laid down no long array of man's duties to God; but commanded him to love God with all his heart, and all his soul, and all his mind; and, instead of a long line of man's duties to his fellow, he is simply enjoined to love his neighbour as himself. "On these two commandments" are made to "hang all the law and the prophets." There is no form of churchgovernment implied in these commands, which clearly import that man's great duty to God and his fellow-man can only be discharged by a personal performance. All that is contained in the writings of the apostles [in the teachings of Christ there is nothing] is so dim and shadowy in outline, we are forced to the conclusion it was not intended to set up authoritatively any form of church government, nor to convey the impression that the subject was of any vital import. If the form adopted by the apostles and thus slightly traced be deemed obligatory, certainly the manner in which it is handed down to us by its authors admonishes that we should

not magnify the importance of that which is so little dwelt upon by those who framed it. It was because Christ appeared in the garb of poverty, and without any of the power or pomp or riches of this world, that the Jews rejected him with such disdain: being wedded to these things, they could not believe in the reality of His mission who condemned and denounced them. This spirit, manifested so strongly by the Jews, is not extinct to this day, but has been equally visible in every age of the Christian era. It was with great difficulty the first converts at Jerusalem could believe the gospel was to be preached to the Gentiles, that they could be brought to give up the practice of circumcision, the observance of days and feasts, and other Jewish forms and regulations, and bring themselves to the simple requirements of a purely spiritual worship. In reality, nothing was left of Jewish forms, for this spirit to feed upon; and to remove every pretext in regard to days,―as, otherwise, there would seem to be a great

propriety in adopting the seventh day of the week as the day of Christian worship,-even that was changed, lest it should come to be regarded rather as a continuance of the Jewish Sabbath than as a day appointed by Christians for rest from labour and for religious services. The necessity of that change is made plain enough by the whole history of Christianity: even now, many enforce the observance of the first day of the week, in the same terms and under the same sanctions as those which are applied in the Old Testament to the seventh day. It would be incredible, if the like were not seen upon all sides, and more or less in every form of Christianity, how this spirit of clogging its pure system with excrescences which in few instances have been of any use, and, in very many, of incalculable injury-this putting new wine into old bottles-has prevailed from the days of the apostles down to this moment. It is a spirit which may be losing some of its strength, but which yet exerts its power with

extraordinary vigour: having its root in some of the worst vices of the human heart, it cannot readily be extirpated. The more numerous these excrescences upon the Christian system, the more numerous are the pretexts for human agencies, and for the exercise of spiritual power. They were piled on for ages by the Romish church. Protestants have not only failed to cast off all these accumulations, but adopt many of their own invention or selection. It is in regard to the adoption or rejection of these, that some of the most violent religious controversies have been carried on, and in regard to which the greatest religious animosity and uncharitableness have been displayed. The Lord's supper, an institution of the simplest possible kind, was the subject of rank abuse in the days of the apostles, and has ever since, in various ways, been the subject of singular perversion. The simple emblem of purification in baptism has been the subject of like abuse; and because a man may simply wash his face or hands or

feet, or may bathe his whole body in the water, in either of which cases the emblem is equally significant, a controversy is waged with heat, not only whether baptism implies washing or bathing, but whether it carries with it regeneration. The ceremony of washing the feet has been observed among Romanists, in a manner which is a perfect mockery of that humility its appointment was intended to promote and signify: among Protestants it is wholly neglected. The fondness for ceremony and outward forms does not reach so low as this act of humility, which is as clearly enjoined as the Lord's supper.

The beautiful and sublime simplicity of the Christian religion is thus continually sacrificed by attempts to improve-to build upon it; its progress is continually impeded by loading its movements with innumerable additions of man's invention. It asks none of these aids or accompaniments. It can live through all these abuses; it can save many of those who are unwittingly guilty of them. It requires no