“And I answer you,” I returned, “that just to such a Church our Lord belonged.”

“I do not quite understand you.”

“Our Lord belonged to the Jewish Church.”

“But ours is His Church.”

“Yes.  But principles remain the same.  I speak of Him as belonging to a Church.  His conduct would be the same in the same circumstances, whatever Church He belonged to, because He would always do right.  I want, if you will allow me, to show you the principle upon which He acted with regard to church-rates.”

“Certainly.  I beg your pardon for interrupting you.”

“The Pharisees demanded a tribute, which, it is allowed, was for the support of the temple and its worship.  Our Lord did not refuse to acknowledge their authority, notwithstanding the many ways in which they had degraded the religious observances of the Jewish Church.  He acknowledged himself a child of the Church, but said that, as a child, He ought to have been left to contribute as He pleased to the support of its ordinances, and not to be compelled after such a fashion.”

“There I have you,” exclaimed Mr Templeton.  “He said they were wrong to make the tribute, or church-rate, if it really was such, compulsory.”

“I grant it:  it is entirely wrong—­a very unchristian proceeding.  But our Lord did not therefore desert the Church, as you would have me do.  He paid the money, lest He should offend.  And not having it of His own, He had to ask His Father for it; or, what came to the same thing, make a servant of His Father, namely, a fish in the sea of Galilee, bring Him the money.  And there I have you, Mr Templeton.  It is wrong to compel, and wrong to refuse, the payment of a church-rate.  I do not say equally wrong:  it is much worse to compel than to refuse.”

“You are very generous,” returned Mr Templeton.  “May I hope that you will do me the credit to believe that if I saw clearly that they were the same thing, I would not hesitate a moment to follow our Lord’s example.”

“I believe it perfectly.  Therefore, however we may differ, we are in reality at no strife.”

“But is there not this difference, that our Lord was, as you say, a child of the Jewish Church, which was indubitably established by God?  Now, if I cannot conscientiously belong to the so-called English Church, why should I have to pay church-rate or tribute?”

“Shall I tell you the argument the English Church might then use?  The Church might say, ’Then you are a stranger, and no child; therefore, like the kings of the earth, we may take tribute of you.’  So you see it would come to this, that Dissenters alone should be compelled to pay church-rates.”

We both laughed at this pushing of the argument to illegitimate conclusions.  Then I resumed: 

“But the real argument is that not for such faults should we separate from each other; not for such faults, or any faults, so long as it is the repository of the truth, should you separate from the Church.”