philanthropic practice of many among us, we shall find that there is now, as there has long been, a great deal of religious belief and religious effort bearing some other name than that of Christ, yet inspired by him, the honor of which is due to him, and which would gain in power if it were still associated with him.

It is an ancient, a cherished, and by no means an idle or unprofitable conviction of the wisest and best of our race, that the Divine Father of men raised up Jesus of Nazareth as his Messiah and our Redeemer; that this messenger of God lived for a season upon the earth, and introduced into it a religion worthy of all acceptation; that he taught a pure faith, and enjoined a perfect rule of duty for man in all things. The sufficient testimony of experience has confirmed by long trial and by wide application this conviction of the wise and good. And if it was ever important that the name and authority of Christ should be associated with his lessons of truth and duty, it is important now. We should regard with a holy jealousy the honor due to Christ, and should never allow him to be severed in our faith or in our practice from the blessings which the world has received through him alone. All the attempts of sectarianism, of philosophy and free speculation, and of popular contrivances, to assume the work and honors of Christianity while the name of Christ is set aside, should be reminded of their obligation to him, of their dependence upon him, and of the importance of relying upon his sanction and help for success in all that is right. Let his name be blessed and dear to us. Let his authority be sufficient for us. If we cannot add to the truth and holiness of which he was the teacher and the example, let us not take from him the reverence which as our Master and Lord he claims. Let not the world nor any of its instructors, as age by age it testifies to the importance and the value of Christian faith, lose the memory of its origin, or sever its blessings from their Author.

The title which we have placed over these remarks Christianity without Christ is not so much chosen by us, as forced upon our use, in view of certain matters to which we shall now proceed to apply it. Let us premise however a statement which is very appropriate to this discussion. Jesus Christ seems to have anticipated this rejection or for

1846.]

Sects and Dissensions.

79

getfulness of his name and his divine authority, and to have predicted the preference among men of other teachers to himself, even when they taught only the same as he taught, or less or more than his own doctrine. His most intimate disciple writes of him that he spoke these words "I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not; if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive." Veritable history shows that this plain assertion was true even at the moment when it was uttered, for Judea was overrun at that time by impostors who could each of them boast a larger retinue than could the Messiah. A long and full history that has been written since that time, and present experience the living and abundant testimony of our own days, give to the Saviour's words an application more striking even than that which they first bore. His assertion admits of forcible illustration; as its general meaning is, that men are ready to be duped, deceived, or controlled by error, or at least by partial and imperfect truth, while they will not dare the ventures of a faith, which requires humility and reliance in its reception, though it bear sufficient and entire truth in its message. We shall attempt to illustrate this assertion by a reference to the dissensions, the speculations, and even the philanthropic efforts, which prevail throughout Christendom.

The sects and dissensions which prevail in the Christian world have verified the assertion of the Saviour. They make his name and authority secondary to some other title or claim. They propose Christianity without Christ. Most of the Christian sects bear the names or rest upon the sanction of some human leaders. There is a Papal Church, an Athanasian Creed, a Lutheran Confession, a Calvinistic Catechism, a Wesleyan Connexion, a Campbellite Fellowship, a Swedenborgian Communion, and there are disciples of Joe Smith. Not one of these sects would yield up the name of Christ; but if asked individually of their belief, they would be sure to mention some patron's name with his, if not before it. Now it is not possible that this confusion. of titles should exist without obscuring or impairing the authority of Christ, and mingling something with Christianity which is not Christianity. They sever the affection and interest of Christians from the Author and Finisher of our faith. They cause him, like that best altar-stone

which stood in all Athens, inscribed to the Unknown God, to be neglected for the sake of the shining statues of polished marble which all have titles. There is an application of the Saviour's words, strict and literal, to the dissensions and distinctions prevalent among Christians. Jesus coming in the name of the Father does not find that to be definite enough with many of his disciples. His sign must be countersigned before it can have currency. Other individuals come in their own names; they owe whatever good effect and wholesome influence they may work, to that portion of Christian truth which they may make the basis of their teaching. And such as these are received and followed.

