the fairest, and can direct to it the observation and preference of those with whom they are connected. They are, beside, a living voice of interpretation themselves. They employ the six days, which by others are devoted to various occupations, in gathering the riches of heavenly wisdom, and on the seventh day they dispense them to their people. In a few hours they impart the results of the application of many days, I may even say of many months; for the general preparation of early years must be taken into the account, as well as the immediate investigation of a particular subject or text. In one discourse they will scatter abroad the essence of whole chapters of erudition; and they are likewise always ready, in their closets, to guide the inquiries and resolve the doubts of those whom they are elected to teach. It is evident therefore, notwithstanding the accumulation of critical learning by the preserving powers of the press, that it could never be even tolerably diffused by books alone among the multitude of nominal Christians; and that a certain number of men should make it their chief occupation to digest what had been already published, to add, if it might be, something to the stock themselves, and to awaken and keep awake the interest, and direct or assist the studies and reflections of their fellow men.

It may probably be again objected, that clergymen disagree as frequently and as widely as books; that they cannot all be in the right, because they flatly contradict each other; and how is it to be determined who are in the wrong, who are misleading their hearers, and who are guiding them well?—It is not contended, that the members of the ministerial body arrive at the

same conclusions in their interpretation of the scriptures, or that all have equal capacity, opportunity, or even disposition, to enlighten the objects of their pastoral care. This would be but an unmeaning and unavailing defiance of facts which are every where about us. But thus much is contended; that certain principles of interpretation have come to be generally acknowledged, and certain eminent biblical critics admitted as good authority, by the well educated and the candid among the ministry of all denominations; that this consent has brought about a much more rational method of reading the scriptures than would otherwise have existed; that arguments are now dropt which were once thought convincing, as that in favour of the trinity, for instance, drawn from the Hebrew form of expression in Genesis, "Let us make man," or from the thrice repeated epithet "Holy," in the prophecy of Isaiah-texts which a good and fair minded scholar of any persuasion would now be ashamed to quote for that purpose; that passages have been discarded as spurious from the holy writings, by all the well informed, which once were led forward into the field of controversy with an air of triumph, as in the case of the celebrated text of the three heavenly witnesses, which if a clergyman should now pronounce from the pulpit as a part of the first epistle of John, he would be pointed out as a man who was either remarkably ingenious in satisfying his mind against evidence, or remarkably indifferent about consulting any evidence at all on the subject. All these things show, that some common laws of scriptural investigation are acquiring dominion, and that the Bible is daily becoming better understood, through the labours of men who make the study of it a

part of their profession, though they may indeed differ in many of their results.-But what would be the consequence, if every man were his own biblical interpreter, without the means of procuring many books, without the time to compare their merits, without the education to direct his judgment, and without an adviser to resort to in his difficulties? There would be as many wild theories as there are verses in the Bible; there would be as many sects as families; there would be as many winds of doctrine as there are points in the heavens for the winds to blow from, and the flame of charity might very possibly be blown out between them. The clergy, after all their disputes, have a regulating influence on the opinions of the people; they fall into many errors, and they often encourage extravagance, delusion, and folly, but not beyond a certain limit; their habits of study and reflection act as a sedative on their own imaginations, and their superior information, as a body, confers on them the power of checking fanaticism, when it begins to assume an alarming attitude. They expose and refute and discountenance error, when the blind ignorance of others has forced on them a view of its startling consequences. I say not that there are no disgraceful instances to the contrary; but I speak of the influence of the clergy as a class.

And such considerations as the above warrant, as I think, the conclusion, that a ministerial order is useful for the preservation and increase of the means of religious knowledge, and a more familiar acquaintance with that volume which we regard as the source of it.

2. It is to be noticed, in the second place, that our religion includes the performance of certain rites. And who is there who may so properly and decently

dedicate your children to the love and service of God, as he who is constantly propounding to you his word? And who may so fitly offer to you the symbols of your Saviour's death, as he who is from time to time putting you in remembrance of the sufferings, which for your sake your master endured, and inciting you to some resemblance of his holy character? Would you omit the observance of these rites altogether? You think too highly of their use and sanctity, to admit the thought of doing so. Would you then leave the observance to chance? Would you connect with it no ideas of order and solemnity? Would you commit it to the hands of the vain and the vulgar? Would you call on your neighbour to conduct it? Would he obey your call? Would you do it yourself? Are you sure you would? What confusion, and neglect, and levity, are implied in these suppositions.

3. Then there are, in the third place, the rest, the devotions, the instructions, of the first day of the week. Who will say that they are not in the highest degree beneficial to the community? Who that examines the effects of that separated day on the manners and morals of the people, would utter one wish that its obligation and its services might be dispensed with that the year might roll on from its first day to its last, in the monotonous hum and clank of business and worldliness, unmarked by the sweetly recurring seasons of quietness, meditation, and prayer? Who would lose the sight of the sober throngs, who, on each returning Sunday, fill the streets of our cities, on their way to their several houses of worship? Who would level our village churches with the ground; that their spires might no longer rise above the trees, and their bells no more

send their music of invitation, over the sleeping hills and the silent farms and into the peaceful cottages? And yet how are you to secure the religious advantages of an appointed day of rest, and how are you to conduct the offices of public worship and instruction, unless you have a particular class of men to preside over and perform them? Will you collect yourselves together, and wait, till any one who pleases shall undertake to teach you, or to address Heaven in your behalf? Are you indeed willing that such important duties should be taken up at random? Will not the pert and the illiterate often conceive themselves eminently qualified to be your conductors, while men of more modesty and sense will hold back and keep their peace? Will there be much regularity, will there be much good taste, will there be much edification or instruction in your exercises? Do you adduce the example of the Quakers? Go into one of their religious assemblies, and then ask yourself how long it would be possible for men of education and discernment to follow their discipline. Will you allege, that one or two of the most capable and irreproachable in a congregation might be selected to lead the services regularly and periodically? You at once constitute, I answer, a clerical order, though necessarily of an inferior sort; for if they do not devote themselves to sacred studies, they cannot perform as they ought all their sacred functions. If they do thus devote themselves, they are to all intents and purposes clergymen. I conclude, therefore, that the proper observance of the christian Sabbath requires a stated ministry.

4. The existence of the ministerial order must be regarded, in the fourth place, as of incalculable ad