice, and against the exhortations of their brethren, who greatly disapproved of their conduct in this affair. For many ages the Jewish Christians entertained a warm attachment for the obsolete institutions of Moses. They circumcised, observed the Sabbath, and yet no schism was occasioned by it, and no one thought seriously of dividing the church or of denouncing their brethren on these accounts; but now the spirit of intolerance is so high, and the zeal for partyism so rife, that nothing of the kind could be borne: revolt and division would

instantly obtain under such a state of things. Indeed I have been credibly informed that in a city of the West a congregation was divided in twain upon the ground of introducing the practice of giving out two lines of the Psalm instead of the one, which the clerk in the solemn, which is the nasal tone of the conventicle, was wont to do. And if the history of divided Christendom was now faithfully written, it would be found that in most cases the different sects were made pretty much in the same way. We have seen sufficient in cur day among those who have professed the ancient faith, to convince us that the bond of union may easily be broken by those who attach undue importance to matters of opinion or of expediency, or things even lawful; for be it remembered that a thing may be lawful, and yet not expedient; and the most unmanageable and restless spirits that we have met with, are those who denounce as temporizers their brethren who exercise moderation in relation to those subjects which, although lawful, are not absolutely necessary to the existence of Christianity, and which, if imposed upon the brethren, would, without adding any thing to the influence of religion, tend to disturb the peace and comfort of the disciples. It was certainly lawful for the Gentile Christians to protest against the Jewish converts for their adherence to the antiquated ordinances of the Jewish law, and doubtless this was done by a few hot-headed flaming bigots; but the apostolic rule in relation to all such cases, was, "Him that is weak in the faith receive without regard to differences of opinion. Destroy not with thy meat him for whom Christ died. Now walkest thou not charitably." Sectarianism is one of the works of the flesh. Compare i Cor. iii, 3, 4.; Gal. v. 20 ; Rom. xiv. 17.; 1 Cor. xii. 12.; Eph. iv. 3. The Apostle commands us to mark them who cause divisions, contrary to the teaching which he gave, and to avoid them; and has also named in the same line, and strung on the same thread, sects and factions, with uncleanness, sorcery, brawlings, intoxications, revilings, murders, &c.; for they are all of the same family-they are of their father the devil, and the doom of perdition awaits them. We are, then, warned by these considerations against any thing which would have a tendency to separate the body of Christ. We should occasion ourselves to look at such a result as one of the greatest calamities which could befall us, and as under the highest obligations to preserve the unity of the church after the example and upon the same principles as exerted in the apostolic age. On one occasion the British monarch desired to make Arnold known to the high-minded Earl of Balcarras: after the usual ceremony of introduction Arnold extended his hand to the Earl. "What, sir," said the latter to the King, at the same time drawing himself up to his proudest height, "Is this the traitor Arnold?" and refused to reciprothe honor. The hand of Douglas was his own." In the same manner would an Apostle have treated even a colaborer if he had proved recreant to the cause, and have attempted to betray the interest of the Christian kingdom at the shrine of a party, or into the hands of the enemy. All the divisions that can obtain among us will have their origin in difference of opinion in relation to doctrine, form of government, discipline, or order of worship, or in matters of expediency. Let us, then, habituate ourselves to think and to speak in favor of union, as the only ground upon which truth can triumph over

6

error, light can dissipate the darkness, and the church can save the world. Let this be our motto; and whatever we give up, let us not part with the unity of the spirit." We may differ about things lawful and expedient, whether repentance precedes faith, or faith repentance; about standing or kneeling in prayer; about what we shall call our public speakers, preachers, teachers, or evangelists; or whether we shall have any such persons or not, or need them; or about how we shall raise funds in the congregation, or how much may be needed; or about the imposition of hands, if now necessary, and for whom; or about singing, whether grave or gay, the old tunes of our fathers', or those of modern date, whether by note or by memory. We may differ about the name Christian and Disciple, as the great patronymic of the citizens of the kingdom of God. We may express ourselves with freedom upon all of these subjects, and may honestly differ; but "let all our works be done in love;” and no evil, but good will be the result. JAMES CHALLEN.

EMBRYO HERESY.

In the ancient city of Palmyra, as tradition says, there was a large church with but two bishops. They believed in a simple plurality. The senior bishop in some of his proceedings disaffected a few members of the congregation by his great vigilance over their moral behaviour. They complained not to himself, as the Christian law required; but they rehearsed their grivances to the junior bishop. Till that day, no two bishops had cultivated a more perfect amity, or displayed a more cordial unity of aim, interest, and feeling. But in human nature there are I and you; and a class of feelings, sympathies, and desires which rally around these two pronouns; and though often apparently dormant, these special pleaders are easily waked; and when awaked, are the most sleepless and observant lynxes in nature.

The frequent appeals to the junior bishop to interpose for them and defend them, originated between himself and his co-pastor ungracious suspicions that he was becoming the organ and tool of a party, rather than displaying the character of a bishop of the church. A lack of prudence, indeed, seemed to be all that was wanting on the part of the junior in the first instance; but in a short time, imperceptibly even to himself, he became the special pleader of the disaffected, and opposer of his senior and more experienced brother; till at length, in open day, and before the church and the world, they appeared opposing one another. The congregation finally split into two halves. The senior bishop had his church, and the junior had his church. Then all the churches in the district of Palmyra, to the number of more than half a hundred, became involved in the affair-some siding with the senior