TIME, the material of which life is made, never pauses. In its onward current to the ocean of eternity, it carries with it all the busy tribes of men. Our fathers--where are they? and the Prophets--do they live forever? Lord, teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts to wisdom and understanding!

      The year One Thousand Eight Hundred and Thirty-Three has arrived. Almost eighteen full centuries are completed since life and incorruptibility arose from the darkness of the grave, in the person of Messiah, to bless a dying world. The Apostacy is in its dotage, and the Man of Sin tottering on the brink of the grave. The world is in travail; a new age is soon to be born; and the great regeneration is at hand. The parchments, the leagues and covenants that bind the nations in their social and unsocial compacts, are moth-eaten. The foundations of the political mountains and hills are crumbling down to dust; and the imbecilities of all human policies to give to man the knowledge of his rights and the enjoyment of them, are be coming manifest to all. A solemn expectation, an eager longing for some great change, the sure prelude of a mighty system of revolutions, is marked in the pensive countenances of all who think, and believe that the Lord Almighty reigns. Expectation is on tiptoe, stretching forward into the mysterious future, ready to hail with acclamation the harbinger of better times. Jew and Gentile now unite in the anxious anticipation of a great deliverer, whose right to rule the nations none dare dispute.

      Our little party jealousies and strifes, our ecclesiastical bickerings and feuds, are all arguments of irresistible demonstration that the Christian profession has, in the long dark night of error, mistook its way, and been jostled off the foundation of God.

      The voice of reformation has been lifted up, and the banners of the ancient constitution of Messiah's kingdom have been unfurled. The ancient standard has been dug up out of the ruins of the ages of [3] delinquency; but of the immense multitudes who acknowledge its theoretic excellence and practical utility, how few are inspired with that holy spirit of unconditional submission to the authority of the Prime Ministers of Messiah's realm, which distinguished the soldiers of the cross in the days of uncorrupted Christianity.

      A remnant has always been found in times of the greatest delinquency; and in the close of the times of the Gentiles we have reason to rejoice, that there is a goodly number of the Gentiles who rally under the testimony of Jesus, and are zealous for his institutions. The theory of reformation is, however, far in advance of the practice, and to this fact special regard will be had in the volume which we have just commenced. It is no common thing to be, in the constitutional import of the word, a practical Christian, or rather a Christian in fact. To admire and commend such a one is easy and pleasing to all; but to exhibit and fill tap all the outlines of a child of God, a citizen of heaven, and an heir of immortality, is not the result of a wish or a prayer, but of the untiring efforts of an enlightened understanding, and a pure heart, to be conformed to the whole declared will of our Father who is in heaven.

EDITOR.

      THE Oracles of God being the light of the world and the life of men, because developing the WORD of God incarnate, dwelling among men--is the Book of Books, and the only book that heaven and earth admire and guard with unbounded jealousy and intense interest. This Book, containing the writings of the Divine Historians, Prophets, Poets, Evangelists, and Apostles, is the work of fifteen centuries. The sacred writings of the Christian Institution are the work of almost one century: at least they include the great incidents of one hundred years from the birth of the Baptist to the death of the beloved John. The New Testament embraces in its contents, and has deeply impressed upon its face, the features and characters of the age which gave it birth. The allusions and direct references to the volume which preceded it, and to the institutions, manners, and customs of the countries in which, and the people among whom, it was first promulged, make a particular acquaintance with these necessary in order to a satisfactory knowledge of its contents. This knowledge is not accessible to all, and therefore the New Testament is not now what it was in the times in which it was written--a self-interpreting volume. For the first readers of this book were acquainted with all its notices and references to existing circumstances, with the geography of their own country, and the incidents of their own history, and needed only to read it carefully to understand the whole message of God to them.

      The FAMILY TESTAMENT, which we are now completing, and hope to issue during this year, is designed to be a SELF-INTERPRETING [4] volume. Besides, being a very improved new version, the conjoint labors of men the most learned in languages, ancient history, criticism; containing many emendations in style, in translation; bringing down to the present year from the days of King James, and engrossing the labors of all eminent interpreters, European and American, since that period; will contain one hundred and sixty pages of Prefaces, Critical Notes, and Tables Literary, Geographical, Historical, Chronological, Miscellaneous; together with the Maps of the Holy Land and the countries visited by the Apostle to the Gentiles; Explanations of Words and Phrases alluding to ancient manners and customs; as well as the leading Terms and Sentences, subjects of sectarian controversy--will make this volume intelligible to all who diligently peruse it.