A professed Christian may go with the name of his Master for his proffered pass-word and seek communion at the sacramental feast where he is commemorated, and yet be refused such fellowship: he must speak some other name, some human title, or stand aside. Amid the enterprises now undertaken in the facilities of intercourse, it would be no strange thing if piety should unite with curiosity and romance, to induce some believer in Christ to make a complete tour amid the lands and churches where his faith is professed. Such a traveller might rest at intervals every Lord's day, and enter a different place of worship each week, and he would need to mention the names of as many founders of sects, poor, erring fellow-disciples like himself, as there are Sundays in the year, or at least to assent to their peculiar views, to ensure himself admission to the Lord's table. The Lord's table! That has indeed long since lost in many quarters the Saviour's name, and has ceased to speak his free invitation. Custom has made us familiar with the substitution of human names for the Christian name, so that we do not marvel at it, but it is marvellous, and it is far from being harmless in its influence on our common Christian faith. Religious truths and lessons are thus severed from their only proper sanction, their only sufficient authority. An attempt is made to receive Christianity without first receiving Christ, the teacher and pattern of Christianity. Other names are put before his, and sometimes his name is omitted altogether. The blessings which he has assured to the soul and to the world are held as if by some other tenure than that of faith in him, and he is not acknowledged as he should be.

1846.]

Athanasian Creed.

81

Some, however, may affirm that each sect intends, though it may bear the name of a human leader, to attach to Jesus Christ his full honor, and that all its distinguishing tenets are merely subsidiary to this end. Be the intention what it may, such is not the effect of the naming and labeling of contending sects. They confuse and embarrass popular opinions, they make all Christian union impossible, they introduce animosities among disciples, they have made the world to groan with a gathered mass of controversies, and have uttered a lively commentary upon the Saviour's warning to his followers-"Be not ye called masters."

For the great evil attending this substitution of human names for the name of the Master is yet to be mentioned. Jesus came in the name of his Father, other teachers have come in their own names, and all the difference that is found between the teachers and the names with which they have come, is found also in their doctrines. Hence have grown human creeds and formularies. If these contain more than has the sanction of the Master, or less, then they are not allowable: if they contain the same, then there is no need of them. Hence have sprung the rites and ceremonies, and institutions, and discipline which make the very essence of so many sects. We know what importance is attached to them severally in different Communions, and we know too that all the stress which is laid upon them is at the expense of plainer articles of faith and practice. The name of St. Athanasius is attached to a creed, which in a short space manages to conflict with every science and every authorised principle known to man. It is ungrammatical, unmathematical, unreasonable, unphilosophical, unscriptural and unintelligible. That Creed is enjoined upon the faith of millions. It begins with the assertion, that whoever will not believe it shall without doubt "perish everlastingly." Yet it does not contain a single article common to it and the sermon on the Mount, which closes with the Saviour's own promise that whoever hears and obeys it, builds his house upon a rock. Truly the beginning of the one document conflicts with the end of the other. They bear very different names. They cannot both be received together. Yet the reception of that creed, where it is made (as it is made) of vital importance, must confuse many who would receive Christ in the name

of the Father, without being compelled to receive Athanasius with him or before him.

Again, the Swedenborgian tells us that there is a hidden sense beneath the literal sense of Scripture. The search for this must take time and thought and effort needed for learning and obeying the literal sense. The literal sense rests upon the authority of Christ. The hidden sense rests upon the authority of Swedenborg. On which of these two senses do the Swedenborgians lay the chief stress; which has the greater interest for them? If they were satisfied with the literal sense, they would be content to call themselves Christians, and would put no other name before, or beside that of Christ. But if they will adopt also the internal sense, they must also take the name of the man on whose alleged commission to teach it the authority of that internal sense depends. We have indeed been assured by a disciple of the so called New Church, that he was and should have remained an unbeliever, had it not been for the writings of that learned and amiable Swedish baron. We could not but reply to this remark, that there was certainly great propriety in the adoption of the term Swedenborgian by him who made it, for that title in his case could not but stand before the title of Christian.

So indeed might we take the peculiar sentiments of each and every sect which rests on creeds, human titles and formularies and rites, and show how in some thing they receive a human teacher in his own name. This never can be done without perplexing the essentials of Christian faith, or increasing the effort of belief and obedience, or making of secondary importance the authority of him who came in the name of the Father. Though we might abundantly fortify these positions by a large reference to past and present experience, yet we must leave this first form of Christianity without Christ, because of others at least as remarkable. Let us however recognise the manifest obligation of keeping the supreme authority of Christ attached to his own religion; and of distinguishing between what he taught in the name of the Father, and that which others teach in their own names.

We pass to another attempt to appropriate and enjoy the blessings of Christianity under some other name than that of Christ. Let this illustration be drawn from some