, the _Christians_:"--thus
making use of the very name of Christ to characterise a sect. Such
were some of the schisms; and to the schismatics St Paul said, "Ye are
yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and
divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I
am of Paul; and another, I of Apollos; are ye not carnal?"

The apostle desired to heal those schisms, and to bring the members of
the Church into one mind. How did he endeavour to effect this?

Had he been a Papist, he might have said--"Why thus divided? Because
you are not building on the one true foundation, which is Peter! Do
you not understand the meaning of the name, _Cephas_, or the Rock,
given to him, and intended to teach all Christians that the temple of
the Church was to be built upon _this_ rock, and this only; against
which the gates of hell cannot prevail? Therefore, you who say, 'I am
of Cephas,' are right; all others are schismatics." Never, apparently,
had a man a better opportunity of revealing to the world this great
secret of unity than St. Paul had, if such was his faith, especially
when he compares the Church to a building, and speaks of a
foundation-stone. "As a wise master-builder," he says, "I have laid
the foundation, and another buildeth thereon.... For other foundation
can no man lay than that is laid, which is"--Cephas, or the rock? No!
but "_Jesus Christ_." Not one word of Cephas as the centre of unity.
Strange silence for a "Roman Catholic!"

Had Paul been a "High Churchman," viewing with deep awe the mystery of
sacramental grace, we can understand how he would have spoken to the
schismatic Corinthians of the vast importance of their submitting to
absolute apostolic authority, and of "the awful powers with which
God's ministers had been vested, of regenerating souls by the waters
of baptism;" and how "such a clergy should command unqualified
obedience." If these, or anything like these, were Paul's sentiments,
and such as we are every day familiar with, it is not easy, to say the
least of it, to account for his language to the Corinthians. What does
_he_ say of the exalted privilege of being able to baptize? "I thank
God I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius:" strange words
from a "High Churchman!" or a "High" Baptist! "I baptized also the
household of Stephanas: besides, _I know not_ whether I baptized any
other:" strange forgetfulness on such a supposed centre point of
Church uni