      The volume will contain more than 600 pages, somewhat larger than the pages of this work, and is printed on paper as fair as this, the text being in a large, clear, and beautiful type; having the verses enumerated for reference on the margin; and will, when substantially bound, be sold at Two Dollars per volume. We are able to offer it at this price only because of the size of the edition, and the expectation of being able to sell it at a moderate discount to those who will be active in distributing it. According to the prices fixed on similar works published in New England, such as Professor Stuart's Translation and Critical Notes on the Epistles to the Romans and Hebrews, its price would be at least four dollars a copy.

      The stereotype edition, containing simply the text and about one hundred pages of Prefaces and Miscellaneous matters, in very fine type and on fair paper, plain binding, we hope to be able to sell at 62½ cents per copy. Extra binding, if we can get it done, will be an extra price. But for this we cannot now stipulate.

      The Family Testament will, we trust, be found of great assistance to all preachers and teachers of all denominations, and to all persons who wish for that extrinsic information which brings us to live almost in the times of the Apostles, and makes the book what it was at first--a self-interpreting volume. The Pocket Testament is designed to be the pocket companion of all who love the oracles of the living God.

      It will not be satisfactory to all, as indeed it never was in any case, to affirm, that we have felt the awful responsibilities of such an undertaking, and that we are not conscious, before the Judge of all, of having had a single wish to make one passage speak in favor of a single tenet or practice attributed to us. We do not, indeed, doubt that the intelligent reader, who carefully examines this version, will find many passages in it much less favorable to some of the leading tenets ascribed to us, than the common version. When he reads the Epistle to the Romans, if he is not convinced of this, we would despair of convincing him of any proposition to which he is averse.

      Our real tenets are just the true meaning of the original Scriptures; and all that we are solicitous for, is to get the true meaning of the words and phrases used by the sacred writers. This, we feel assured, we have done to a greater extent than ever before appeared in any [5] one version of this book. Our rules of interpretation are those propounded by all the great critics in Europe and America, as recently issued in various forms from the Andover Massachusetts school. We are patrons of all the works issued from that school, which we esteem the most learned, and of course, the most candid and independent in America.

      As it will be impossible for us, in any reasonable time, to send single copies to those who may wish for them, we shall solicit all our agents and patrons to order as many copies as they think they can dispose of; and on receiving the order accompanied with the price of copies ordered, leaving it to us to discount in proportion to the number, we risking the safe transportation of them and the price by mail, (unless by special agreement other arrangements be made;) we will, as soon as we get the works bound, proceed to forward them in the order in which we receive said orders. The first orders will be first filled. Those who order a box, will recollect that we must have proper directions as to the mercantile and commission houses to which they are to be addressed; and this ought to be in places the most contiguous to them.

      As we have, with much personal labor and at great expense, finished this work, we earnestly request our patrons and friends to be as prompt as possible in forwarding their orders. The work we hope to be able to begin to distribute in March next.

EDITOR.

      FRWNHMA TOU PNEUMATOS, (phronema tou pneumatos.) This phrase occurs but twice in the New Testament. It is in Romans viii. 6. in the King's version, rendered "spiritually, minded;" by Macknight, "minding the spirit;" and in verse 27 of the same chapter it is rendered "the mind of the spirit." We prefer the latter--and as the phrase phronema tou sarkos also occurs but twice, and in the same chapter, once translated "to be carnally minded," and once "the carnal mind," by the King's translators; and by Macknight and others, "the minding of the flesh"--we also prefer the same version of both phrases, and render the passage thus: The mind of the flesh is death, and the mind of the Spirit is life and peace. "The mind of the flesh is enmity against God"--and he that searches the hearts knows the mind of the spirit. Rom. viii. 27. Thus we have all the places in the book where these two phrases occur; and as the King's translators, Macknight, and many others, have, in the 27th verse, translated it "the mind of the Spirit," we have their authority and that of Professor Stuart, for so rendering it in the new version. We are uniform, and so is Professor Stuart, and not any of the others. So much for authority.

      But now for the meaning of this mind. It is admitted on all hands that this is not the word which is usually employed, or, perhaps, at all employed, to represent the simple understanding or mind of man. It is not nouV, nor pneuma; but fronhma. It is an artificial or created mind--as is the mind of the merchant, mechanic, statesman, poet, &c.--a mind formed, or a taste or disposition acquired. Such is the usage of the word phronema. Phroneo, from which it is derived, signifies to savor, taste, or relish. "Peter, thou savorest not the [6] things that are of God, but the things of men"--You have a taste, relish, or savor for the one, and not the other. So the word is translated by the King's translators.

      Now from this data, what does Paul mean by the mind of the flesh and the mind of the Spirit, Rom. viii. 6. vii. 27.? A savor, taste, or relish for the flesh, and a savor, taste, or relish for the things of the Spirit; or the disposition, desires, and longings produced by the flesh, and those produced by the Spirit. So must we understand the phrase if we attend to the original acceptations of the words and the canons of criticism. He that searches the hearts knows what is the desire of the Spirit--"the bent of the Spirit," says Thomson. Professor Stuart also remarks on this passage, "It is not the mind of the Spirit of God, in itself considered, and as belonging to the godhead, that the Searcher of Hearts is here represented as knowing. It is the mind or desire of the Spirit as disclosed in these inarticulate sighs or groans that the writer means to designate. In this way there is no difficulty in applying pneuma to the Spirit of God." Thus far the learned Professor; and with him we agree.

      The mind of the flesh is, then, those desires after the flesh which the things of the flesh produce; and the mind of the Spirit is those tastes, relishes, desires, longings, which the Spirit of God works in the human soul; and, therefore, the longings, sighs, and groans of this Spirit are most intelligible to him whose offspring they are. The Spirit of God produces a mind like itself, and so do the things of the flesh. The former has for its fruit, life and peace--the latter ends in death. As St. Augustine does say we may say, on the "cannot" of Paul, Rom. viii. 7. "The mind of the flesh cannot be subject to the law of God. How can snow be warmed? for when it is melted and becomes warm, it is no longer snow." They that are led by the Spirit have the mind of the Spirit, and they only can enjoy life and peace.

EDITOR.

      "THE foundation of God stands sure, having this inscription, The Lord has made known them that are his; and let every one who names the name of the Lord depart from iniquity." 2 Tim. ii. 19. What is the foundation of God? How does it stand firm? and how does the saying, "The Lord will make known (or has made known) them that are his," prove it? These are three questions that must be intelligibly answered before the passage is understood. The common version is much more difficult: "Nevertheless, the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his." From an attentive investigation of the context and the allusions in this passage, we are authorized thus to interpret it:--The foundation which God has laid for our faith is the Twelve Apostles; and this foundation stands firm because God has sealed their mission by his Holy Spirit, and has by these attestations made known them that are his. Let those who acknowledge Jesus as the Christ depart from these iniquitous men, (or the iniquity of Hymeneus and Philetus,) who, while they do overthrow the faith of some, by affirming, contrary to the Apostles, that the resurrection is past, cannot shake the foundation of faith which God has established.

      The qemelion, or foundation here spoken of, Heb. vi. 1. denotes the principles of the Christian doctrine, the foundation of reformation; and in Rev. xxi. 14. denotes the twelve foundations of the New Jerusalem, which are said to be the Twelve Apostles; and the church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, &c. Eph. ii. 20.

      Paul seems to allude to the conspiracy of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, in this Passage; for he quotes the words of Moses on that occasion, as they stand in [7] the Septuagint, Num. xvi. 5. The Lord will show who are his. Com. Ver. Septuagint, egnw kuprioV, The Lord will make known; for so the idiomatic import of know is in the hiphil form. In the phrase, "Depart from iniquity," he seems to allude to Moses, who said, (Num. xvi. 26.) "Depart from the tents of these wicked men." So Paul--Depart from the iniquity of such spirits as Hymeneus and Philetus.

