and the like. The advocates of these novelties rightly plead that they have no law against them, for the standards which would condemn them are not received by that body.

The most important point of difference between the profession of Seceders, and that adopted by the General Assembly of this country, regards the recognition of the covenants. Adherence to these deeds constituted a marked, an essential feature, of the Secession from its very beginning, and the importance attached to them by all the Secession fathers may be seen by a reference to the prominent place given them in all their writings. Now if the Seceders who joined with the Synod of Ulster, which confessedly was not a covenanting church, carried with them their principles, as they professed to have done, how comes it that, in settling the questions for ordination in the united body, they exchanged a question adopted by the Secession Church from the beginning of its history, in which the covenants were spoken of in the most decided terms, for one in which they are not so much as named? And if Secession principles are maintained in the General Assembly, how is that the continued obligation of the covenants has never been publicly asserted by that body, or in any way been formally recognised by them since the year 1840? True, it is replied that ministers and ruling elders are required at ordination to hold it their duty "to maintain and prosecute the reformation work of our covenanted fathers," and as the ends of the covenants are thus to be aimed after, that is all that is needed. But there is a wide difference between the covenants and the things covenanted. Our forefathers might have prosecuted the work of reformation, and it would have been their duty to have prosecuted it, even though they had not entered any covenant, just as a man is bound to pay his debts even though he may not have signed any bond to that effect. There is surely a great distinction between doing a thing from a sense of duty and performing the same thing under the superadded obligation of a vow. And when once we have made the vow, it will not do to get rid of it, by falling back upon our integrity of purpose. What, for example, would a creditor think if the heirs or successors of a debtor, who had signed a bond binding himself and his posterity to pay certain debts, were to come to him and say, We acknowledge the lawfulness of these debts, and we hold it our duty to pay them every farthing, and hence we don't see any further necessity for this bond, and you will greatly oblige us by cancelling or burning it? Or, what would a husband think of the fidelity of the wife, who whilst professing an affection for him and a regard for the welfare of his house, showed a desire to get rid of her marriage vow, on the plea that it was no

longer necessary, since she held it her duty to act the part of a faithful spouse?

The church that disowns the obligation of the covenants, separates herself, in so far, from the high position assumed by the Church of Scotland, the mother of us all, in the days of her purity and prime,-a position which she held tenaciously till the period of the Revolution, when her vigour began to decline, and the symptons of an enfeebled constitution to appear. Many seem to think that holding the Confession of Faith and Catechisms is sufficient to identify any section of Presbyterians with the pure reformed Church of Scotland. But it should be known that she held the covenants as one of her standards equally with the confession, and that she would have been spared many a fiery trial in the days of the persecution if she had only kept to the confession and given up the covenants. In her estimation and experience they were inseparable, and to yield up either was to surrender to the foe. By adherence to the one she proved her orthodoxy, by the other her faithfulness. In the confession she had arranged for her warfare, well chosen materials from the armory of heaven; in the covenants these were brought into active service and levelled with marked precision and effect against the strongholds of the enemy.

From such considerations as these, it is plain that Seceders, in holding by their distinctive principles, differ in some material points from other Presbyterian denominations, not only in Ireland, but throughout the three kingdoms, and therefore are obliged, in maintaining these principles, to occupy a somewhat obscure and isolated position. Is their position justified? What is to be the test or criterion by which we are to determine this important question? Is public opinion to decide? If so, we must be condemned. But public opinion was wrong ere now. Public opinion pronounced Christ an impostor, and sentenced Him to die. Is the opinion of other Churches to be taken as conclusive? No, for if they approve of our position, they must condemn their own. Is the warrantableness of our standing to be tested by the number and station of our members, by visible and immediate successes in our labours. No, for duty is man's, success is God's. If these were to be the standards of examination, the purest churches on earth must be condemned. Weighed in these balances, the ministry of Noah, of Isaiah, and even of Jesus Christ, would be found wanting. The only test by which we will submit to have our position as a church tried, is this,-is it Scriptural? Is it justified by adherence to those principles which we believe to be agreeable to the Word of God? If so, it must be maintained at all hazards. If other churches change their moorings, are we bound to

change too? We hold by the principles and position of the Covenanted Church of Scotland, and we will separate only from those who persist in separating from her. Seceders are often represented as opposed to the union of churches: on the contrary, if true to their principles they are bound to be its warmest friends. Believing that the wisdom which is from above, is first pure, then peaceable, they cannot approve of any union which is effected at the expense of truth. It is a very common notion in these days, that all that is necessary to the union of the churches is, that the different denominations bring together, and in the exercise of mutual confidence and Christian charity, bury out of sight, their differences, and then embrace each other around their common grave. That, no doubt, would be a very congenial task for charity, provided there were no Scriptural principles involved in any of these differences. For, whilst charity may cover a multitude of sins, yet, "she rejoiceth in the truth," and hath no authority to hide even the minimum of that. The question of union, so far as it concerns the various branches of the Presbyterian family, ought to admit of an easy solution. Did not the parent Church of Scotland, the Church of the Second Reformation, settle that question long ago for herself, and for all her members? In prosecution of the Solemn League, she formed the sublime design of bringing the Churches of the three kingdoms into a blessed uniformity in religion. In furtherance of this design she sent Commissioners to the Westminster Assembly, who sat five whole years in seeking to adjust the differences of the various churches of the Reformation, so that they might meet one another upon Gospel ground. The ground or basis then agreed upon, and which the Church of Scotland cordially accepted under the oath of the covenants, and bound herself, and her posterity to adhere to, is preserved in the Westminster Standards. On that basis-the most Scriptural, catholic, and enlightened, that has ever been proposed-Seceders have ever taken their stand, whilst other churches, who are under the same obligations to abide by it, have slipped away from it one by one. Is it fair, therefore, for those who have broken loose from the terms of union agreed upon long ago by the Churches of these lands, and that too upon oath, to turn round, and charge those who are trying to keep faithfully by them, with being the enemies of union? We are bound to unite with all the friends of truth upon the high Scriptural ground referred to, but lower down we cannot consistently go.

