326 THE ARGUMENT FROM THE PRINCIPLES OF BEAUTY.

than any thing else that could be substituted in his place. And if, in another region, we find the Christian society there, constituted, of their own free choice, according to presbyterian discipline, why force bishops on them, as if denying that every pastor of a parish is a bishop, or as if maintaining that it is indispensable to good order in the church of Christ to believe that a bishop is essentially more than a presbyter. Deny that the presbyterial church is a church, will good men believe that you are an enlightened Christian for holding such an opinion? Destroy it, would the beauty of the universal church be increased by such an act? Would the beauty of the heavens be increased if the Ursa Major were away, and if Orion were to stretch out his already stretched-out arms beyond the pole? If this great constellation of the north have a rough and an illiterate name, whether we call it the Great Bear or the Plough, ought we not to remember that it never sets, and points so directly to the polestar, that it is the very compass of the heavens, and the friend and the confidence of all who seek for guidance.

And yet once more; as in every region of the world we find some Christians associated into independent churches, concentrating each within itself an organization which needs only to be expanded, in order to amplify itself into presbytery or episcopacy, according to the direction given to it, why should we force upon those who are thus spontaneously organizing themselves, conformity to the dominant churches as indispensable to the moral beauty of the whole church? Beautiful as the various constellations are, each in his own region of the heavens, yet that beauty owes much to the single stars that lie between, and form a common medium of union between all. Nay, shall we not admit that, in order that the whole may be complete, and that there may be a society of Christians to represent every sinless phase of Christian liberty, there

must be a Cassiopeia in the church. But let that pass. And let me conclude this argument by simply remarking, that, in harmony with the views which have now been stated, the inspired writers, when they appeal to the beauty of the church, and symbolize it by some beautiful figure, always choose for this purpose some object in which variety is conspicuous, as well as unity. Of such objects, none is more frequently chosen than Jerusalem, as has, indeed, been already illustrated; and whether we look to the Psalms, where the beauty of this city is celebrated in the strains of exalted poetry, or to the Apocalypse, where its plan is laid down in minute description, we may equally discover that, whether it be the Jerusalem that then was, or the New Jerusalem, that filled the mind's eye of the inspired one, he lays much of its beauty in its mountains round about, its bulwarks, its gates, its palaces, its houses, its pavements, its variety in short.

But here, again, our argument returns upon the testimony of Scripture, which has been already considered, and therefore closes for the present.

ON THE ARGUMENT FROM UTILITY.

When we consider that true religion, in its purest and most spiritual expression, consists in the utterances of the heart, the aspirations of the soul to a present God, whom we need not necessarily to go to church in order to meet, but in whom we live and move, and have our being, everywhere and at all times-when we consider that the truest religion, the purest piety, is thus an exercise of the deepest secrecy, we must admit that the church, viewed as an outward institution, exists not so much necessarily and for its own sake, as from expediency and for the sake of those who are members of it-not so much as

a thing essential in the abstract, as that the exercise of religion may be put in harmony with the social nature of man,-in order that the sinful, who are present in the assembly listening to the teaching of the word of God, and yielding to the holy influence, may be converted, and the saints who are present may be confirmed and edified by a fit ministry of the word and a solemn and suitable observance of the worship of God, and while they enjoy communion with God, also enjoy communion with one another. But if such be the main object and idea of a church, it is plain that the form and constitution of that church ought to be suitable to that object. Is an universal uniformity, then, or an unity of spirit in variety of form, most suitable and fit in the present circumstances of the human family? It is not easy to conceive a form and constitution of the church that would be more unfit, in the present day at least, than an universal uniformity over all. Such a state of things would be altogether destructive of a spirit of communion. In fact, it never could be established but by a prevention and suppression of human nature, for to human nature it belongs, in all its present movements, to develope variety. But the very feeling of prevention and restraint is destructive of the spirit of communion. Communion is the heart enlarging itself, and outpouring and uttering truth and love in its own feelings and language. The spirit of communion is a spirit of conscious liberty, of spirituality and choice. It is the enjoyment of the glorious liberty of the sons of God. The idea of restraint is utterly opposed to it. Nay, the very effort to adhere to a certain form, even though it be willingly made, impairs the sweetness, and destroys the feeling of communion. Form is the parent of formality; and, in order to communion, every thing must be left to the heart. But instead of this, where there existed such a rule as an universal unifor

mity, there would be nothing left to the heart at all. How different is the treatment which the soul disposed for communion receives from God Himself, whether when we come to meet Him in private prayer, or in His word! What liberty in the one, what variety in the other! In prayer we can pour out all our hearts' emotions; and in the Bible, whatever our frame when we open the blessed volume, if we but know where to look, we will find what will comfort us if we are cast down,-what will confirm us if we be doubting,-strengthen us if we be weak,—or if we are overpowered, raise us above the world and ourselves. Far from any thing like a system of universal uniformity, there we find a richly varied revelation, now clothed in language and ideas of the most rural simplicity, now in strains of the most exalted poetry, now in the sequences of the severest logic. The Bible, as a whole, is a volume peculiarly well fitted for cherishing the spirit of communion; and, for that spirit, would not the church, as a whole, be far more suitable likewise, if it displayed somewhat of this variety also, than if it were regulated every where by the police of an universal uniformity? Yet let it never be forgotten, that, as with all the variety in the Bible, there is every where an unity of spirit, so must there ever be in the church.

But while an universal uniformity would be thus altogether uncongenial with the spirit of communion, it would be equally unfavourable in the present day for the conversion of sinners and the edification of saints. This may be easily perceived, by considering for a moment how vast the differences are between man and man, and how different, in consequence, must be the moral and religious appliances which shall prove equally influential to those whose moral position is thus so various. Even in a single nation, where a general amount of civilization prevails

Ee

over all, some individuals come into being under predispositions extremely different from others. Others exist under accidental influences, extremely various. And thus, what with variety of natural character, education, rank, in a word, all those differences which constitute and characterize every individual after his own way, such ⚫ various and different modes of thinking and feeling in

reference to religion, such variety of spiritual wants, come into being, that a ministry and mode of worship which would be suited to one could not possibly be equally well suited to another; and, in order to equally influential appliances for the conversion and edification of all, there would need to be a variety corresponding to that which exists in those who are to be the subjects of such appliances. Thus, in some individuals and some nations the intellectual element is far stronger than the taste, than the imagination, than the sensibility; and, to be congenial and profitable to minds of this cast, a church polity and Sabbath service must be comparatively simple and severe. The objects of faith must be presented to the mind as naked as language can leave them; and duty must be enforced by cogent argument, and direct appeal to conscience. In some other individuals and nations again, the pathetic, the imaginative sphere, the sensibility, has the ascendant; and to be equally congenial and profitable with such individuals, or in such a nation, the scheme of church polity and the Sabbath service must be more ornate. The objects of faith must be presented, as much as is lawful, in the form of symbolism, the doctrines illustrated by types and figures, and duty enforced by pathetic appeals.

And, in harmony with this variety in the spiritual wants of His children, we find, in point of fact, that the Head of the Church distributes his spiritual gifts to it. Of this, as has indeed been already shewn, we have a very