bly to their own knowledge of his perfections and his will, by the sanctioning and ratifying power of the civil magistrate, agreeable to Mr. Wylie's system, and the public conscience of Hobbes, then prevalent. If the Saviour was correct, in declaring to the Jews in his own day, (Mat. xxiii. 35) that all the guilt of the righteous blood shed, from that of righteous Abel to the blood of Zacharias, should be visited on that generation, the Rev. Mr. Wylie, and those who think with him, should carefully examine how far they make themselves heirs to the guilt of the blood of the martyrs, shed from the time of Constantine and the council of Nice, to the present day.

'How far, or in how many things those who believe in the divinity of, and atonement made by him who was, by divine direction, called Jesus (viz, thè Saviour from sin) may differ in other things, or even what degree of indistinctness their impressions may be of those very important principles, has employed the wisdom of ages, without success, to define; nor will it ever be defined with precision in this world. God, who knows all our motives of action, and the circumstances by which our actions are influenced, has reserved the power of this discrimination in his own hand, and has restrained men from usurping his authority. The obligation on all men to make the moral law of their nature, the rule of their conduct, can never be dispensed with, unless a change of the divine nature takes place, which, even to contemplate with approbation, is blasphemy. That law, as a condition of life, and the positive institution of the covenant of works having given place to the gospel, the plan and discovery of which, results solely from the free and so

vereign will of God; by the same sovereign will all the conditions of enjoying gospel privileges are prescribed.

The conditions, as prescribed by the forerunners of the blessed Saviour who came to prepare his way are, John iii. 36. "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life, and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life." And by Paul and Silas, to the keeper of the prison, "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." But that believing, viz. faith if it is genuine, worketh by love, Gal. v. 6.-"love is the fulfilling of the law." They are only Christ's "friends, that do what he commands them." John xv. 14. And faith without works is dead, James ii. 17. The Saviour's rule of moral conduct towards our neighbour, is, "whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye the same unto them." Mat. vii. 12. These are all the terms of christian communion, which I find prescribed by the Saviour and his apostles, to the New Testament church. Whosoever does not profess this faith, and endeavour to live agreeable to these rules, are not Christ's disciples, nor entitled to communion in his church; and to such as add to, as take away from them, he, in the conclusion of the New Testament, says, he will add to him the plagues written in that book, and take away his part out of the book of life. With such as reject this faith, as disobey these rules, they are to have no religious fellowship. Further than this, the church is not authorised to go by its glorious head.

Civil governments, appointed by the people in pursuit of their own happiness, are under a moral obligation to protect all men who lead quiet and peaceable lives,

and punish such as do not; they are, in so doing, nursing fathers to the church, which few of them have ever been. Many of the heathen emperors persecuted it, but the imperial union of church and state, has far exceeded them in violence and cruelty, and in keeping the human mind in darkness.

The author, and others who think with him, complain much of our governments for granting liberty of conscience, toleration &c. There is no such thing in our laws. They made no religious establishment, of which toleration, as understood in national political churches, is the spurious brood. Jehovah, as the peculiar king of the Israelitish theocracy, tolerated so far as not to authorize the civil magistrates to punish much greater departures from the purity of the moral law, than any of the United States have. He tolerated polygamy, concubinage and divorces at discretion, the perpetual slavery of aliens and their posterity, and several other deviations from the moral law, which our laws prohibit and punish, Sadducees who de nied the resurrection of the dead and the existence of angels and spirits, were not only tolerated to be in the communion of the church, but to be the priests of it, Such was the wisdom of God; but he gave them the moral law for their rule, as they should account to himself.

If these zealous enemies of that christian forbearance, agreeable to the spirit of the gospel, which they call toleration, would only with the spirit of meekness, without one passion, peruse Rom. 14. throughout, they would perhaps think with me, that most of the regular protestant churches, might and ought still to be in one communion. None of them are perfect, but

most of them, with the holy patriarch Job, "have the root of the matter in them." I have heard much of the importance and necessity of public testimony bearing. The histories and doctrines of the new testament, contain the testimony of Christ's church. To add to it is presumption.

I will conclude this paragraph with a few sentences from the apostle Paul, Rom. xiv. "Who art thou that judgest another man's servant? To his own master he standeth or falleth.But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ. Let us not therefore judge one another any more." If the same spirit which guided the apostle, had continued to guide the church, there never would have been political churches, nor persecution for difference of opinion. This would have passed to the judgment seat of Christ.

In page 40, the author says, "Most, if not all, of the state constitutions, contain positive immorality. Witness their recognition of such rights of conscience, as sanction every blasphemy, which a depraved heart may believe to be true. The recognition of such rights of conscience, is insulting to the Majesty of heaven." In the next page, he particularly denounces the constitution of Pennsylvania, for permitting the people to reserve from the powers of government, " The indefeasible right of worshipping Almighty God, whatever way a man's conscience may dictate; and declares, that this shall, for ever, remain inviolate.

The words whatever way, are not in that instrument; but I admit them. The constitution, in this instance only, reserved what they had no moral power

to take away. The master has not the power of taking the right from his slave of worshipping God agreeable to his own knowledge of his perfections and his will. Worship offered in obedience to the master's knowledge and judgment of the will of God, that is, the master's conscience, would indeed be a mockery; it would be insulting to the all-seeing God, who knows our thoughts before we utter them. If the slave has this right, it must be unalienable. The representatives of Pennsylvania in convention, could have no greater claims on the obedience of their constituents, than masters have over their slaves. They could not oblige them to worship agreeable to their own reason and judgment, on an implicit faith. All acceptable worship is a reasonable service rendered in faith, agreeable to the discoveries of the will of God, as revealed to the worshippers. If he is ignorant, or ill-informed of it, his sin, if information is attainable, but worship rendered agreeable to the judgment of another man, contrary to his own, is a presumptuous sin, nearly approaching to that which has no forgiveness.

The author, indeed, personifies conscience, as if it was an independent agent. He charges it with legitimating what God's law condemns; and acting paramount to the divine law, rendering virtuous and laudable the most damnable errors-the most horrid blasphemies, &c. Page 41.

It is necessary to enquire what this monster is. It is no person it is an exercise of mind of every man possessed of reason. It is not even a faculty of mind. It is the exercise of memory, recollecting what the person has done; and of reason, comparing our conduct with the law; and of the judgment, drawing a