      "Having this seal." A seal with an inscription upon it, was, in ancient times, fixed upon the foundation of edifices. Zechariah iii. 9. alludes to this custom in the rebuilding of the Temple. Jesus is said to be sealed; and the Christians Jews, and Gentiles were sealed by the Holy Spirit; i. e. the attestations gives by the Spirit to Jesus and the Apostles, were the seal of their divine mission. Thus the passage becomes plain and intelligible, and beautifully pertinent to Paul's purpose, when all the allusions and references are understood.

      The word egnw, being 3d sing. 2d aor. is certainly most naturally rendered in The past time, though from some license, it has been rendered in the future. Paul certainly had good reason to say, that the Lord had already made known who were his Apostles and worthy to be believed. It could not be that be would have Timothy or any other person to wait for future development: whether the Apostles or Hymeneus and Philetus were most worthy of belief. I am thus particular in explaining this matter, because no translator or interpreter which I have consulted has rendered egno in the past indefinite, which it most obviously is. Some, indeed, give it the present, and some the future; but none the past time. This can only be accounted for on the supposition that they did not fully comprehend the meaning of the Apostle.

EDITOR.

      OUR worthy friend Broaddus, has had published in the Richmond Herald of the 14th ult. some remarks on our notice of the Dover Decree, which he is pleased to set forth under the heading of "Unfair Representation Exposed;" yet he arraigns not one item in said notice as untrue. He admits all the facts; and, indeed, censures "the acrimony" of the resolution which cut off the brethren before mentioned. But he does not like our comment on their conduct.

      In his attempt to justify the excision of the churches from the Association he argues not from any fact, but from a slander which I am sorry to say he publishes in Virginia, though perhaps he is not the original author of it. But "he that takes up an evil report against his brother," differs only in degree from him who invents it. His words are--"Through the people called Reformers we found ourselves virtually connected with the Unitarians and Arians of the West, who deny the divinity of our Redeemer: for have they not there agreed to become one people?" What the above question means we are left to conjecture. Was he afraid to affirm the fact? or did he first condemn and then ask for the proof? What an innuendo! "Are they not one people?" This is the gentleman who censures our statement under the title of "UNFAIR Representation." Yes, indeed! "Have they not agreed to become one people!"

      Now, if a few Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Universalists should be immersed, and the Dover Association should receive them into communion, and become one people with them, would not [8] Mr. Broaddus represent himself and his brethren as grievously slandered and reproached, if any one should publish that he, his brethren, and the Catholics, Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Universalists have become one people? He would say, What an unfair representation! nay, what a slander upon such decent people! It is, then, wholly a slander to publish to the world as a fact, that the Reformers have become one people with the Arians and Unitarians of the West.

      For my part, I regard no man as a believer in Jesus as the Messiah, who denies that lie is a divine person, the only begotten of God; or who refuses to worship and adore him with all his heart, soul, mind, and strength. I fellowship no man nor people under the heavens, and I am sure none in the heavens, who are unwilling to admit that our Redeemer is Emanuel, God with us--God manifest in the flesh. [See an essay in the Christian Baptist, vol. 4, p. 230, on THE WORD that was in the beginning with God, and that was God.] As far as my acquaintance with all the brethren extends, North, South, East, or West, (whatever may have been their former opinions I know not,) they all accord in rendering the, same honor in thought, word, and deed to the Son, as they do to the Father who sent him. They are opposed, indeed, to both Trinitarian, Arian, and Unitarian speculations on the divine essence; but all harmonize in regarding Jesus in all the high character which Prophets, Evangelists, and Apostles give him in the full import and meaning of their words.

      To prejudice his brethren in favor of the Decree, as well as against the excluded, with the same political dexterity, he would have them think that we regard them as only wanting the power to imprison, banish, or burn those who will not worship the idols which they have set up. We have, indeed, asked what they can do more under our laws; and Mr. Broaddus admits they have done all in their power, and justifies them for having done it on the aforesaid allegata.

      But how does he justify his course? By an argumentum ad hominem. If he is erroneous, so are we; for, in his logic, not receiving an unbaptized person into the kingdom is just as criminal as excluding a citizen from it for a difference of opinion. Because we do not do what we were never asked to do--that is, to receive certain dead men, whom he supposes are now in heaven, or certain living men of the same stamp, we are as deep in the mire as himself, and brethren in excluding many living Christians from the kingdom, for no moral impropriety whatever; nay, whose moral and religious character, Mr. Broaddus himself being judge, is far superior to many of those whom he fellowships as worthy disciples.

