diffused over the whole frame, and we are filled with enjoyment. The same is supposed to be the effect in the church of Christ. What affects one member affects all. What gives pain to one, gives pain to all. What honors one, honors all; and as an injury done to a nerve in the body, though so small as to be scarcely traceable to an unpracticed eye, may be felt at the remotest extremities, and on the most important functions of life, so it is in the body of Christ. The dishonor done to the obscurest member should be felt by all; the honor done to that member should produce rejoicing. No member of the church should be regarded as so obscure or worthless that his happiness or sorrow should excite no sympathy among his brethren-as you can make no part of the frame so obscure as to be lost on the sympathies of the whole. "Whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honored, all the members rejoice with it."

We have the same idea presented substantially in the following passages. "Rejoice with them that do rejoice, and weep with them that weep. Be of the same mind one toward another."-Rom. xii. 15, 16. "Remember them that are in bonds, as bound with them; and them which suffer adversity, as being yourselves also in the body,"-Heb. xiii. 3. "We then that are strong ought to bear the infirmities of the weak, and not to please ourselves. Let every one of us please his neighbour for his good to edification. For even Christ pleased not himself, but as it is written: "The reproaches of them that reproached thee fell on me."-Rom. xv. 1-3. A church founded on this model would be a community where every member would regard every other one as a brother; where he would rejoice to hear of his welfare, and would sympathize in his griefs; where he would feel pleasure in any honor conferred on any other member, and would be ready to aid him in his sorrows. Without any officious intermeddling with the private concerns of individuals, there would be such an interest felt in the common welfare of the whole, that each one might be certain that he might depend on the sympathy of his brethren at all times, and in all circumstances.

Without attempting further to illustrate this point in general, let me for a moment refer to one aspect of the church to which it is always applicable, and in which the duty referred to may be discharged. I allude to the condition of the youthful members of the church, and the claims which they have on the kindness and sympathy of their older brethren. It now happens, and under the influence of Sabbath School instruction, will happen more and more, that a large proportion of those who become members of the church, enter it at quite an early period of life.

It is unnecessary to speak particularly of their condition then. They are inexperienced, alike in the world, and in religion. They have hearts susceptible to all impressions, good and bad. are surrounded by evil influences from without, and there are

They

many who would rejoice in any false step which they might make, and any dishonour which they might bring on the cause which they have espoused. They have professedly left the world, and they can no longer look to it for its sympathy. They need instruction; they need counsel in perplexity; they need the strengthening influence of the prayers of the church; they need the watchful eye of those who love Zion; they need a kind word in their difficulties; they need an affectionate voice of admonition if they go astray. Perhaps they need aid in their business; and, not only that they may prosper in that business, but that they may honour religion in it, they need the counsel of those who have experience. What their circumstances require is, not only that they may feel free to seek the spiritual advice of their pastor, but that they may seek counsel on all subjects from their Christian brethren. No man knows what service he may be rendering to the cause of religion, by a word of affectionate encouragement and counsel to a young member of the church. He who takes a Christian youth by the hand and saves him from temptation, or encourages him to open his heart freely to him, or helps him in his efforts to get into some useful employment, or assists him in obtaining an education for the ministry, may be doing the most important service to religion which he can ever render, for he does that which shall be telling on the welfare of Zion long after he shall have gone to his rest.

IV. In the fourth place, the church, according to the model in the New Testament, is a community in which its members accommodate themselves and their conduct, so far as can be done with a good conscience, to the views and scruples of their brethren. It is a community in which it is the duty of its members not to give needless offence to their brethren: not to do that, unless conscience requires it, which others regard as wrong, and to be ready to sacrifice what they may regard as harmless indulgence, if it should be the occasion of leading others into sin. This important principle it is my business now to show was laid down by those who had authority to give laws to the church, and was cheerfully practised by themselves. Having shown this, the question will arise, in what circumstances, the application of the principle is demanded now.

We are naturally reminded of the conduct of the Saviour, as stated in a passage already referred to. "For even Christ pleased not himself."-Rom. xv. 3; comp. John vi. 38. It was not his object to gratify himself; nor did he ever do anything which would lead the most ignorant of his followers into sin. He indulged in nothing that could give offence to any who were most anxious to lead lives of deadness to the world, and evinced throughout a readiness to deny himself of any personal gratification which could be indulged in only at the hazard of the souls of men. And so it is said of all Christians: "None of us liveth to himself; and no man dieth to himself."-Rom. xiv. 7.

But was it the idea that, from respect to the opinions and feelings of others, it was proper to give up what would otherwise be regarded as innocent and harmless? Was it ever the idea that the conduct of a member of the church was to be influenced by the views of his brethren, so as to lead him to sacrifice what he would himself regard as harmless and proper? And ought a reference to the feelings, the views, and the weaknesses of our brethren, be allowed to regulate our own conduct in anything that is not a matter of conscience? We have a very striking case, in answer to this question in the conduct of the Apostle Paul. The question arose in the primitive church, whether it was lawful for a Christian to eat the flesh offered in sacrifice to idols. It was urged, on the one hand, that if this were done it would seem to lend a sanction to idolatry, and would lead the feebler members of the church, who were not accustomed to nice discrimination in reasoning, into sin. On the other hand, it was alleged that the eating of flesh that was exposed for sale was not unlawful, and that the purpose for which it was offered could not affect the question whether it was lawful to partake of it. Paul was clearly (1 Cor. viii.) of the latter opinion, and yet the former consideration decided him in regard to his own practice. The eating of meat could not be with him a matter of conscience, and if his doing it were the occasion of leading one into sin, he was willing to forego the indulgence. Hence he so firmly says: "If meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." -1 Cor. viii. 13.