If the public position of the Secession Church is somewhat isolated, it is satisfactory to know that it is honourable. If in maintaining our principles we are not honoured with the association of the mighty and noble of the present day, we can claim to be associated with the

nobles of the past, the reformers and martyrs of Scotland. The cause for which martyrs bled and died, is the very cause for which we contend. They died, history tells us, for approving of the various steps of the covenanted reformation, for their adherence to the divine right of Presbytery, for their attachment to all the Westminister Standards; they died for maintaining the continued obligation of the covenants, and for condemning the glaring violations of these engagements with which all ranks and classes were chargeable. "It is plain that had they not held these principles, or had they been less faithful in maintaining them, they would never have writhed under the rack or dyed the scaffolds and fields with their blood."

Lastly, our position is highly advantageous and important in view of the conflict that the Churches have to wage out with the old enemies of Christ's Crown and Covenant in these lands. The position offered in the Covenanted Reformation was that taken by the Church of Scotland in those terrible days of old, when the allied forces of Popery and Prelacy, led on by perfidious monarchs and infamous prelates, and backed with sword, rack, and gibbet, sought to crush her uncompromising spirit, and wrest from her the right and liberty to worship God according to His Word. Firm and resolute on her chosen covenanted ground, she withstood the shock of overwhelming odds, as the sea-girt cliff does the raging billows which dash against it in their fury, and instantly dissolve into foam. And so long as this position was retained the power of Antichrist was kept in check, and just the moment that it was surrendered, that power sought to regain its former ascendancy. And before this system of iniquity is fully and for ever overthrown, we believe the Churches of these lands will be driven to take again to the old defences, and that, as the martyred Guthrie exclaimed on the scaffold, "The covenants, the covenants shall yet be Scotland's reviving."

III. On our third particular-the immediate prospects of the Secession Church in Ireland—we cannot speak decidedly, as we would judge nothing before the time. Considering how she was stripped almost naked, and left half dead, at the union of 1840, considering how few were left to represent her, how unpopular her position and principles have been since, and how feeble the efforts were that she was able to make in the way of extending her borders, it is satisfactory to know that in the face of many difficulties and much opposition, But she has been enabled to make very considerable progress. whether we are likely to hold our own, as regards membership, or to receive accessions in any considerable numbers to our ranks, for some time to come, we are not prepared to say. We know that in many quarters outside, our position and principles are more favourably

regarded than once they were. And we have no doubt they will be more esteemed by the thoughtful and earnest advocates of truth in other denominations, in proportion as the unsatisfactory results of the latitudinarian spirit and tactics that generally prevail, develop themselves. Much of our progress and prosperity will depend, under God, on the attachment of our people to their principles, and on their faithfulness and self-sacrificing zeal in maintaining them. These principles have been kept alive and handed down to us, at the sacrifice of much precious blood and treasure. If we are to prove worthy of them, and be honoured as the means of transmitting them to succeeding generations, we too must make some sacrifice in their behalf. How should the zeal and activity of the apostles of error rebuke our lethargy and lukewarmness in seeking to spread the truth! We have much to discourage us it is true, in holding by our principles, but we have far more to encourage us. Look at that special promise which Christ makes to a Church in somewhat similar circumstances to those in which we are placed, "Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation which shall come upon all the world to try them that dwell upon the earth" (Rev. iii. 10). And then let us look at the certainty of the triumph of our cause one day or other, and thank God and take courage. If our cause is apparently unsuccessful now, it is consolatory to know that it was successful once, and will be again. The banner under which our fathers fought and conquered is in our hands, and though we may not be permitted to cry out, Victory! we may be honoured to hand it down to those who shall be the means of passing it into the hands of those who will be the standard-bearers on that day when the Lord comes to favour Zion. And thus we may become a connecting link between the glorious past, and the still more glorious future. It is a grand thing to be engaged in a cause that is sure to succeed. Truth is eternal and will prevail. Be assured then, that if truth is on her side, though all her present membership should forsake her, our Church must stand-must sooner or later prosper,

For why? the Lord our God is good,

His mercy is for ever sure,
His truth at all times firmly stood,
And shall from age to age endure.

Every hour comes to us charged with duty, and the moment it is past, returns to heaven to register itself how spent. My hours how trifled, sauntered, dozed, sensualized, sinned away!—Adams.

C