      Before I would do what Mr. Broaddus has done--vote, as unworthy of Christian fellowship, such citizens of Christ's kingdom as those whom he has judged unworthy of a place at his Lord's table--I would suffer myself to be excluded from all civilized and Christian society. But Mr. Broaddus can accomplish this with all good conscience: first call them Arians, or one with Arians and all that class of errorist, and then treat them as such. [9]

      In one word, I do not say nor think that any of the Virginia Baptists would burn myself or brethren; but unless they would burn, or banish, or otherwise inflict civil penalties upon us, what more can they do than what they have done? According to the laws of our government they can do no more, if they were so disposed, than call us by some odious name, and then treat us as guilty, without even the forms of trial.

      But Mr. Broaddus is determined not to defend the ground he has taken; and exhorts his brethren to avoid the controversy. Good, and seasonable, and politic advice! This is what the Catholic priesthood have ten thousand times commanded their laity in Protestant countries--for the best reason in the world:--they know that they must always be foiled if they would dare to justify their faith or practice by scriptural argument. Mr. Broaddus tells them in the close that he would have his brethren to be reformers without the name; and that he is "aiming to steer a middle course--between Calvinism on the one hand, and Campbellism on the other." "That is high-toned, strait-laced, and systematic Calvinism and Campbellism"¹ Well, a pleasant voyage, and a safe mooring to our friend Andrew Broaddus!

EDITOR.

      THE Ordinance or Decree of last October, nullifying the Constitution of the Kingdom of Heaven, and the personal rights of Christians, it is said was passed without debate, and without much opposition. I wondered how this could be; but my surprise was greatly diminished on learning from an authentic source, from a member of the committee raised by said Association, whose moral and religious character no man can impeach, that the members of said Association friendly to reform, thought it most prudent to avoid every occasion of being chargeable with the common reproach of making divisions, and therefore permitted the opponents of reform to take their own course. The Decree was, indeed, drafted in Richmond, and all the arrangements were made for carrying it into effect, before the Association met. When before the committee, one brother, however, had the courage, though not seconded by another, to oppose to its passage the six following arguments:--

      1. The Report represented the churches as in most distracted and disastrous circumstances; whereas the letters from the churches to the Association represented them as in peace and general harmony. [10]

      2. But if the letters give a false representation, and they were actually as represented in the Report, then the churches themselves, and not the Association, could take the proper steps to obtain peace.

      3. That it was expressly contrary to the constitution of the Association to interfere with the internal affairs of the churches.

      4. That the member who addressed the committee, though generally acquainted throughout the Association, knew of no person who maintained the things set forth in the Report.

      5. That until the churches were consulted to know what was their wish in the case, it was premature to take any steps upon the request of five churches who alone wished the Association to take up the subject.

      6. That it was unjust to take any final step at the present meeting, because many churches were not represented in it.

      During the course of conversation in the committee, without any formal speech on the subject, these six arguments were urged to dissuade the authors of the Report from assuming such a high responsibility. And may not the appeal be made to the good sense of every unprejudiced man, whether there were not moral authority and rational gravity in any one of these six arguments, to deter any grave, considerate, honorable, and righteous committee from a measure so solemn, and so responsible to heaven and earth. But we never knew any ecclesiastical committee, determined on proscription, that was more influenced by reason or argument, than that committee which reported (with their fingers in their ears) in favor of the stoning of Stephen. We thought it good, for future reference, to record the leading arguments of a member of said committee, which must, we think, be regarded as a dignified and argumentative protest against the report. I may add, that in said committee, this brother was treated rather as a heretic before inquisitors, than as a citizen of Christ's kingdom, though admitted by all to be free from any specified error or immorality, and to be very useful among the churches.

EDITOR.

FOR THE MILLENNIAL HARBINGER.

