In the patience, long-suffering, and forbearance with which the great Shepherd and Bishop of souls bore, while on earth, with the slowness of understanding, and the remaining imperfections and prejudices of his followers, we have a still higher model for our imitation. Let every pastor have such examples invariably in his view. In his character ought to be combined the most perfect selfpossession under contradiction and opposition, or whatever is calculated to tease, to inflame, or to discourage, with the most lively sensibility to the eternal interests of the souls of men. In short, the glory of his Divine Master, and the salvation of men, ought to appear objects so important in his estimation, that every personal interest and feeling ought to be completely forgotten, if these grand objects may be but effectually secured, and extensively promoted.

I may add another quality: not self-willed-dogmatical-unaccommodating-tenacious in triflesregardless of the feelings and wishes of others. Much annoyance has often been the result of indulging such a temper. I am here reminded of the beautiful description which the late Robert Hall gave of the character of the Rev. Thomas Robinson of Leicester, to this effect: such was his gentleness and amenity of disposition, "that he made the wheels of business move with the least possible friction."

When we think how evil habits may be formed and strengthened by indulgence in early life, and how much they may be avoided or corrected by at

tention and rigid self-discipline, I would remind our young friends attending our colleges, with the view of studying for the Christian ministry, the importance of cultivating in early life all those mental qualities which are necessary to fit them for the deeply interesting work in which they desire to be engaged.

ers.

One hint more. Some think there cannot properly be a choice of a pastor, unless there are different candidates among whom you are to make the selection. But this seems by no means necessary. Many a good man has chosen an excellent wife, though she was his first and only love, and there were no rivals. When a church can unite in calling one whom they consider qualified for the office, from their knowledge and experience of his character and gifts, they, by so doing, avoid the risk of many evils which often arise from hearing a variety of preachWhere there is such a variety, a party spirit is apt to spring up; one is attached to one, and another to another. Some charge others with using undue means to accomplish their object; and when the election is over, they are not always the most Christian feelings that are excited, either in the successful candidate, or in those who have been disappointed; the one being improperly elated, and the others unsuitably mortified and discouraged. These evils will be obviously avoided where a church can, after satisfactory knowledge of the party, at once agree to invite one whom they consider a proper object of their choice.

APOSTOLIC DISTINCTIONS.

The apostle James speaks of those who believe as a people taken out of the world." If we would return to apostolic language and apostolic ideas, we should consider every Christian as coming under this designation. All are either of the world, or taken out of it; in short, either Christians or Heathens. This seems harsh language, but is it scriptural? There are no other distinctions in the

word of God. "He that is not with me, says Jesus, is against me, and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad." Again, "Whosoever therefore, shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven; and whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven." Such language implies that there is no medium between these two characters. While this is the only distinction now, it will be found the only one at the great future day of decision.

Men often speak of the heathen at home, and, in doing so, they refer to the inhabitants of those abodes of wretchedness, ignorance, and vice, found in certain localities of all our great cities, and think of such exclusively under this designation. But is this correct? When Paul preached at Athens, and addressed the philosophers of that city, they treated him and his doctrine with contempt; but when they did so, he left them as much heathen as be found them. We have then, in the present

day, judging according to the Scripture standard, many distinguished by high mental cultivation, refined manners, amiable disposition, by eminent literary, scientific, and professional attainments in the various departments of human knowledge, with whom Paul's doctrine of Jesus and the resurrection would meet with no better reception than that with which it was treated by his philosophical hearers on the Areopagus. Such as really, in the language of Scripture, belong to the world as the meanest and most profligate of the people. There is one point in which these different classes, amidst all their various shades, are united. The object of the supreme pursuit, desire, and enjoyment, of each is something on this side the grave. Here, then, we have two distinct characters. The one practically believes in immortality-the immortality brought to light by the gospel-the other does not. Hence the one is supremely influenced by things seen and temporal; the other by things unseen and eternal.

INTERCHANGE OF MINISTERIAL SERVICES.

I know I here touch on a somewhat delicate subject, when I recollect the difficult position in which many valuable ministers of Christ are placed. But while I must leave them to judge of the path of duty, by taking into account all the circumstances of that position, I cannot disguise my conviction that things will never be as they ought to be -that we shall never be able to present to the world

the real union that subsists among those who hold the same fundamental principles, till the ministers of different denominations are able, without let or hindrance, to hold the fullest ministerial intercourse. -We may endeavour to explain the reason why we can have no such union. These may satisfy the minds of some, and others may regret they cannot in this matter do the things they would; but the world, without enquiring, look at the fact. There are persons professing to be united by the strongest and most endearing bonds, and yet, except when they meet on a platform, or when they proclaim this union in their usual public services, it is not to be seen. On the other hand, any evil supposed to arise from denominational distinctions (which must perhaps continue while men differ in modes of church government) would be greatly, if not effectually counteracted by such intercommunion as that here proposed.

I will put the case thus: In a meeting of the Evangelical Alliance at Dublin, I find the following observation in good Mr. Bickersteth's speech: "The increase of brotherly love among those who, previously, have been strangers to each other, is very precious to the members of the Alliance. I, for instance, did not know my friend near me, (Dr. Urwick,) till we met to promote this cause. Love to each other and love to our common Saviour, has been thus mutually strengthened and enlarged." This is all good. But in what capacity did he recognise Dr. Urwick? Was it not as a minister of Christ? Why then could he not occupy his pulpit?