Twice do we find our Lord Insisting upon this unwelcome truth: each time in terms as impossible to mistake then as to explain away now: each time not to the mixed multitude that thronged Him occasionally, but to His own disciples whom He had chosen to be with Him always: to the twelve, in His instructions to them before sending them out on their first mission: to S. Peter, in the parable which He interpreted at S. Peter's own asking on this occasion: and in which, of course, not S. Peter, but his successors must have been intended, as they, not S. Peter, would be "found so doing" at the time to which He refers here--"Blessed is that servant, whom His Lord, when He cometh shall find so doing. But, and if that servant [3/4] say in his heart, "My Lord delayeth His coming" and shall begin to beat the men-servants and the maidens, and to eat and drink and to be drunken." . . . Nobody that is the least conversant with Church-history can be ignorant that this is precisely the charge which has been made and repeated for the last thousand years, by high and low, friend and foe, clergy and laity, in all parts of the Church, east, west, north, and south, against the Popes. And this it is which our Lord follows up and brings to a climax, by asking at last: "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." As if He had said: "Can you suppose for one moment people will put up with conduct like this: can you think possibly they will submit to be beaten and tyrannized over in this way and not retaliate? Human nature alone would be sure to rebel against such treatment: and when my servants commit crimes like these against Me, do you suppose that I [4/5] won't punish them? Talk of unity when such things are done! it is out of the question, and even if it were not, I would not sanction it: unity shall never co-exist in My kingdom with iniquity. God forbid! Under such circumstances I am not come to give peace, but division--division in the Church militant on earth, which I am about to found." No! He Who felt so constantly called upon to reprove with harshness those who, with a single exception, as He well foreknew, would end a long life spent in His service by laying down those lives for His sake--at one time for "disputing amongst themselves which of them should be the greatest;" at another for asking to "sit this on His right hand and that on His left hand in His Kingdom;" at another for asking whether they should not command fire to come down from heaven and consume the Samaritan village that would not receive Him--He would certainly be the last person to overlook high misdemeanours [5/6] in their degenerate successors, materially tending to frustrate or bring into contempt all those glorious objects for which confessors had toiled and martyrs had bled. "The Lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for Him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder,"--divide him in two--"and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers," says S. Luke; "with the hypocrites," says S. Matthew: "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." If there be "wailing and gnashing of teeth" in any part of the Church militant, it is where honest men are compelled to believe what common sense alone tells them is notoriously untrue; if "hypocrites" abound in any part of the Church militant, it is where men of learning and intelligence have to manufacture arguments as best they may in defence of a system which they know in their inmost souls to be vicious and indefensible; if [6/7] "unbelievers" abound in any part of the Church militant, it is where such a system is upheld as every man of education and reflection must consider degrading to belong to, hopeless to try to improve, hopeless to try to supplant or exchange for a better. This is one side of the picture: now look at the other. "From henceforth," continues our Lord, "there shall be five in one house divided; three against two, and two against three." Mark these words: "one house" and divisions in it: not several houses, one divided against another: but "one house" and five members of it divided amongst themselves: three against two, and two against three--a numerical majority, but a strong minority. Could the state of the Church for the last thousand years have well been predicted in clearer terms? One Church, and always divided unequally; formerly, the Eastern half may have been in a majority of three to two; at present, and for some time [7/8] past, the Eastern half is and has been in a minority of two to three. Had our Lord spoken as a prophet only, there would have been no need of analysing His words any further; and we might confidently say, in quitting them, that never prophet spoke plainer. But our Lord, besides being a Prophet, was the Founder of that "one house;" and besides prophesying its divisions, sanctions them here, as far as words go. "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? if you think so, you will be greatly mistaken; division is what I am come to bestow there, as you will see."

