in the Church above?” Can hatred to meeting on earth be in any sense a right preliminary or preparation for desire to meet in Heaven?  Nay, more, should we not carefully guard lest the bitter displays we see of religious hostility may even tend to bring men’s minds towards a disinclination to meet in Heaven, of which the most terrible condition was thus expressed by Southey:—­“Earth could not hold us both, nor can one heaven[194].”

One mark of any particular Church being a portion of Christ’s Church on earth seems to be overlooked by some of our English friends, and that is a mark pointed out by our Lord himself, when he said, “By their FRUITS ye shall know them.”  By this announcement I would understand that besides and beyond a profession of the great articles of the Christian faith, I would, as a further criterion of a Christian church, inquire if there were many of its members who have been distinguished for their Christian piety, Christian learning, and Christian benevolence.  Is all external communion to be interdicted with a church which has produced such men as we might name amongst the children of our Established and other Churches in Scotland?  Look back upon half-a-century, and ask if a similar act with that of the Archbishop of York and Bishop of Winchester would then have created a like feeling.  I can remember well the interest and admiration called forth by the eloquence, the philanthropy, and the moral fervour of Dr. Chalmers, amongst the High Church school of the day too—­the good Archbiship Howley, Bishop Blomfield, Rev. Mr. Norris of Hackney, Mr. Joshua Watson, etc.  I remember, too, the perfect ovation he received in the attendance of Archbishops, Bishops, Clergy, Peers, Princes, etc., of the great London world, at his lectures on Establishments.  We can hardly imagine any one saying then, “This is all very well, but the Church that produced this man is no part of the true Church of Christ, and no English prelate or clergyman could possibly take service in it.”

No one, I believe, who is acquainted with my own views and opinions on religious subjects would say that I look with indifference on those points wherein we differ from the great body of our fellow-countrymen.  I am confident that I should not gain in the estimation of Presbyterians themselves by showing a cold indifference, or a lukewarm attachment, to the principles and practice of my own Church.  They would see that my own convictions in favour of Episcopal government in the Church, and of liturgical services in her worship, were quite compatible with the fullest exercise of candour and forbearance towards the opinions of others—­I mean on questions not essential to salvation.