A question of similar character, and perhaps in the same connexion, came up in regard to the use of wine, and the Apostle stated a similar principle, that, whatever might be his own convictions as to the absolute lawfulness of the practice, it could not be right if it were the occasion of leading others to sin. "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak."-Rom. xiv. 21. His own general rule in all such matters, he has elsewhere stated: "I made myself servant unto all that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law as under the law, that I might gain those under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak I became as weak, that I might gain the weak; I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. And this I do for the gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you."-1 Cor. ix. 19-22.

The general principle, as an illustration of what the Christian church is to be, is here plain. It is this: "There are some things which are right or wrong in themselves. They depend on the positive enactments of God, and on the eternal distinctions of things,

and cannot be compromised, modified, or disregarded. There are other things, however, which may be regarded as matters of personal comfort, convenience, or gratification. They are clearly right in themselves, but they may be so connected, or there may be such associations in regard to them, or others may entertain such views of them, that indulgence in them by us will be an injury to others. It may shock or pain them as if we were doing wrong; or, acting on our example, they may be led farther than we would go, and fall into sin; or they may be led by our example to do that which they now regard as sin, and which would be sin to them. In such a case, the course which we are to pursue becomes clear, and it is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor anything where by a brother is offended, or is made weak."

This was the principle on which the Christian church was evidently founded, and on which the Apostle Paul acted. It may be observed here that it is a principle for which there will always be occasion in the church. The particular questions in connexion with which it was stated may not occur, but questions precisely similar are occurring in every age, and under the numerous phases in which society appears. There are certain things which are absolutely right, and always right, and from the obligation to do which no modification of society or custom can absolve us; and there are certain things which are absolutely wrong and always wrong, and which no modification of society can make right. And there are certain things, always quite numerous, where the consciences of some are entirely clear as to their lawfulness, and of others much in doubt, or when the tendency of indulgence would be to lead others into sin. In such cases, what is Christian duty! What would Paul do?

We will take two cases, one of which Paul has himself referred to; the other not.

The one is the use of wine. You regard it as lawful. You think the Scriptures do not condemn its use, and refer to the example of the Saviour in justification of its use. But many of your Christian brethren have strong doubts on the subject; no matter whether well founded or not. What is more to the purpose, perhaps, is, that many of them might not be as safe in the use of it as you would be. They are younger; they are liable to be invited to places where you would not be; and there is a moral certainty that, sustained by your example, they will be led to excessive indulgence, and may bring reproach on the religion which you and they profess to love. In such cases, what would Paul do? Would it be found on his own table; would his conduct be such that it could be construed in favor of that which had led others astray? We hnow what his conduct would be. "It is good not to drink wine, or anything whereby a brother stumbles, or is offended, or is made weak."

The other case you have probably anticipated. It is that of dancing. You think it not wrong, though the arguments on which a Christian justifies it have not yet been submitted to the public. You would refer in this instance to neither the example of the Saviour or his Apostles, nor to any recorded experience of theirs, as to its lawfulness for a Christian. But there are, we will suppose, views which make you think that it is not inconsistent with the proper spirit of a Christian, and the precepts of the New Testament. Meantime there are very different views among your brethren. They have no doubt about it, and they do not hesitate to express their conviction that it is inconsistent with the general spirit of the New Testament, and with the proper example of a Christian. Some of these may be among the "weaker" members of the church, but not all. There are found the great mass of the most devoted and useful ministers of the gospel in all denominations, and many, very many, of the most spiritual and exemplary members of the churches. I may make an appeal to you yourself on this subject just here, which I mean shall convey no invidious idea, and excite no invidious comparison. It is, whether, as far as your own observation has extended, you do not yourselves believe that the most consistent and devoted members of the church-they who have the . most enjoyment in religion-regard it as improper for Christians. If you find a very devoted and eminent Christian, do you, or do you not expect to find him in the ball-room, and do you expect that he will regard this species of amusement as that which is proper for a Christian? But still more to the purpose. This practice which you regard as proper, and in which, for supposition only, we will regard as safe for you, will not be as safe for all. There are the young, the inexperienced, the "weak," in the church. There are those of little education, of ill-balanced minds, of the imperfectly subdued love of the world. There are those who are surrounded with more temptations than you are, and there is a moral certainty that sustained by your example, they will be led into sin. In such circumstances, what would Paul do? Am I wrong in inferring, from the principles which he has laid down, that he would not enter a ball-room "while the world stands ?" If I am wrong, will you tell me exactly where there is a link wanting in the chain of reasoning by which I am conducted to this conclusion?

V. In the fifth place, the church is a community in which it is contemplated that there shall be mutual admonition among the members, if they go astray. I will not now tax your patience by illustrating this point at length, though it is a point which I had designed to make somewhat prominent. Yet it was an elementary idea in the early conception of the Christian church. Look at the fundamental principle laid down by the Saviour: "If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between him and thee alone; if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother."