Sincere belief must be the consequence of proof, without which we cannot believe truly; with it, we must. If then we content ourselves with the mere _ipse dixit_ of others without seeking proof, our belief is the result of indolence, and for that indolence we shall be accountable when we are called on to give an account of the talent committed to our charge, if error has been consequent upon it. He, on the contrary, whose education or whose means have not put proof within his reach, although he may wish earnestly for it, _may_ be wrong in understanding, but he will never be wrong in heart: his tenets may be wrong, but his life will be right. It behoves us therefore to be cautious how we pass sentence on one another in religious matters, since, as has been well observed, we are ourselves amenable to a tribunal where uncharitable conduct towards others, will bring down a just and heavy sentence on ourselves. We are not to erect ourselves into judges of other men’s consciences, {10} but leave them to the judgment and disposal of ONE who alone can see into the heart of men, and alone can ascertain the real nature and ultimate consequence of all questions which admit of “doubtful disputation.” There will be some danger of losing our way among the almost numberless divisions and subdivisions of sects, which present themselves as soon as we begin to consider the subject at all narrowly. I therefore propose to simplify my task, and make our course a little plainer, by adopting the two great divisions into which the reformed churches may have been said to have arranged themselves at the era of the Reformation, as a foundation for the classification of Christian sects at present. Calvin and Melancthon may be considered as the prototypes and heads of these two divisions, which however they may sometimes vary and sometimes intermingle, are continually reproduced, because they are grounded upon two great natural divisions of human kind, the stern and the gentle. My own leaning is to the latter, because it appears to me most in accordance with the spirit of that gospel whose great Promulgator made universal benevolence the test of his disciples; but at the same time I must acknowledge, and shall indeed prove before I have done, that the sterner theoretical view may coexist in the mind with a large share of true Christian charity and benevolence. Be the abstract belief of the Christian what it may, if he be really at heart a disciple, the example of his mild Master will always influence his life and feelings, and he will tread in the steps of his Lord, even if his judgment should sometimes have mistaken the true meaning of some of his words.