Can that be a Reform of the Church, with "just claims upon the respect and affections of the people," which shall leave a ground and excuse for dissent by any one of the people? I say, NO. Can it be a Church of Christ? I say, NO. Do we know what a Church of Christ is in reality? For myself, I say, YES. A Church, too, founded upon an understanding of the _Sacred_ Scriptures, of the Old and New Testament, upon the revelation of the mystery of those Scriptures, and upon all the first principles essential and conducive to general human and social welfare; that shall no more admit of dissent than the multiplication table, or the accurately placed sun-dial, than the elements of Euclid, and all the never-failing tests of the science of chemistry. The Apostle that told us to "_prove all things, and hold fast that which is good_," gave us a definition of the exhortation of the Evangelist or the Baptist--"_Repent, for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand_." A repenting and a proving people are necessary to make a Church of Christ. Repentance and enquiry are the pillars and foundations of that Church; without repentance and enquiry there can be no Church of Christ; and I ask, confidently ask, with the assurance that a true answer must be in the negative,--has anything calling itself a Christian Church in Europe, established by law, or dissenting from such an establishment, anything to do with the two principles of repentance and proving, the one meaning reflection by animadversion, the other a trial by outward tests of that reflection? There is not a congregation of people in Europe, calling itself a Church, that is founded upon an understanding of the Sacred Scriptures, the understanding which shows that the "letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." I impugn, as being in error,--I denounce, as that error is the cause of all dissent, of dissent uninstructed,--all the churches or congregations called churches in the British dominions; and I call for a reform that shall eradicate that dissent, and make all become one in efficiency, usefulness, and respect and affections of the people. The present state of the Church is, that it is a theatre of mystery, giving no solid satisfaction to the people, and for which, among the receivers of salaries and benefits only, can there be a particle of real respect and affection. Its defects are, that none understand, neither priests nor people understand what any part of its dramatic ceremonies mean. And this is the cause of that dissent which has made a revision necessary. What, then, ought the Church to be, so as to have no ground and reason of dissent? In two words, I answer, A SCHOOL. What kind of a school? A school for knowledge only; for revelation without mystery; and for practical use and benefit to every member, without parade or pomp, even without ceremony, beyond what order and good may require. And would such be a Church of Christ?