And if satisfaction was so little necessary, that the divine Majesty easily admitted one that bears no proportion at all to the offence, i. e. was wholly equivalent to nothing, when compared with the offence, and so was no payment or satisfaction at all; then he might have forgiven sin without any atonement."* Again: "It cannot here be reasonably objected, that God is not capable of properly receiving any satisfaction for an injury; because he is not capable of receiving any benefit; that a price offered to men satisfies for an injury, because it may truly be a price to them, or a thing beneficial; but that God is not capable of receiving a benefit. For God is as capable of receiving satisfaction as injury. It is true, he cannot properly be profited; so neither can he properly be hurt. But as rebelling against him may be properly looked upon as of the nature of an injury or wrong done to God, and so God is capable of being the object of injuriousness; so he is capable of being the object of that which is the opposite of injuriousness, or the repairing of an injury. If you say, what need is there that God have any care for repairing the honour of his majesty when it can do him no good, and no addition can be made to his happiness by it? You might as well say, what need is there that God care when he is despised and dishonoured, and his authority and glory trampled on; since it does him no hurt ?" The president then goes on to prove, from the natural dictates of conscience, and from the light of reason, that Jehovah demands a reparation of the evil of sin, not merely because it is injurious to the happiness of his creatures, but chiefly from regard due to his own insulted Majesty.

Sincerely and affectionately,
Yours, &c.

*Vol. viii. p. 530, 531. † Vol. viii. p. 532.

VOL. IV. Ch. Adv.

FOR THE CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE.

HOW SHALL WE MAINTAIN BOTH TRUTH AND CHARITY?

Who that possesses the real spirit of the gospel, and has any tolerable acquaintance with the history of the church, but must have wept over the unhappy contentions and divisions which have existed among good men, the true disciples and followers of Christ, from the time of "the sharp contention" between Paul and Barnabas, till the present hour? And is there no way of avoiding or preventing this evil; so reproachful to religion, so hurtful to its progress, and so destructive of the peace and comfort of Christians themselves? Unquestionably there is-We know assuredly that this evil will come to an end; for we have the promise, "Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice, with the voice together shall they sing; for they shall see eye to eye, when the Lord shall bring again Zion." Isaiah, lii. 8.

It may bear a question, whether, when this glorious promise shall be completely fulfilled, it will entirely destroy the distinctions which now exist between the various denominations of Christians; so that they shall all be called by one name, and be perfectly united in their religious sentiments and opinions. That there must be a unanimity, in all opinions which are either essential or highly important, seems indispensable to the fulfilment of the promise. But is it necessary, in order to "seeing eye to eye, and singing with the voice together," that there should be a perfect accordance of opinion in all minor pointsin those things which all may regard as unessential, and of small comparative importance? It is believed not. A part of the perfection of Christian charity, to which men will then so happily approximate, may consist in this very thing that they may, with entire brotherly affection, embrace those who differ 2 X

from them in some points of speculation, or habits of action. For it is not easy to conceive that such a difference as this can be altogether prevented, unless the whole human race should partake of the same education, and be placed in the same condition of life; nay, unless they should receive the same constitutional temperament-to influence, as it always will, in some degree, the system of affections, passions, and original cast of thought. It is difficult to believe that this will ever take place in this world; and assuredly it is not necessary that it should. Imperfect as the feelings of Christian charity and benevolence now are, we notwithstanding witness a few rare but lovely examples, both of ministers of the gospel and private Christians, eminently pious, but of different denominations and of varying opinions on the unessentials of religion-loving each other with great cordiality; holding occasional intercourse with each other in delightful conversation on the great topicks of practical piety; rejoicing in each other's success in all efforts to promote the gospel; aiding those efforts, so far as they conscientiously can and their means will permit; and joyfully anticipating the happy meeting which they mutually expect to have with their Christian brethren, in the mansions of perfect concord, purity and peace. Only suppose mankind in general to have a good portion more than these exemplary Christians possess of their temper and spirit, and that additional approximation of sentiment which, without reaching to perfect union, such a temper and spirit would certainly produce, and we imagine a Millennium, as perfect probably, as any that will ever exist on earth.

The preceding thoughts have arisen in the mind of the writer, in meditating on the question which is expressed in the title of this paper -how shall we maintain both truth

and charity? It is believed that an answer to the question is intimated in the suggestions already offered. Let every individual hold firmly, every thing, essential or unessential, important or unimportant, which he believes to be truth; as no doubt will be done in the Millennial age. But let every man distinguish between what he considers as essentials and nonessentials, or as important and unimportant; and let him, with something like the charity of the glorious period to which Christians look forward, love those from whom he differs in smaller matters, rejoice in their joy, and wish well to their endeavours to promote the Redeemer's kingdom-In this manner he may maintain both truth and charity.

It will readily be perceived that the writer is no friend to that misnamed charity which places all religious opinions on a level, and holds that it is no matter what a man believes. No truly; he is not only no friend to such a charity as this, but he can have no fellowship with any one who is. He believes that there are essential truths and doctrines in religion, and that he who rejects these rejects religion itself; and is entitled to no other charity than that which consists in praying for his conversion from the error of his ways, and in doing all that is practicable to promote it. The writer farther believes, that there are truths and doctrines in the revealed system of Theology which, although they may not be absolutely essential to salvation, yet are highly important-so important that they must not, and by a truly conscientious person, cannot be compromised-They must be retained and provided for, in a system of church fellowship and ecclesiastical order. The writer believes it to be a very weak and superficial remark, however common, that we should be willing to have church communion on earth with all those whom we hope to meet in heaven.

