which themselves have recognised, and that what in it appears false to their apprehension, is in reality to be set down to the position from which they are accustomed to view it. It may be, that the supposed heresy is not, when duly scrutinized, an embodiment of a wrong object of faith viewed abstractedly, but an awkward or distorted exhibition of what is in itself true. It may be, that even when really, in the main, a delusion, it is one serving to lead the way to some neglected region of thought, or to warn an uninquiring, and perhaps apathetic church, of some swamps of corruption which have been suffered to do their deadly work unheeded. It may be, that it is destined to disclose or to destroy something more noxious than itself, and, like a poison, to counteract and to expel an insidious disease. Whilst holding fast to the essential distinction between truth and error, and cherishing, with anxious care, a sense of individual responsibility in regard to our perception of it, there are many considerations, I think, which might produce upon observing minds the conviction, that the very mistakes of men, in respect of religious truth, have, under the superintendence of the All-wise Mind, an office to fulfil, and that whatever mischief they inflict as a judgment upon carelessness, insubordination, or pride, they act upon the life of the Church beneficially in the main. It It may, therefore, well be matter of doubt, taking a broad

and comprehensive view of things, whether by any line of conduct calculated to check the frankest utterance of opinion, either on our own part, or on the part of others, we are best consulting the ultimate welfare of the Church. That the provi dence of God has turned upon no such principle, the history of the Church abundantly testifies. The Divine arrangements might easily have secured, if such a thing had been consistent with the plan of Supreme Wisdom, the stifling of every religious error in its birth. But it is quite evident that they were never framed with a view to any such result. Real and reputed heresies have been allowed full scope to do whatever it was in them to do. And along with the direct and immediate mischief which they caused, they have been overruled to greater, and more lasting, although indirect, good. To many a Christian community in the days of Paul, the appearance of Judaism in the very bosom of the Church, disturbing her peace, drawing bounds about her freedom, and impeding her usefulness, must have been a grievous mischief, about the permission of which by her divine Master perplexing thoughts would harass simple minds, and many a timid but unexercised believer in the "law of liberty” may have sighed for some display of power to smother the heresy before it should mature its strength and yet to its rise, activity, and partial success, we owe most of those apostolic

writings which have been to all subsequent ages a perennial source of spiritual enlightenment. Or take an illustration from modern times. When, towards the close of the last century, infidelity, gendered and nourished in secret by the corruptions of nominal Christianity, started with terrible energy upon its crusade against revelation, and plied against it wit, argument, and philosophy, poetry and learning, subtle disquisition, deep research, and even civil power, it was but like a tornado in the natural world. Doubtless, the temporary desolation it inflicted was sufficiently mournful, and the prostration before it of many a towering intellect, like the crash of noble trees under the mad whirl of the elements, attested its awful power, and still awakens tearful reflections -but we have reason to rejoice in the more permanent results of its fury. Over and above the successful zeal, industry, and ability, which it evoked in behalf of the truth, and which ransacked all history for solid materials of defence, it is becoming every day more strikingly evident, that it dispersed the poisonous miasma which had previously crept over and settled upon the surface of religious society, and that since the passing away of that tremendous outburst, the atmosphere has been sensibly fresher, the pulse of the Church livelier, and her spirits more buoyant, than for a long time before. No man,

then, it is plain, judging from proximate likelihoods, or even from immediate results, is competent to decide that his own convictions, or those of others, may be beneficially withholden from the Church of Christ. Possible as we should regard it, in any case, that after all our pains the views we hold may be at best but incomplete or distorted images of the truth, we cannot justly conclude that the exhibition of these will not serve some useful purpose. For our own sakes, care, diligence, conscientiousness, self-distrust, prayerfulness, are requisite in every stage of that process which terminates in belief. But in the open avowal of our belief, and the grounds of it, religious society has an interest-and the functions of its spiritual life may be, one way or another, assisted by our free utterance of thought, whether the conclusion at which we have arrived be right or wrong.

Lastly, if what has been already laid down is correct, we may fairly deduce from it this practical conclusion, that however uncertain we may be as to the mode in which the expression of our convictions may ultimately work, the general rule of duty by which we are to be guided is explicit enough. "I believed, therefore have I spokenwe also believe, and therefore speak," shortly but emphatically lays down for us the only known law of obligation in this matter. Where faith leads the way, utterance is bound to follow. No

room is left for prudence to step in between the one and the other, or to "put asunder what God has joined together." This is not, I fear, universally admitted even by Christian men. Who has not heard, in the course of an ordinary lifetime, expressions of regret, tinged, too, occasionally with a show of resentment, at the publication of opinons which, even if true, are thought to be ahead of the sentiments of the age? The "doctrine of reserve" in religious matters is held by not a few besides the followers of Dr. Pusey. Our Lord's example is pleaded in support of it; and Paul's reproof of the Corinthians, "I have fed you with milk, and not with meat; for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able," has been thought to present us with an actual adoption of it. I need scarcely detain the reader to point out to him the utter irrelevancy of both the example and the language to the point under notice-the first exhibiting nothing more than the natural and necessary precedence which the gospel facts had of gospel teaching, and the other proclaiming what every one must feel, that in the clash and tumult of sectarian strife, the higher and more spiritual truths of revelation have small chance of a meet hearing. The real question for decision is, whether any man is justified in withholding his convictions from the Church at large, by an impression that it is not sufficiently

E