There can be no doubt whatever that this is what our Lord means here: namely, that the divisions which He predicts exist by His appointment; and leave His house one notwithstanding: not but that one hundred times over He would have desired peace for it in preference. "Peace I leave with you, My peace I give unto you; not as the world giveth give I [8/9] unto you? were His words, on a later occasion, to the Twelve themselves. And when He turned away from them later, to pour out His whole soul to His Father, unity was never prayed for more passionately or upon a wider scale, than it was by Him: "Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on Me through their word; that they all may be one . . . that they may be one in Us, that they may be one even as We are one." The unity which is here contemplated is independent alike of time and place, of race and estate: Jew and Gentile, every believer, of every nation, in every age, young and old, rich and poor, priests and people, all welded in one! How welded in one, do you ask? "in Us;" in what guise or fashion? "even as We are one." Passionately earnest as these words are, there is a deep purpose in them: it is by no means unity of every description, or in every shape, that our Lord prays for: and it [9/10] is only what He prays for that He desires. Unity brought about in any way short of His own is not His unity, however much, externally, it may resemble His; nay, possibly, there may be forms of unity resembling His ever so much to which He would infinitely prefer division. Look at the question from the analogy which S. Paul supplies, "This is a great mystery, but I speak of Christ and the Church." What is a great mystery? "They twain shall be one flesh." Who twain? Man and wife. But are they the only twain who can be one flesh? Certainly the only twain who can be one flesh in God's eye. But there is another kind of union which the Apostle calls "one flesh," and with good reason, as far as external characteristics are concerned. "What? Know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith He, shall be one flesh." Both unions are the same so far: children--aye good children--are [10/11] produced by both; unregenerate nature cannot or will not distinguish between them, or set one above the other. But a Christian congregation surely need not be told that union of the one kind is a state ordained by God; union of the other kind a mortal sin; that mutual respect and law cement the one: lust and arbitrary caprice the other; that the one the more faithfully it is adhered to through life conducts to heaven; the other, unless repented of and dissolved, the sooner the better, conducts to hell. Let us not be deceived into thinking that unity of any sort, so long as it is unity, must be good for the Church or for ourselves. There is a form of unity which was desired by Christ: and there is a bastard unity which works for purposes the reverse of His. Of the unity desired by Christ you have heard already: "That they all may be one in Us:" and "that they may be one even as We are one." The conditions of this unity are thus plainly set forth--Firstly, [11/12] "That they may be all one in Us:" not in Peter or Paul or both together, but "in Us"--in God, not in man. If one in Us first, they will be one in all others that they should be afterwards; if one in Peter and Paul first, it may be that they will stop there, for this simple reason that Peter and Paul are men of like passions with themselves. If God is placed first, man is assured of his dues once for all; if man is placed first, God is defrauded of His dues by that one act, and all security for His dues is ever afterwards at an end. Secondly, "That they may be one, even as We are one;" not parting with their personality while forming one body; real unity and real individuality; mutual inter-dependence and independence; social equality without excluding subordination; obedience without servility; law without dictation; order maintained, not by force, but by love. Such was the unity desired by Christ for His Church; He prayed for no [12/13] other; He sanctioned no other; if it was not to be this, He as good as said it should be division. Division, He as good as said, would further His purposes infinitely better than unity which fell short or wide of this. Was there ever such unity realized in the Church as this? Certainly there was once--for one day at least--to the full. On the day of Pentecost, when "all were filled with the Holy Ghost," and converts to the number of three thousand were made, "the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul; neither said any of them that aught of the things which he possessed was his own; but they had all things common." This was unity, such as our Lord desired indeed; one in God, and one as God; unity not excluding plurality, equality not excluding subordination. It was too good to last long; it could exist only so long as there was not so much as a sinful thought, nor a thought of self in any.

They were all "filled with the Holy Ghost." S. Peter and the eleven fresh from His first act of descent by fire; the multitude fresh from His second act of regeneration by water; both the first acts of their kind, and the most signal ever witnessed. I call this Ideal or Divine Unity while it lasted; the very thing for which our Lord prayed; that which should be the model of our aspirations at all times, and the standard by which we should test every species of unity that has since been realized or proposed. Would to God that it had been only destined to have been longer-lived!

