and Austria. He made his friendship valuable to France and Holland, that by their means he might exert the greater influence in behalf of religious liberty throughout Europe. Nor was his policy unavailing. He well nigh controlled the court of Versailles during the early part of the reign of Louis. It was the common remark in Paris, that Mazarin, the prime minister of Louis, "had less fear of the devil, than of Oliver Cromwell." The suffering protestants throughout Europe, and even from the confines of Hungary and Transylvania looked with hope toward the English commonwealth. The suffering Vaudois, under the duke of Savoy, long and gratefully remembered his merciful and princely interpositions in their behalf, amid the mouldering ruins of their depopulated villages. Besides appointing a fast, and a general collection throughout England for these confessors, he wrote to the duke of Savoy, to the king of France, to the kings of Sweden and Denmark, and to all the protestant princes in Europe with the view of arresting these fearful persecutions. Nor" was any part of his negociation with foreign princes more acceptable to his country than this."*

* For a full account of this, see "The Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, and the State of Europe, during the early part of the reign of Louis XIV. illustrated in a series of letters between Dr. John Pell, resident ambassador at the Swiss Cantons, Sir Sam uel Morland, Sir William Lockhart, Mr. Secretary Thurloe, and other distinguished men of the time," by Robert Vaughan, D. D. of London University.

Nor do I refer to these declarations with the less reluctance, because I am a presbyterian. It must be confessed that the presbyterians of Britain were as tenacious of civil power as the episcopalians; nor was there any denomination of Christians at that period, except the independents, who, as a religious body, recognized to their full extent, the sacred rights of conscience, and who while in power accorded to others the rights which they advocated for themselves under oppression. This praise is awarded them by distinguished historians, who were themselves ministers and members of the established church.* And it is in no small degree to the influence of this very class of men, that the broad principle of religious liberty holds so prominent a place in the constitution of the American States. Such too are the principles distinctly recognized in the Confession of Faith and Form of Government of the presbyterian church in this land. We have never, in this respect trodden in the steps of transatlantic presbyterianism. While we give an honest preference to our own doctrines and discipline, we claim no infallibility; we invest ourselves with no jus divinum, and cheerfully accede to others the same rights and immunities, both civil and religious, which we claim for ourselves. Our excellent Confession of Faith explicitly declares, "God alone is Lord of the conscience, and

* Grant's History of the English Church Sects; Introduction to Col. Hutchinson's Memoirs; Brodie's British Empire.

hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are in any thing contrary to his word, or beside it, in matters of faith, or worship. So that to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commandments out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience; and the requiring of an implicit faith and an absolute blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience and reason also."

But it will probably be asked, has the church no power-no authority over her own members? Has she no discipline? And may she not admonish, rebuke, censure, and even exclude from her communion those who reject her doctrines, and pay no regard to her worship? She has all this authority, and is bound meekly and firmly to exercise it. She is not a voluntary society, associated upon principles of human invention, but a society divinely instituted and governed by the laws of her redeeming God and King. It is indispensable to her prosperity, that she be governed; that she be governed by laws well defined and understood. She must have rules for admitting, controling, and disciplining her members. And her discipline ought to be accordant with the high and sacred ends of her divine institution. "Ecclesiastical laws," says Mr. Locke," are to be enforced by exhortations, and advice. Where these fail, there remains nothing farther to be done but that such stubborn and obstinate persons, who give no ground to hope for their reformation, should be cast out and separated from the society. This is the last and utmost

force of ecclesiastical authority." No man should complain, because he is made responsible to the church with which he has voluntarily united himself by irrevocable bonds. Nor should he, when he denounces her doctrines and government, think ît a hardship if he is required to acknowledge his offence, or withdraw from her communion. "A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject!" "If thy brother shall tresspass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, tell it unto the church; but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican!" But he must hear, and if he desires it, must be heard. By the laws of Christ, the most erring and most vile of his professed followers is entitled to a full and impartial trial. To pronounce sentence, or even the mildest judicial admonition, without a hearing, is a direct violation of the great principles of religious liberty, the word of God, and the everlasting law of rectitude. A church can suffer no greater calamity than the loss of such a right. But it were a sad perversion of the truth to plead the rights of conscience for the neglect of wholesome discipline. "The free circulation of the blood, and the proper discharge of all the animal functions, are not more necessary to the health of the body, than the discipline which Christ has instituted, to the spiritual health and prosperity of his

body the church." One sickly sheep infects the flock. And a black flock would the church indeed be, if she were embarrassed and frustrated in attempts to reclaim, or exclude those who are unfit for her fellowship. "How can two walk together, except they be agreed?" Men who are "tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine," may not, because they cannot have any fellowship with that truth which is one and immutable. I have given you evidence, by an almost thirty years ministry among you, that I am not insensible that the peace of the church is broken, her strength divided, and her vigor impaired by foolish contentions: but contentions for substantial truth are not foolish. Men may "wrap up their deceptions in scriptural phrases, and even in language which is consecrated by the usage of the Christian Church, and yet be apostles of error."

There are two extremes in the exercise of a faithful discipline which every Christian Church should cautiously avoid. The first is, that it is a matter of indifference what religious principles a man adopts, and what form of worship he prefers. The Bible contains essential principlesprinciples which constitute the very elements and essence of the gospel; which must be believed and loved in order to salvation; and which are so fundamental, that if any one of them should be denied, the denial would, in its legitimate consequences, subvert the entire method of salvation through Jesus Christ. It forms no part of that religious