Some might be inclined to suggest the idea that both Episcopalian and Baptist churches are true, that the ministers of both churches have authority--equal authority, the one with the other. This is virtually condemning both parties. It is utterly impossible for two opposing churches of equal authority to be one true church, or part and parcels of the true church. No sane person could broach such an idea. Two conflicting principles can never become one principle, worlds without end. One principle must drop. If you tell me that two disagreeing sects have equal authority, I am bold to affirm that neither of them have any authority at all, and every sensible man will back my affirmation. Her Majesty, Victoria, is the true and rightful queen of England. Her claim is undoubted, her authority is indisputable. She reigns exclusively. Why? Because she is the nation's only true sovereign. It is the thing impossible for any other woman to have just claim to equal authority. The royal prerogative is vested solely in one person. No other person can have the slightest legal claim to it. So the true and legal authority and prerogative of salvation can be solely vested in one church. No other church can have the slightest lawful claim to it. The true Church may have many branches upon various portions of the earth's surface, but they must all be united, and subject to the Head. Two true churches, two true creeds, two true preachers, differing from each other, contradicting each other, present an irreconcilable impossibility. It is perfectly senseless--monstrous--the wildest, most far-fetched idea that could be conceived. Its birthplace must have been "beyond the bounds of time and space." The simplest capacity, the narrowest {68} mind, can perceive at a glance the thorough unreasonableness of such an idea. Yet unreasonable as it is, senseless as it is, monstrous as it is, still it is a favourite point, a bright specimen of the wise folly of our "gospel blaze," Christendom. Can we wonder at the rapid spread of deism, atheism, infidelity, or unbelief, when we consider the foolish, nonsensical doctrines which are gravely taught in our day, with all the sanctity, longfacedness, impudence, and insolence, imaginable? Can we wonder the world is sick of religion? Is it strange that intelligent Roman Catholics should consider sectarianism a wicked soul-destroying heresy? What is the natural effect of men seeing an hundred opposing sects, all believing differently, teaching differently, and acting differently, yet at the same time taking one another by the hand as brothers, and with all gravity declaring to the world they have conjointly one faith, one hope, one calling? Why, the natural, the legitimate effect is, that straightforward thinking men will consider them all as so many arch deceivers, conniving at the accomplishment of party purposes, or grossly ignorant of what they affirm, and in either case their profession is a misnomer upon themselves.