charges you adduce, but are not some of them exaggerated, and have you taken an impartial view of all the facts bearing on the case? If much evil has been associated with the history of the Christian Church, would you overlook the good? You desire to see all men brothers, you long for a happy socialism to succeed the long reign of a woe-creating selfishness; but whenever have such schemes as yours effected its realization? Have not attempts to bring it about resulted in confusion, robbery, and murder? The only fulfilment of your longings is to be found in the history of that church which you condemn. We can tell you of a time when "all that believed were together, and had all things common, and sold their possessions and goods, and parted them to all men, as every man had need. Neither was there any among them that lacked, for as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the Apostles' feet; and distribution was made unto every man according as he had need." While

maintaining social order and the obligation of obeying lawful authority, it was Christianity which first roused men to a general sense of their true freedom, so that the Apostles, poor, illiterate men as they were, dared to stand forth before the rulers of the earth, and vindicate the sacredness of conscience, asserting that there was a domain within the soul of every man, where no princely sceptre must be swayed, a sacred temple where even the foot of Cæsar must not tread. "Whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye; for we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard. We ought to obey God rather than man." Whatever others have done, the early teachers of Christianity, those Apostles whose authority is so much pleaded, assumed no priestly character, were neverlords over God's heritage,' declared themselves the servants of the people for Christ's sake, sought no worldly distinctions, and while claiming the right to live of the gospel,' rather than prejudice religion by receiving

contributions from unwilling disciples, thought it no dishonour to their apostleship to "work with their own hands" and could make such public appeals as this of St. Paul

"I have coveted no man's silver or gold or apparel, yea, ye yourselves know that these hands have ministered to my necessitics." We could remind you that during the first centuries of the Christian era, in which, in spite of the most dreadful persecutions, the Church achieved triumphs unequalled ever since, carrying the gospel into every part of the known world, her resources were derived entirely from the free gifts of her votaries, no person being taxed in her support, no law being needed for her defence, but the grand principle propounded by her Divine Head being fully recognised-" My kingdom is not of this world." Though Christians did in after years persecute one another, it was not so then. Uniformity was not thought essential to unity. Every man was to "be fully persuaded in his own mind" and not to "judge his brother." Such was the affection which

bound together the disciples of the cross, that the heathen in astonishment exclaimed

"See how these Christians love one another." If in after times Christians have become selfish, tyrannical, arrogant and worldly, just in such proportion have they violated their own principles. The Church has never departed from Charity but by departing from Christianity. But though she has lost much of her pristine purity, is she doing nothing in our own day to promote the welfare of the world? We might claim on her behalf a vast influence in mitigating the horrors of war, in humanizing criminal codes, and in promoting a spirit of kindness in society at large. We might remind you of her benevolent enterprises, her schools and hospitals and varied charities, asking you to point to any other system which has ever rivalled or even approached her, in such achievements? We might refer especially to her missionary enterprises, and challenge you to name any philosophical or socialist school which has sent forth its emissaries to the most distant climes as she has done, not

to oppress and plunder, and not for the mere purposes of trade and profit, but to refine and civilize the barbarous tribes of men. Is not this the practical recognition of an universal brotherhood, when stepping across the artificial divisions of empires, not repelled by differences of color and customs, not deterred by the difficulties of strange uncooth, and even unwritten languages, not alarmed by ferocity and not disheartened by years of unsuccessful toil, men have abandoned the enjoyments and refinements of home, and spent their whole life amidst savage races sunk almost to the brutes in ignorance, for the purpose of raising them up to the true dignity of their common manhood, and to the enjoyments of knowledge, civilization, and religion? If slavery has its advocates among persons so impious as at the same time to call themselves christians, are not the truest friends of liberty to be found amongst the warmest friends of that religion on which you look so coldly? Was it not the rousing of the religious spirit in our own country which abolished the infernal