Somewhere about the time when the churches of the West came under the dominion of the Holy See, the successor of St. Peter was observed to cool in his regard for _Charity_, and to withdraw his affections very sensibly from _her_. The cause of this decline in his attachment was at length discovered. A rival, not unknown for many ages before, had now acquired a very formidable ascendancy in the breast of the Holy Pontiff; and the new attachment was not a little cherished by the leading members of the subjugated church. The influence of the favorite rapidly increased, and that of _Charity_ proportionably declined; till at length, matters went so far that the latter was deposed and imprisoned, and the former enthroned in her place. The name of _Bigotry_ (for so she had been called from her birth) was against her, and so was her countenance. The first of these difficulties she got over by assuming the name of her disgraced predecessor; the latter, it is said, remains a difficulty to this very day. In the mean time, _Charity_ continued immured in the closest confinement; and when the monasteries were pulled down at the Reformation, this queen of all the virtues was found pale and almost lifeless in a subterraneous cell. Her health had been so much impaired by confinement, and her character misrepresented by the artifices of her rival, that it took her a great deal of time to regain her strength and make herself properly known. In both these respects she has now to a great degree succeeded: and though the Pope denies her rights, and many persons, who ought to know better, continue to question them, yet her countenance and temper most clearly identify her with that heavenly original, whose office it is to sanctify the confidence of faith and the fervor of hope; and to make them the instruments of promoting glory to God in the highest, and peace and good-will among men. Now though this looks very much like an allegorical account of the matter, yet I think it accords so well with the fact, that I trust both you and I shall be the better for the moral of it. I am sure if I thought that uniformity of opinion upon the details of Christianity, could be brought about among those who agree in the fundamentals of it, I should rejoice to contribute my proportion to the advancement of so desirable an event. But I do not expect, what in the present constitution of human nature I believe to be impossible. I think that the nearest advances to such uniformity may be made by resolving to unite as far as we are _like-minded_, and to be reciprocally forbearing where we are _not_, and thus to fulfil our Saviour’s commandment of loving one another. I am sure that if every Country Clergyman will substitute this species of Charity for the adulterous idol which you have set up (and I have little doubt but they will), the church will then maintain herself in vigour, usefulness, and beauty; “and the gates of nonconformity” {24a} will not prevail against her.