all men conduct themselves towards each other as brothers," given by God to his church, embraces all the ideas which you comprehend in this precept:—The whole of society ought to labour for the amelioration of the moral and physical condition of the poorest class. Society ought to organize itself in the manner the most suitable for the attainment ofthis great end.
It is equally certain that, at the origin of Christianity, this principle ought to have been expressed under the first form; and that now the second form ought to be employed.
At the period of the foundation of Christianity, you have said that society was divided into two classes of a political nature, totally different—that of masters and that of slaves,—which constituted, in some respects, two distinct human species; nevertheless, intermixing with each other. It was totally impossible, at that time, to establish a complete reciprocity in the moral relations between the two species; therefore, the divine founder of the Christian religion confined himself to the enunciation of his principle of morality in such a manner as to render it obligatory upon every individual of the human species, without having the power to establish it, as a tie to unite together the masters and the slaves.
We live at an epoch when slavery is completely annihilated. All men are now of the same political species. The classes are only separated by shades of colour. You conclude, from this state of things, that the fundamental principle of Christianity ought to be presented under the formula most likely to render it binding upon the mass, in respect to one another; yet without ceasing to be binding upon individuals in their individual relations. I find your conclusion legitimate, and of the highest importance; and from this moment, New Christian, I unite my efforts with yours for the propagation of New Christianity.
But upon this point I have some observations to make to you, upon the general course of your labours. The new formula, under which you represent the
