ligation devolves alike upon the writer and the reader. With a deep impression of its importance, its claims are urged on your present attention.

Under the presumption therefore that in these diversities of opinion we are all more or less in error, let us inquire whether it is right that the body of Christ should on account of these diversities be rent into so many different parts, under circumstances creating different interests in each, and strongly tending to alienate their affections, and dissolve that bond of fraternal love, by which they should be united, or whether it is the duty of Christians to endeavor to heal these divisions, and promote unity among all whom they profess to regard as disciples of Christ. The will of our divine Master will become apparent to us whilst we successively consider,

I. The Scriptural injunctions.

II. The example of the apostles and primitive Christians. III. The consequences which these divisions produce.

In the wealthy and corrupt city of Corinth, a christian church nad been planted by Paul, watered by the eloquent Apollos, and blessed by him, from whom alone can come any genuine increase. In this church, it seems, there appeared symptoms of the spirit of sectarianism, that spirit, "which now worketh" not only "among the children of disobedience," who have a name to live whilst they are dead;" but which often mars the enjoyment and tarnishes the graces of the members of Christ's spiritual body. The Corinthian brethren had long been familiar with the several sects of heathen philosophers and religionists and by a natural transition were led to array themselves into parties according to some religious differences which arose among them. Some said "I am of Paul," probably because he first laid the foundation of the Corinthian church; others said "I am of Apollos," perhaps on account of his superior eloquence; and others said "I am of Cephas," either because like Peter, they cherished Jewish predilections, or were converted by him elsewhere. Here then was an attempt to introduce different sects or religious denominations into the church of Christ, ranged under different leaders such as Paul, Apollos, Peter, Luther, Calvin, Zuingli or Wesley; and what are the feelings of the noble-minded Paul? Does he approve of such a course? Let us hear his own words, my brethren, and pray that the spirit of our lacerated

Chap. 3: 10. Acts 18: 11.

"I beseech you,

Master may enable us to understand them. brethren, by the Lord Jesus Christ," (by the hope you cherish through him, by his suffering, by his blood), I beseech you, "that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no schisms (oriouara) or sects among you; but that ye be joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions (epides) among you namely that every one of you saith," either "I am of Paul" (he is my leader), " or I ain of Apollos, or I am of Peter, or I am of Christ. Is Christ," (i. e. the body of Christ) “divided? Was Paul" (or either of those whose names ye assume and whom ye wish to place at the side of Christ as leaders or heads of the church) "crucified for you? Or were ye baptized into the name of Paul (or of Apollos, or of Peter, so that ye were received into their church, and not into the church of Christ?) "I thank God," (since ye thus abuse the privilege of having been baptized)" that I baptized none of you except Crispus" (the ruler of the synagogue)" and Gaius" (whose hospitality I enjoyed whilst at Corinth;) so that ye cannot with any semblance of truth allege, that I baptized you in my own name and thus formed a peculiar sect of Christians.

Such is the powerful and decided testimony given by the inspired apostle Paul, against the spirit of sectarianism. Ought not every man who believes himself a Christian, to feel the force of this rebuke and ask, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do to heal thy wounded body? The apostle does not even introduce into his argument the points of diversity among them, on account of which they were arraying themselves into different parties. The simple facts that they were baptized into Christ, and into Christ alone, i. e. were members of the church in good standing, and that Christ must not be divided, are the only arguments which he deems requisite to prove the impropriety of their divisions and of their assumption of different names. He would have them Christians and nothing but Christians; not Pauline Christians, nor Apolline, nor Cephine, nor Lutheran, nor Calvinistic, nor Wesleyan Christians, not because he had any antipathy to Apollos or Peter; but because any such divisions based on dif ference of opinions or personal attachments naturally tended to rend asunder the body of Christ. Let it be distinctly remembered then, that the argument of Paul for the unity of the Redeemer's visible church is twofold; first, he maintains that this

unity and the impropriety of divisions on party-grounds are evidently presupposed by the fact, that all its members are baptized into the name of Christ alone; and secondly from the fact that all divisions based on difference, are equivalent to dividing the one body of Christ. Nor does he here affix any limitations to these principles, and no uninspired authority is competent to prescribe any others than such as may indubitably flow from other inspired declarations or from the obvious nature of Christianity itself. The apostle Paul therefore distinctly forbids the cutting up of those whom he would acknowledge as Christians at all, into different parties or sects. And this he does even by anticipation, for in all probability, these parties had not yet fully separated from one another, nor renounced ecclesiastical inter-communion. Yet there were in the apostolic age, as well as at present, men who claimed to be Christians, but whom this great, apostle was unwilling to acknowledge as such, and commanded" after the first and second admonition, to reject."*

In the passage, "A man that is a heretic (aigerixov avvo∞Tov) after the first and second admonition reject," the apostle himself limits the application of the principles above urged on the Corinthians, by showing that although he forbade the formation of sects or divisions among Christians on the ground of difference, yet there were occasionally persons in the church, who if incorrigible, deserved to be cast out of it altogether. The crime which in the judgment of Paul merited this punishment, he designates by the term heretical (aigerıxov), which in the English language distinctly refers to one who denies a fundamental doctrine of Christianity. The original word also sometimes seems to have this sense; but more frequently it signifies a schismatic, one who makes a division, or forms a sect. In the former acceptation, the passage inculcates the salutary duty, acknowledged and practised by all the orthodox churches of the land, of excluding from their communion and from membership, those who deny a fundamental doctrine of the gospel, that is a doctrine unitedly believed by all the orthodox churches, and regarded as essential by them. Some denominations would exercise still greater rigor, and exclude from their communion the believers of doctrines held by such sister churches, as they professedly and sincerely regard as churches of Christ. But Paul wholly repudiates those divisions grounded on diversity of

* Titus 3: 10.

sentiment, which would render it possible for a brother Christian, when ejected from one portion of the Saviour's church to find admission to another. At all events, the church in his day was not thus divided, and those whose excommunication he enjoined, must in his judgment have forfeited all claim to the christian profession. The apostles's rule, therefore, as limited by himself, would be that we ought not to separate from our brethren, for any error which we believe them to entertain, and which does not in our most conscientious judgment deprive them of all claim to the character of Christians.

The primitive import of the Greek word aigeois (heresy) is selection, choice. Thus it is used by many ancient Greek writers. The following passage of Aeschines Socrat. (Dial. II. 3,) amounts, if not to a definition, yet to the most appropriate exemplification of this sense of the term : εἰ δέ τίς σοι διδόιη αΐρεσιν τουτοῖν, πότερον ἄν βούλοιο, In this sense we also meet it in the Septuagint; (Lev. 27: 18 and 21,) as equivalent to

free will, voluntarily. It is also employed to designate a peculiar kind of discipline or mode of living, that has been voluntarily assumed. But its more common signification* is schism, division, sect. Thus Dionys. Halic. (Ep. I. ad Ammaeum. c. 7.) says of Aristotle: He was not the leader or head of a school, nor did he form a sect of his own (oute oxolns nyovμeνος, οὔτ ̓ ἰδίαν πεποιηκώς αἵρεσιν.) It is used by classic writers to designate the several philosophic sects, the Stoics, the Epicureans, the Peripatetics, etc. It occurs nine times in the New Testament and in the majority of cases it is translated sect in the common version. In the other cases it might with equal propriety be rendered in the same way,† as indeed it is by many distinguished translators. In its primitive and most current signification, therefore, the word (aïgeois) conveys no reproach. It is used to designate the sect of Pharisees,‡ the sect

* Rosenmüller defines αἵρεσις thus : "Αιρεσεως vox, per se media est. Ubi in malam partem sumitur significat idem quod oziopa; sed restringitur ad ea dissidea quae fiunt ex opinionum diversitate.

2 Pet. 2: 1. 1 Cor. 11: 9.

Acts 15:5: But there rose up certain of the sect (aïgeois) of the Pharisees, who believed saying, that it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. Acts 25: 6: The Jews knew me from the beginning if they would testify, that after the most straitest sect (aipedis) of our religion, I lived a Pharisee.

of Sadducees,* and the sect of the Nazarenes or Christians.† In all the passages where it is rendered sect, in the common version, it signifies a party of persons who have separated themselves from others professedly pursuing the same end, over whom they profess to have some advantages. Here we have sects substantially corresponding to those of our days, sects based not on geographical lines, but on doctrinal diversities like our own, and yet what does Paul say concerning such sects in the church of Christ? Using the very same word by which he designated the sect of the Pharisees, (in an adjective form,) he declares: Him that is a sectarian man (aigɛrıxov äveρшπоv) an originator or supporter of sects in the christian church, after the first and second admonition, reject, exclude from your communion and intercourse, avoid. Here we have the apostle again distinctly condemning the formation of sects in the christian church, using the very identical term by which the Pharisees and Sadducees are designated in the New Testament and the several sects of their philosophers by classic Greeks.

Again, in the third chapter of his first epistle to the Corinthians, Paul denounces such divisions in the christian church as "carnal.' "For, (says he) whereas there is among you envying and strife and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith I am of Paul, and another I am of Apollos, are ye not carnal?" How then can divisions essentially similar, among modern Christians, be pleasing in the sight of God? In his letter to the Galatians, this same apostle classes these heresies or divisions among "the works of the flesh." He beseeches the Romans,|| to "mark, (oxonεiv) attentively to observe, or watch those," who cause divisions and offences, contrary to the doctrine (or rather the instruction or advice) which ye have learned and avoid them." But it would be an endless work to present all the passages, in which the sacred volume inculcates the unity of the church, and deprecates its disruption into sects. Let one other passage terminate this branch of our argument. To the same Corinthians, T

Acts 5: 17: Then the high priest rose up and all they that were with him, which is the sect (aigeois) of the Sadducees.

Acts 24:5, 14. 28: 22.

§ Gal. 5: 20: sects, divisions.

+ v. 3: 4.

The works of the flesh are- -wrath, strife, heresy, or