text:  First whether the new points contended for waiving all controversy upon their abstract doctrinal truth are really such in _practical_ virtue that it could be worth purchasing them at the cost of schism? Secondly supposing a good man to have decided this question in the affirmative for a young society of Christians for a church in its infancy which as yet might not have much to lose in credit or authentic influence--whether the same free license of rupture and final secession _could_ belong to an ancient church which had received eminent proofs of Divine favour through a long course of spiritual prosperity almost unexampled? Indeed this last question might suggest another paramount to the other two--viz