to these several churches is doubtless the real benefit of his people in
after generations;--just as his dealings with the church in Old
Testament times, "were written for our admonition and learning." (Rom.
xv. 4; 1 Cor. x. 11.) Moreover, some persons have inferred from our
Lord's treatment of these churches, a _divine warrant_ for the
existence, and an imperative Christian duty for the charitable
recognition, of all the conflicting and antagonistic organizations of
our time, popularly styled Christian churches. But as the designation,
"Christian churches," is in the apprehension of some too general, the
term "evangelical" is used by them as restrictive of the term
"Christian." Still the question will present itself,--What constitutes a
church "evangelical?" And this question is still without any definite
answer. Perhaps no two persons would include in one category the same
denominations of professing Christians. For example,--Is a community to
be considered a Christian church in which the "doctrine of Balaam" is
taught? Does the law of charity require the recognition of an
organization as a Christian church, in which a "Jezebel would be
suffered to teach, and to seduce the servants of Christ?" Is that a
Christian church which denies the supreme deity of Christ, and rejects
the seals of the covenant of grace,--the only charter of the Christian
church's existence, on earth? Or is that combination to be viewed as a
Christian church which has no regular ministry, but expressly rejects
the "pastors and teachers" of Christ's appointment and the morality of
the sabbath? These, and many other questions of similar or analogous
import, will suggest negative answers to all who fear God, respect his
authority, and are free from the bewildering effects of popular error.

It ought to be considered that all these _seven_ churches were _one
church_, as originally constituted, having the same,--that, is, a
divine, scriptural organization. And although in the divine forbearance,