At the same time the unity which succeeded it, was modelled on it, and was by no means despicable. This second form of it I call Constitutional Unity, from being as nearly as possible shaped and regulated on the same principles as the unity between man and wife, the foundation of all other social ties. The principles on which this unity was maintained were [14/15] fourfold: reverence for the law of God, reverence for the law of man, mutual respect, and mutual affection: or, if you please, you may combine them in one--reverence for law; for this was their common ingredient and characteristic. As long as these principles obtained or had their due sway in the Church, this unity was assured to it in full force; there may have been high words, outbursts of feelings at times, transient quarrels, widespread heresies: but no chronic divisions in the Church itself. This happy state of things lasted about 800 years, more or less; let us see what fruits it produced. First, it elaborated a form of constitutional government, the best, the freest, the most comprehensive, the least favourable the least exposed to caprice, the most rigorously protected by law ever known, so much so that our own glorious constitution has been most celebrated for resembling it most: abolition of caste, abolition of slavery, eligibility of all without [15/16] distinction to the highest offices, freedom of debate, fair and open trial, amenableness to law of the highest as well as the lowest; these principles on which we pride ourselves with so much cause for having embodied in our laws--these principles were unknown practically till they became stereotyped from long and invariable use in the councils and tribunals of the Primitive Church. You will find them embodied in its canons long before England was a Christian country. What else was not done during this period? If the outward framework of the Church was consolidated, its faith was defined. What we call the Nicene Creed was the work of the first four general councils, which the fifth and sixth councils joined the fourth in ordaining should never afterwards be taken from or added to by so much as a word, but remain as it was then to the end of time, and be the one creed of the Church to the exclusion of all others for that purpose. What we [16/17] call the Apostles' Creed was framed by the Western Churches for the use of candidates for baptism during the same period. Of all Churches Rome contributed the least to these creeds, and she received one after the other in preference to her own. Similarly liturgies budded and blossomed on all sides in rich luxuriance, nobody knows how sown; their growth was as spontaneous as it was free. When they had attained to maturity they were called by the name of some Saint or some Church, that had used them, to classify them. Men and women retired from the world of their own accord to be able to serve God without distraction, some by themselves, others with companions. The rule of life which they adopted was of their own choosing and therefore of endless variety; their devotions found vent in the psalms and hymns of Holy Scripture, which they recited each in the order that pleased them best at set times. All that was [17/18] done, was done for God and in God. This lay at the foundation of their every work, and gave to all works their symmetry. Let me call your attention in conclusion to the missionary spirit that then animated the Church. Christians thirsted in those days to win souls to Christ, and to make all men sharers of the blessings which they enjoyed themselves. They wanted no missionary societies to evoke their ardour, or minister to their support. Their zeal supplied the lack of training, of funds, of organization; nation after nation succumbed to their efforts and embraced the gospel. Such wholesale conversions have never been made since. First, the Roman empire, which comprehended almost all the known world at that date; then, the barbarous tribes by whom the Roman empire was overthrown, and Europe in a manner re-peopled; lastly, various outlying nations that Rome had failed to subdue. There was no mistake about [18/19] these conversions; kings came over at the head of their peoples; the worship of Christ was substituted for the worship of idols; Christian laws for Pagan superstitions; a native clergy was formed to teach and perpetuate the new faith, of which foreign missionaries were not wanted but to sow the seed. In this way the national Churches of Italy, France, Spain, England, and Germany were founded, and as soon as founded fraternised. The Roman empire, that had held the world together previously, was no more, but a new tie had supervened: and oneness in Christ and in God united for a time, more closely than they had ever been since the world began, races as dissimilar as those of the West and East.

But this unity, which had been so blessed and had worked so mightily, was in time displaced by another, which I call the Unity of Domination: a bastard unity, of which pride, passion, and prejudice [19/20] were the promoters, and man, not God, the bond. It first showed itself in a sectarian form: "I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas;" and as long as it reposed on individuals its effects were transitory; but after it had attacked Churches, it became a permanent pest. "I am of Jerusalem, and I of Antioch, and I of Alexandria, and I of Constantinople, and I of Rome," were cries that had made themselves heard again and again fiercely, long before the end of the eighth century; and, as is usual in such cases, the weakest went to the wall. Jerusalem, Antioch, and Alexandria voluntarily put themselves under Constantinople; and the contest lay between Constantinople and Rome. Then the divisions ensued which Christ had foretold, and sanctioned in preference to the unity which was none of His. I have called this the unity of domination; I now call it, to make myself intelligible in describing its effects upon that part of [20/21] the Church which has suffered most from it, and never more than now--Roman Catholic Unity. You see its character reflected in its very name. "I am a Christian:" "Oh! that is nothing at all," it replies; "I am a Churchman." "Are you quite sure of that?" "I am a Catholic." "Prove your assertion:" "I am a Roman Catholic." "Aye, now I understand you; but you would not have been anything without that: it is of no use your belonging to God, unless you belong to man first."