In heaven, we know that harmony of opinion will be complete, and that God will be worshipped and enjoyed without the intervention of ordinances. On earth the opinions, even of very good men, at least in the present age of the world, may be, and often are, so discordant that they cannot walk together in comfortable church fellowship and ecclesiastical order, because they are not agreed-They are not agreed in regard to the nature of some ordinances, the proper recipients of these ordinances, and the best mode of their administration. They are not agreed how a church may best be constituted, organized, officered, and governed. Hence it is found more comfortable, more conducive to peace and edification, for these good men to look out, severally, for those with whom they can harmonize with the greatest cordiality, and form bonds of union with them, and leave others to do the same-It is surely more eligible to do this, than for the whole to be amalgamated into one mass, in which, although every constituent part is somewhat seasoned by Divine grace, there still are so many discordant materials, that close and solid union, with all its beneficial effects, can never take place.

It is undoubtedly true that good men must often "agree to differ," in regard to non-essential and unimportant points in a religious system; and that there may be, and frequently has been, a faulty extreme of narrow mindedness and tenaciousness, relative to things of little or no moment. As to this, no specifick rule can be given. The whole matter must be left to the influence which various degrees of knowledge, of a truly charitable and Christian temper, and of intercourse with different religious sects or denominations, will always have on different minds. Some will find it easy and pleasant to wave, as unimportant, what others cannot

with a good conscience regard in this light. Still, it should be remembered, that no man is at liberty to treat as falsehood, any thing that he believes to be truth. He is to hold all truth as truth-Yet while he does this, and while he allows his brother the equal privilege of doing the same, the two may and ought to look out for the truths in which they are agreed, and if they find that these embrace all that they think essential, and much moreover which, though not essential, they deem important, so that the points which remain are comparatively of very inferior moment, they may and will cordially love each other; and will have with each other that fellowship, or communion of saints, which consists in cherishing the same holy affections, desires, pursuits and expectations.

In pursuing the train of thought which is now before the reader, the writer has had constantly in his eye, the ultimate resolution of the following questions-Ought Christians of different denominations, who regard each other as holding the essentials of religions-and especially if they mutually consider each other as holding almost all that is important-to endeavour to amalgamate with each other, so as to break down all visible distinctions, be called by one name, and act together as one body? Or will they better consult their own peace and edification, and inore promote the cause of God in the world, if, while they retain and carefully cultivate the spirit of brotherly love, and aid and encourage each other in doing good, they maintain their separate standings, and distinctive characters as religious denominations? The writer answers decisively in the negative, to the former of these questions; and in the affirmative to the latter-with a reservation for some distinction or explanation. He explains thus-If the differences between religious denominations

FOR THE CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE.
THE SPIRITUALITY OF GOD.

The importance of speculative opinions upon religious subjects, is much greater than is generally imagined. Men possessed of a revelation from God, are evidently under obligation to believe the truths which that revelation contains. Apart from this consideration however, the nature of some of these truths, and our deep interest in them, render correct opinions concerning them, peculiarly important. The character of God, for instance, is a subject which demands our most careful attention, and concerning which, no error can with propriety be esteemed slight or unimportant. As God is possessed of every possible perfection, surely it is no light matter to entertain any notion which is derogatory to his character. Voluntary ignorance and careless misconceptions upon this subject, are incompatible with that reverence for God which right reason dictates and true religion inspires.

Upon this subject, however, solemn and important as it is, men are peculiarly prone to err. Here the weakness of their minds and the wickedness of their hearts, conspire to lead them astray. The idea of a being of immaculate holiness, and of inflexible justice, to whom we are accountable, is too alarming to the sinner conscious of his guilt, to be cordially received. The natural man does not like to retain God in his knowledge. And besides this unwillingness to conceive aright of God, men labour under a mental debility, with regard to this sublime subject of contemplation. To conceive of a real existence, infinite and immense, possessed of no form and confined to no place, requires a vigorous mental effort an effort from which the human mind is prone to recoil, and to rest upon something

more palpable and commensurate with its powers.

The history of our race, even when placed under circumstances the most favourable to mental elevation, affords lamentable evidence of the truth of these remarks. The world by wisdom has never known God. The light of science, which burned so brightly in ancient Greece and Rome, served only to render more distinctly visible, the moral darkness which brooded over those polished nations. The genius of Homer, which upon most subjects soared with a vigour and glowed with a brilliancy seldom equalled, and perhaps by uninspired man never surpassed, was bewildered amid the mazes of their mythology, and has wrought into immortal verse the most childish and impious fables. The finest productions of the chisel and the pencil, although they were evidently conceived by minds tenderly alive to the sublime and beautiful of nature, and were almost quickened into life by the magic touches of genius, were executed by gross idolaters; and many of them were consecrated to an impious and grovelling superstition. The Bible has ever been the only source of rational religion. The character of the Deity as it is drawn in the holy scriptures, exhibits the sublimest conception that the human mind ever formed. To the Supreme Being the sacred writers have attributed every excellence, natural and moral, and from him they have removed all imperfection, even in its slightest degrees.

Men destitute of this revelation from God, have not only been prone to misrepresent his character or attributes, but have almost universally misapprehended his very nature or essence. The traces of the notion of the spirituality of God, which are discoverable in the various systems of Paganism, are few and faint;