cause of truth. We are too much accustomed to look on such a scene as the martyrdom of the holy Stephen, as an event of former days—a trial never likely to recur. Living in peace and comfort, we regard a martyr with a mixture of pity and wonder, as a sort of enthusiast-a man of romantic and excited feelings, too good for the world we live in. I am persuaded that many persons of the present times would have counselled St. Stephen to have spoken more cautiously than he did. He need not, they would say, have expressed himself so warmly; he might have forborne to press his argument, since it served only to excite the anger of his adversaries. But Stephen spoke the words of truth. He testified against sin and error, as God gave him utterance; and in dying the death of a martyr, he received the reward of a saint.

Some again, perhaps, would say, St. Stephen did his duty manfully, as his conscience directed him but surely it was unfortunate for the church. The church lost one of her most useful and valuable members; and, in consequence of Stephen's boldness, suffered grievous persecution. Hence, they would argue that, if not for personal reasons, yet for the church's sake, it is better to keep back unpopular doctrines which may cause offence, and give occasion to the enemies of the church to blaspheme.

But, be assured that such a course is most unworthy and unwise: we may not sacrifice truth for the sake of peace, even when, to worldly view, it may seem expedient. It so happens, however, that in the case of St. Stephen, we can point out great advantages which arose to the church from the boldness of his speech. True that Stephen

perished, and "devout men carried him to his burial, and made great lamentation over him,” and the church itself suffered persecution. But what was the result? The Christians driven from Jerusalem, were scattered throughout the regions round about; and wheresoever they went, they sowed the seeds (under no assumption of the ministerial office') of the Gospel. Perhaps no one circumstance tended more directly to spread the kingdom of God, than that first persecution of the first Christians, which began with the martyrdom of St. Stephen. Thus was the church watered by the blood of the saints; and what, at first sight, seemed likely to have worked mischief, -perhaps, to have destroyed it in its infancy,proved the eventual means of its strength and

increase.

The same dispensation of Providence was strikingly manifested at the time of the Reformation of our own church. When Bishops Ridley and Latimer were led forth to martyrdom," they brought," we read, "a faggot kindled with fire, and laid the same at Dr. Ridley's feet; to whom Latimer spake in this manner: Be of good comfort, and play the man: we shall this day light such a candle, by God's grace, in England, as, I trust, shall never be put out.' Who knoweth whether the like may not again occur? knoweth whether the persecution of the church, if God should send persecution, may not again be destined to light the torch of zeal, and kindle such a spirit of energy as may be the means, under Divine Providence, of greatly advancing the kingdom of Christ amongst us?

Who

Recollect, though the Gospel is a religion of peace, it brings peace only to those by whom it is

A 2

sincerely embraced; and not even to them certainly in this world, except that peace of soul with which the world intermeddleth not. To the ungodly and wilful it brings no peace, but the contrary. The very object of the church upon earth is to make war upon all sin, superstition, ungodliness, and error, without exception. Hence contention and opposition have always been its lot since the time when it first turned the world upside down.' The same spirit which moved the High Priests and Pharisees to enmity against Stephen; the same Spirit which stirred up an uproar amongst the workmen at Ephesus, when their craft was in danger; which called forth the contemptuous cavillings of the Greek philosopher, and the persecution of the Roman politician, and raised up heresies and schisms within the church itself; the same Spirit will, in every age, war against the church, until one or other be subdued.

It is the bounden duty of us all, to temper zeal with moderation; and to maintain the cause of truth with firmness and decision, yet without falling into unchristian enmity, even against those who most sinfully oppose it.

How beautiful is the picture of united firmness and charity presented to us in the fourth chapter of St. John. We see our Lord shaded from the noonday sun, sitting at the well of Jacob, and engaged in friendly converse with a poor Samaritan woman; even condescending to ask a favour of her, and conferring on her a blessing in return. The woman is evidently surprised at his condescension; so different from what she had usually met with from his countrymen. "How is it," said she, "that thou, being a Jew, askest water from me, which am a Samaritan?" And what is

the answer of Jesus? He does not tell her that there was no important difference between their creeds that one person might go to heaven one way, and one another: that Jew and Samaritan were each alike, if they did but act up to their respective creeds. No. He tells her plainly, "Ye worship ye know not what. We know what we worship for salvation is of the Jews!" He tells her without reserve, that she was wrong, in so far as she adopted the Samaritan worship: and then proceeds to convince her of her personal sinfulness, and to offer to her that living water which He alone could furnish.

It is remarkable that, on several occasions in the New Testament, the Samaritans are spoken of in a favourable manner. I do not mean as a body, but as individuals. Thus, when the priest and the Levite passed by the wounded traveller and gave him no relief, it was the good Samaritan who went to him and bound up his wounds, and set him on his own beast, and carried him to a place of safety. And so when the ten lepers were healed, and one only returned to glorify God, it is added, "and he was a Samaritan.”

Now what is the lesson conveyed to us in these passages of Scripture? We are plainly taught that it is our duty to renounce that bitter and personal hostility which was entertained by the Jews of our Saviour's time against those who had separated themselves from the church; and when we see those who dissent from us, in spite of their great disadvantages, 'doing justly, and loving mercy,' we should go and do likewise. We should never suffer any difference of religious belief to prevent us from doing those acts of personal kindness which are due from every man

to his neighbour. If, like the good Samaritan, we saw a poor man lying wounded by the wayside, no one who had a spark of common humanity-no one, we might suppose, in his senses -would think of inquiring what religion he was of; our only thought would be to staunch his wounds and save his life. We should see him only in the light of a brother suffering under misfortune a neighbour who required immediate aid. And such should always be our feeling. If our differing brethren are hungry, we should feed them; if they are thirsty, we should give them drink; if naked, we should clothe them; if sick and afflicted, we should visit them: and under any circumstances we should behave to them with kindness and courtesy. That it is our duty to do this may surely be gathered from the whole tenor of the lovely Gospel.

But we do not gather from the same Gospel that we are to do this because our religious differences are of no importance. They may be of the utmost importance. We do not learn from Scripture that it is our duty to speak lightly of the sin of separation from the church. St. Paul says, "I beseech you, mark them which cause divisions and offences among you contrary to the doctrine which ye have received; and avoid them."

(Rom. xvi. 17.) And again, how solemnly to the Thessalonians, "We command you, in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us."-(2 Thess. iii. 6.)

We may be assured it is no less hopeless to expect peace, than it is sinful to seek it by unworthy means. It is related of the Roman Em