Let us see what has been achieved by this unity, now well-nigh one thousand years old. For just about half that time, we may say without exaggeration, it had but two objects in view: to annihilate its rival, and obtain a temporal crown for itself. All through the Middle Ages it lived and worked for these two objects exclusively; and at last it seemed, in its own eyes at least, to have obtained success in both. By playing the [21/22] hypocrite to an extent and depth never before known, it succeeded in organizing what it profanely called "holy wars," under pretence of delivering the Christians of the Holy Land from their Mahometan invaders, but in reality to subjugate the Christian East to itself; its fell purpose was not revealed till Constantinople was laid in ruins, and the Eastern Churches destroyed, as far as man could see, never to rise again. It attained this result mainly by promising heaven and forgiveness of sins to all who died, not bearing or preaching the Cross, but fighting for it: the more blood they shed the greater reward. By the slaughter of its brethren abroad it secured earthly sovereignty for itself at home, its legal title to which consisted in a mass of forged documents, elaborated with so much craft and effrontery combined, that the world then believed them genuine. Afterwards it argued, upon principles of the purest rationalism, that temporal sovereignty was [22/23] essential to its independence. Upon principles of the purest rationalism, it arrogated dominion over all other temporal sovereigns; claimed immunity from justice for the crimes of the clergy; claimed to be above law itself; claimed the power of dispensing from, and declaring void, every covenant, oath, and engagement between man and man not made to its likings or in its interests. It set aside Church law with as little compunction as State law; trampled canons to which the whole Church was pledged under foot; withdrew clergy from the control of their bishop, emancipated monks from all control but its own; arrayed one religious order against another, to reign the more supreme over all. For five centuries it went on adding to its earthly possessions, its wealth, its privileges; and during that whole time, when it had got half the land of Europe in fee simple, and enrolled half the population of Europe as priests, monks, or nuns, it not only never [23/24] added so much as one nation to the faith of Christ, but never even despatched so much as one mission worthy of the name to the distant heathen: never distributed so much as the dregs of education among the masses living under it at home, who were neither clergy nor meant to be clergy. Its principal aim, to judge from its acts, was to repose upon its laurels, to enjoy the good things it had come into possession of, to secure itself against all harm from without, and make itself thoroughly great and comfortable at home. This certainly was not the age of silver, nor of gold, but of bronze.

My brethren, had this unity been that of the Church, there would have been no Church of Christ at all by this time for at every turn principles and practices then obtained its full sanction that were antagonistic to the plain words of His Gospel. "Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers," says S. Paul, speaking of the civil magistrate: he excepts none. [24/25] "My kingdom is not of this world," said our Lord, pleading before the civil magistrate Himself: "if My kingdom were of this world, then would My servants fight that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is My kingdom not from hence." Test the principles which this unity sanctioned by these words alone! Christ would not have been Christ to have allowed it to go unpunished.

