has been harassed, that which has respected the divine acceptance of his services, has disquieted his bosom, the most, and of all the fears that have chilled his heart, the most icy he has felt, have been his fears of God.

1

We are all agreed that every man is bound to make an enquiry into religion; and wherever arguments are fairly adduced, and questions thoroughly explored by the powers of reason, there can be no danger to truth, or to the friends of truth; for in every such investigation, truth must have a decided advantage over falsehood. But questions are not always so explored, nor arguments always so adduced. Ingenuity is not unfrequently employed in obscuring, where it should illumine, and in perplexing, where it should clear; thus, instead of possessing in themselves a perfect indifference for every thing but known and well-attested truth, regardless of the place from whence it comes, or of that to which it seems to be going; the concern of too many, is not the trial, but the support of their opinions, which can be, in many instances, no otherwise provided for, than by keeping the arguments in favour

of them always in view, and by contriving to have those of a less benign aspect, overlooked or forgotten. The first and surest means of acquiring the good we seek, is our love and affection for the object. This quickens our industry, and sharpens our attention. On this account the love of truth hath always been recommended by the masters of wisdom, as the best means of succeeding in the pursuit of it,-hardly any person suspects that he wants this love, yet there are few whom their confidence does not deceive. We mistake the love of our opinions for the love of truth, because we suppose our own opini

ons true.

The great impediment to our advancement in the knowledge and nature of the Christian faith, appears then to be, that of adopting and espousing some favorite hypothesis, whereon to erect the gospel system. For every dispensation of true religion, consisting of means and end, the well adapting these to each other, produces what is called a system.

Now this may be built either on an hy

pothesis which is a supposed truth, or on a fact which is a real one, and many systems of theology have been unwarily framed on the former model, to suit every man's bent of mind, and frame of constitution. The indolent, the active, the enthusiastic, the phlegmatic and the saturnine, have all their correspondent theories, thus, the greatest dispute in the world is, which is the true religion? for as the apostles upon Christ's declaration that one of them should betray him, every one asked, is it I? so does every religion in the world, upon this question, which is the true religion, answer, it is I. The Jew says, his; the Catholic, his; the Protestant, his; one Protestant, his manner of worship and profession is best; another, his; and a third, his.

How is it possible to determine this controversy, concerning which, there have been such numerous altercations, and so many volumes written ?

The decision lies in a narrow compass -it calls but for one steady look, in order to comprehend it completely. To distinguish

true religion from that which is erroneous, we must bear in mind, that a successful search after religious truth, can be only expected, when we erect our system upon facts, acknowledged facts, as they are recorded in sacred scripture. "Tis not for me," says St. Austin, "to appeal to the council of Nice, nor you to that of Rimini, and to dispute under a prejudice.-I am not obliged to the authority of the one, nor you to the authority of the other. It is my opinion we should seek the church, not in our own words, but in the words of him who is truth itself. Let nobody tell me, I say this, or thou sayest that, but let them rather say, see what our Saviour saith-have we not the books of the Lord? and are not both sides agreed upon their authority? we believe them, and we submit to them, therefore, there it is, that we must search for the church, and there debate the cause. Let us set all aside that is alledged, both by the one and the other, bating only what we have urged, from canonical scripture, for I must have the church proved, not by human rea

son, but by the Divine oracles."* De Unitate Eccles. Cap. 2.

* The rule of faith of the reformed episcopal church is the written word of God. That of Romanists, to use their own words, is scripture and tradition. I con

fess that the unwritten word was the first rule of christians; and in the Second Epistle to the Thessalonians, the observance of verbal, no less than of written tradition, is enjoined by St. Paul. But at the time when that Epistle was written, the canon of the New Testament was so far from being completed, that most probably, not one of the four Gospels, most certainly not all of them, had been published. At the same period also, the Acts of the Apostles, the Revelation, the Epistles to the Corinthians, and Romans, and Colossians, and Ephesians, and Hebrews, and Timothy, and Philemon, by St. Paul, the Second Epistle by St. Peter, the Epistle by St. James, and the three Epistles by St. John, were not in existence. The canon of the New Testament, upon the most liberal calculation, could not have contained more than the following Books ;-the Gospel of St. Mathew, the First Epistle of St. Peter, the Epistle to the Galatians, the two Epistles to the Thessalonians, the Epistle to Titus, and the Epistle of Jude.

The doctrines of Christianity were therefore first preached, and a church formed, before the Scriptures ; but the apostles, conscious how easily a thing is forgotten, which is not reduced to writing, how soon what depends upon memory becomes uncertain, and is variously represented according to the passions or prejudices, or interests of the reporters, thought fit, under the immediate