passions, and to be governed by such influence in estimating both the opinions and the characters of those who dissent from them. The annals of past ages furnish melancholy proof of this fact-such evidence as might well make any considerate man tremble at the thought of assuming such a power or right.

Besides, in civil cases, an interested person is deemed unqualified to act as a judge or a juror. So also is the man who is known to be prejudiced against a person or party whose cause is to be decided. How imminent then must be the danger, when after long controversy and excitement, a minister of one sect ventures to assume the office of a judge in respect to the hearts of those who dissent from his creed! Under such circumstances, what reflecting man would dare, unauthorized, to assume such responsibility? How little confidence is to be placed in the censorious opinions mutually expressed of each other by political partizans, in a time of great excitement? Quite as little, I suspect, is to be placed in the opinions of religious partizans under similar circumstances.

5. There are many causes of error, and many ways to account for it, besides the wickedness of the human heart; and it is a law of love, and the nature of true love, to put the most favorable construction upon a brother's conduct which the circumstances of the case will admit. Every man duly aware of his own liability to err, must feel it to be desirable that others should act on this principle towards

himself. The ambiguity of language is a source of error, by which every man is liable to be led astray, whether he be learned or illiterate, good or bad. Many ambiguous words and phrases are used in the Bible, and in some instances it must be doubtful perhaps to every one in which of two or more senses these words or phrases are used in particular passages. The man who is not aware of his own liability to mistake the intended meaning of an ambiguous word or phrase, and thus to form an erroneous opinion, is as little to be envied for his intelligence as for his candor.

That good men are liable to mistake when ambiguous words are used by inspired teachers, may be evident from what occurred during our Lord's ministry. Several instances are recorded of the mistakes of his apostles, which arose from this source. When he exhorted them to beware of the "leaven of the Pharisees;" they supposed it to be the "leaven of bread" that he meant, till by reasoning with them Christ led them to understand that it was the doctrine of the Pharisees which he had called "leaven." Thousands of similar mistakes result from such a figurative use of common words. The apostles again mistook the meaning of Christ, when he said to them " our friend Lazarus sleepeth." The evening before the crucifixion, Christ said to Judas, "What thou doest, do quickly.” Now no man at the table knew for what purpose Jesus thus addressed the traitor; but as it was known to them that Judas kept the purse of the company, some supposed

that Jesus had directed him to purchase the things that would be needed at the feast, or to give something to the poor. After the resurrection, the apostles again misapprehended the meaning of their Lord in the answer he gave to Peter's question relating to John. Jesus replied to Peter, by another question— "If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? From this ambiguous answer, the opinion was formed and circulated that John should not die.

Now what should we have thought of our Lord's character, had he imputed such mistakes as have been mentioned, to wickedness of heart in his disciples? Yet this would have been as proper as it is for Christians at this day, thus to account for their differences of opinion. For a great part of these differences result from the ambiguity of Scripture language.

6. Children of different sects are differently taught as to the meaning of particular words and phrases, as they occur in the Scriptures; and many of them are perhaps to the end of their lives incapable of correcting the errors thus imbibed in childhood. Though in discoursing with the Jews, Christ imputed their rejection of his testimony to a disobedient heart; yet it is not to be supposed that what he said to them, was applicable to all the Jews of that age who did not become believers in him-nor to any who had not an opportunity to be correctly informed of the evidences of his divine mission. Many of the people of Judea, as well as Jews in foreign lands, had probably no knowledge of Jesus, of his preach

ing, or his miracles, but what they received from his enemies. In regard to persons thus situated, it can hardly be said that light had come into the world; and it cannot be supposed that they were held accountable for privileges bestowed on others, which were denied to them by the course of divine providence. When children are brought up under the influence of pious parents, who happen to entertain erroneous doctrines, they are under a kind of necessity of imbibing erroneous opinions. For a child to be thus situated may be a calamity, but not a crime; and it is rather an evidence of an obedient than a disobedient heart, that he imbibes the erroneous opinions of his parents. For he is required to honor father and mother, and a disposition to obey this command, will naturally incline him to listen to parental instruction and to receive as truth what his parents inculcate as the doctrines of the Gospel. It is as unreasonable as it is cruel for a Protestant to impute it to wickedness of heart that the children of Papists grow up strongly attached to the doctrines of the Catholic church. We may as rationally blame a child for not having been born omniscient, or for possessing the spirit of filial love and reverence, as to blame him for receiving as truth the erroneous opinions which were inculcated on him by his parents, while it was impossible for him to know that they were incorrect. Let any censorious minister ask himself, what would be his views of others, who should impute it to wickedness of heart, that his children hearken to his instructions, and grow up in

the belief of his religious opinions? To whatever denomination a child may belong, the more pious and humble he is, the more likely he is to imbibe the religious opinions of his parents, whether they be correct or erroneous.

7. The doctrines about which Christians have contended, have seldom been strictly the doctrines of the Gospel; they have more commonly been the doctrines of men-of men who assumed the right to say in other words what was meant by the inspired writers, and to set up their explanations of Scripture as unquestionable truth. In some instances, indeed there have been disputes about the genuineness of certain passages, which have found a place in the Bible. In other instances there have been disputes in regard to the correctness of the commonly received translations. But I have not learned that any sect of Christians has been formed on either of these grounds of dispute. The disputes which have divided Christians into sects, have originated in differences of opinion about the meaning of particular passages of Scripture, which were acknowledged to be genuine by each party,-and to be true in the sense intended by the inspired writers. To express the supposed sense of the passages more definitely, has been an object with those who have formed creeds or confessions of faith. Propositions which men have thus formed have been set up as standards of faith, and as tests of Christian character; and to these others must give their assent, or be denied Christian privileges. These propositions of