It had barely started into life, therefore, before it was menaced by the Unity of Division. "Five in one house divided: three against two, and two against three." Three against two first: for the Eastern Church must have outnumbered the Western at least by that much when the schism commenced, as I said before. The one house was not divided, but its members were: it was saved from ruin by their divisions--Saved from ruin in more ways than one: first in this, that only part of the Church, and what was then the smaller part, was ever committed [25/26] to principles and practices alien from the Gospel: in only part of the Church has Church-law and Church-order been crushed to powder, obedience to the civil magistrate absolved from, or arbitrary rule substituted for law. The whole Church has been thus mercifully saved from complicity with the feudalism, with the rationalism, with the depraved morals of the Middle Ages. Next in this, that the old landmarks of the Church have been preserved in what was then the major part of the Church; so that, if God permit, they may some day be gone back to by all: in this also, that they have not been departed from so widely, beyond doubt, as they would have been had they been extinguished everywhere. They have acted the part of a living protest all through. Let us see whether anything further has been achieved; and to do this once for all, let us extend our view down to our own times, for Unity of Division has been a fertile principle since it was [26/27] first introduced. Had the Greek Church only preserved the old landmarks, it would have done wonders, after having been for so many centuries crushed and oppressed by the Turks; but this is a trifle to what it has done in Christianising the vast empire of Russia. Rome never achieved a greater conversion than this in her palmiest days; and neither Rome nor any other part of the Church has achieved the conversion of an entire people since the schism commenced: it is the peculiar boast of the Greek Church to have done this; and the Greek Church bids fair to be the largest and most powerful Church of all before long through the Russian. It is going up every day as fast as the Church of Rome is going down. God has blessed division wonderfully, then, in the case of the Greek Church. But look at the Roman Church itself; look at ourselves. I have said, and I repeat it, that for five hundred years--all through the Middle Ages--there [27/28] were no missions to the heathen, worthy of the name, so much as attempted in any part of the Western Church at all: it was the Reformation--the Reformation, beyond dispute, that made both Rome and ourselves missionary Churches once more: the Roman Propaganda is not above two hundred and fifty, nor our Society for Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts above a hundred and fifty years old; and a hundred years before these missionary centres started into life, neither Rome nor we were trying to convert the heathen anywhere. And since division has become more prolific, have not missionary works increased in--aye, and beyond, proportion? Look at the missionaries that are sent out from France, from the United States, from the Baptists, Wesleyans, and Independents here besides ourselves. None of us indeed have as yet won a single whole nation to Christ: it is the distinguishing feature of all our missions, Roman Catholic missions [28/29] included, that we can only now make converts by driblets. It is as though all of us had forfeited the moral power of converting whole nations, while we are thus divided amongst ourselves. Still it is something that we try to convert the heathen at all again. As a Church historian, I say, that no such efforts to convert the heathen, as are making now, are recorded from the days when S. Augustine converted the Anglo-Saxons, and S. Boniface the Germans, down to the days of S. Francis Xavier. Division has put us all upon our mettle, and impelled us to vie with each other in spreading the faith. Look, again, at the work of education that is progressing--Christian education I mean--in all parts, at home and abroad. There never was a time, literally, since Christianity began, when education of high and low, rich and poor, was more comprehensively taken in hand or vigorously carried out. Look at our Church restorations, and at our Church [29/30] action generally. I am confident that in no previous century, nor, as a general rule, during whole periods, were more churches built or restored than there have been in our own; and this not by ourselves alone, but by every body calling itself Christian: never, I am confident, was more money given to relieve the wants of others, spiritual and temporal: never were the morals of the clergy purer everywhere: never was the Bible studied with more care and interest by all, or defended against sceptics and scoffers with more intelligence. All the grosser forms of vice, all the more crying abuses, all the hideous tortures and cruelties, burnings for heresy, for protests against ecclesiastical covetousness and licentiousness, of the Middle Ages have disappeared, never more to be resuscitated, whatever else may have taken their place. Christians, the more divided they are, the more thoroughly alive they seem to be: the more zeal they exhibit in every way for their common [30/31] Master, the more fully and systematically they fulfil the Apostolical injunction of provoking each other unto good works. Unity of Division has served and will serve Christ better than Unity of Domination ever has, or these results would never have been allowed. Unity of Division, I say, because divided as we are, we have not therefore ceased to be one Church: "One Lord, one faith, one baptism," is still our motto; we worship one Lord; every baptism that is administered in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, is a valid baptism all the world over; all the world over Christians profess their faith in the Apostles' or Nicene Creed, or in both. When we have got back Ideal Unity--the unity realized on the day of Pentecost--or Constitutional Unity--the unity realized during the period when the seven first general councils were held---we shall doubtless all communicate with