But the theoretical view of this objection is, perhaps, still more important to be considered. Let any man examine, what this charge of our unchurching so many other Protestants really amounts to, at the utmost. To what extent of “uncharitableness” does our theory oblige us?—And, first of all, how can we obviate the practical difficulty already alluded to, which is urged with so much confidence, that unordained ministers of many sects, have so large a measure of spiritual success?—It is remarkable that they who urge this, do not see how _variously_ it is often applied to support the most opposite and jarring sentiments. And who can ever decide on the real value of any such appeals? We might admit, safely, that good has, at times, been done by unordained teachers, and yet, in that, admit nothing inconsistent with the exclusive Catholic claims of the Ordained Ministry. It has often been argued that even the Heathen Philosophy and the Mahometan Theism, were over-ruled as GOD’S instruments of good, though evil in their nature: and the corruptest kind of Christianity may be well admitted to be much better than either of them. {101} We cannot indeed allow the distorted estimate, which human vanity makes of its own good doings; but we will not question GOD’S sovereignty over man’s sin, from which He often brings good. We think it wrong not to “receive CHRIST” (Luke ix. 53.); and “follow the Apostles;” but we would not “call down fire from heaven.” We think that it “shall be more tolerable for Sodom in the day of judgment” than for a wilful rejecter, or non-receiver of the Apostles; but _we_ judge not. They are in GOD’S hands. (Matt. x. 14.)—We have before said that we pronounce no private judgment on others.