each other at the Love-feast again, and offer ourselves to Christ at His altar as [31/32] one body, in receiving that One Body which He offered and still offers for us all. From the Unity of Domination, which is Roman Catholic unity, no such results can or ought to be looked for--cannot, because they never have attended it; ought not, because all that is just and true forbids. I say publicly, I should esteem it a public crime to advocate unity with Rome on the terms on which it only now, alas! can be had. Despotism that arrogates infallibility under pretence of offering man security for his faith, but in reality to throw a cloak over its own tyrannical acts, and vindicate its unrighteous claims to hold the rest of the Church in bondage--despotism reduced to such shifts as these to support itself, and unabashed at the reckless perversion of the Gospel necessary for supporting them, this is certainly no form of government for Englishmen to live under; it ought to be no form of government for any part of the Church of [32/33] Christ to live under either. I am not unmindful of the place which the Bishop of Rome should have, has had, and I am not altogether without hope may again have some day in the Church of Christ; but that day I fear was adjourned indefinitely when it seemed almost to have dawned. Never were prospects fairer than they were but two years since; never were they more rudely dashed to the ground, to lie there perhaps for centuries. Most of us in England had come to think that the Pope had been a good deal maligned, or that at all events he had grown a much more amiable person than he was when our forefathers broke with him. Numbers, myself included, came forward of their own accord, and gave up their all to make peace with him. We were--at least I was, taken in by the professions made, when Roman Catholic emancipation was canvassed in this country, by Roman Catholic divines and laymen, [33/34] whose word, because they were Englishmen, we thought as good as a bond. We read the opinions of foreign universities on the deposing and dispensing powers of the Pope which they procured for Mr. Pitt, our Prime Minister; we read their own solemn protestation signed by them all; we read the "Papist Misrepresented," the "Faith of Catholics," and other works of the same kind widely circulated and highly authorized. I gave up my all to make peace with Rome on these terms, as I fondly supposed; I would have gone to the stake cheerfully sooner than remain at peace with Rome on the terms which were offered me two years back, and which are exacted from all Roman Catholics without distinction now. The Roman Catholic Church but a year since solemnly renewed its faith in the very doctrines which our forefathers abjured; in doctrines which procured political outlawry for two centuries in this country for all those who [34/35] professed them; in doctrines opposed alike to the truth of the Gospel and the truth of facts; subversive, therefore, of all religion, because founded upon lies. If the system in which they are taught produces saints, it is no more than can be said of incest or concubinage.

No, my brethren; if we would enlarge our circle, we must turn our eyes elsewhere for some time to come; and do not think that in doing this you will cease to be working for the holy cause"* that has collected us here to-day in such numbers--numbers which I trust are meant as a compliment to one who first invited Christians to join in it, and for a long time worked it single-handed at his own cost, and with but little sympathy. For believe me, there is abundance to be done elsewhere before it can become fact. The old landmarks which the Greek Church has preserved we must be content to borrow or copy from the Greek Church as best we may. We must be [35/36] content to confess that we have some relics of the Middle Ages about us still which we must discard, if any re-union of the whole Church is to be effected. But most of all--I do not hesitate to say it--our first and foremost work lies with our own flesh and blood. We should endeavour that if the re-union of Christendom is ever to come to pass, it may be on the largest scale: and this implies, in the first place, that all should be Christians that can be won to Christ; and, in the second, that all divisions among Christians should be healed. We have therefore two things before us notably: to accomplish the Christianising of all who are not Christians amongst us, and the fraternizing with all who are. Now, it is no secret that our working classes are fast losing their religion, and that nothing but the most vigorous efforts on our part can win them back to the faith. And I am confident that no efforts of ours will be successful for this purpose can secure unless we invite the aid, and the co-operation, of those Christian bodies who separated formerly from the communion of the Church of England, for reasons similar to those for whicli we ourselves separated from the communion of the Church of Rome--similar, but not identical, or half so grave by any means, as they themselves would be the first to own: reasons, at least as much founded in the old connection between Church and State, as in any conduct of the Church herself. Still, thus much must be allowed by every honest man, that they worked for Christ with a zeal, just when our Church did least, and that they brought thousands to Christ from classes utterly neglected by our Church till then. Let us do to others as we would be done by first, and we may hope to be done to by others as we would afterwards. We are impatient that the Roman Church refuses, and the Greek Church hesitates--probably for that [37/38] reason alone--to admit our orders: let us now observe that attitude towards Lutherans, Calvinists, Wesleyans, and others, that we should wish Rome hereafter to observe by us; let us not be too stiff in our requirements; too captious in our criticisms; too certain that our views are not founded on prejudice, and do not require modifying to be consistent with truth. We have a great fight to wage, but not with Christians; accordingly our cry should be, "Qui rempublicam salvam velit me sequatur"--"Come everybody who will to the rescue."

Project Canterbury