Mr. Editor,

      OUR friend Philalethes contends for the Scriptures, the whole Scriptures, and nothing but the Scriptures; and then talks of "Adam" being made in the image of God, and of "man's immortality." I wish he would just point us to the place where such facts are recorded. The Apostle declares, "God only hath immortality." Christ was immortal after the resurrection--"he dieth no more;" but Adam and all his children are mortal and always were so according to the Scriptures. Christ was the image of God, the likeness of God, and he only. We infer from the first part of Genesis, that Adam was made after that likeness and image; that is, his body was made in shape like Christ's. Nothing more can I learn from the Scripture. Some more remarks on Philalethes' communication I intend to forward soon; also, on Mr. Milton's. Meanwhile I remain your friend,

A. B. G. [11]

      THE Prophecies, in no period of the church's history, were so much studied as at the present day. Societies are forming in Britain for the especial purpose of getting at a systematic way of studying the all-engrossing future. Knowledge will increase and increasing on this most interesting part of God's communications to man. Sixty volumes are already in the hands of one society, from sixty authors, advocating substantially the same views exhibited in the essays of Daniel, vol. 1. Be they right or wrong, one thing is becoming most evident to all the students of God's government over men, that the time is at hand when the Lord will rebuke many people, and destroy the policies which are now destroying the earth. We begin to doubt the permanency of our own political institutions; and men are now proving that no parchments, constitutions, or forms of government can throw efficient barriers in the way of the cupidity, ambition, and pride of man. These are more puissant agents than all the constitutions and laws of our confederated states. Politicians stand aghast; but the students of the bible know that the atheism, infidelity, and mammonism, which inwardly work in all the governments of the Old World and the New, must consign them all to perdition.

      The hierarchies of state and church are equally obnoxious to the curse, because equally hostile to the supremacy of the Lord Jesus, and equally opposed to the true interests and dignity of man. Not, indeed, that there are no governments, ecclesiastical and political, which guaranty certain rights, and extend to man safety and protection in some matters, and to a certain extent; but not a government on earth that gives that honor to man which belongs to him as man; and none that places character above circumstances, which is just the reverse of every principle avowed and inculcated by the present Governor of the Universe while he made his abode in this unfriendly world.

      He will, therefore, overturn all the kingdoms of this world--all authorities and powers on earth, called by whatever name, which in anywise contravene the justice, peace, and good will among men which he always inculcated, and which he has made the paramount law in the constitution of human society.

      So long as the sword is made the arbiter of righteousness, and ultimate appeal in national controversies, it is a clear proof that the nations are not rebuked--that they have not learned the principles of government which Heaven will patronize: for when the Lord shall have rebuked the nations, "they will beat their swords into pruning books, and learn war no more."

EDITOR.

      Query.--IF to be born of water signifies to proceed and come forth from water, and the same expression is used relative to the Spirit, how are we to understand being born of the Spirit?

      Answer.--We are not born twice into any kingdom, whether of nature, grace, or glory. The similitude used by our Lord is a beautiful one. There is one birth into the natural world, of which father and mother is the cause and the means. There is one birth into the kingdom of God in its present state, of which the Spirit and the water are the cause and the means. There will be one birth into the everlasting kingdom, of which the Lord and the grave will be the cause and the means. Nor is the last birth less analogous to the first, than is the second; for they that are in the grave shall hear his voice and come forth. His power places them in the grave, and his power will bring them forth.

EDITOR. [12]

ESSEX, VA. October 31, 1832.

BROTHER CAMPBELL,

      Dear Sir,

            THE long agony is over. The Dover Association has assumed the awful responsibility of producing a faction; consequently, a sect. We feel much relieved as respects ourselves. Only three or four of the reformers attended the Association, as we had no objection to being a separate people, if the Baptists were resolved on taking to themselves this act of rebellion against Jesus Christ our Lord. I venture to say, no intelligent friend of reform is displeased with it. For myself, I feel highly honored in being made the first martyr in Old Virginia in the present reformation. My christian character has been gibbeted (though I yet live) for adhering to the sayings and doings of Jesus Christ and his Apostles. Philip Montague has unintentionally conferred this honor on me. It is the highest I ever expect to enjoy in time--worth all the D. D's that ever were issued from all the seminaries in our land. Had there been no charges made against us, the foregoing would be all I would say on this occasion. But I wish to speak to my brethren in order to stir them up to double diligence.

T. M. H.

Brethren,

      WE are accused of being "an antisectarian dogmatical sect." We know this charge is not true; and the writer knows it too, as well as a majority of those men concerned in bringing the case before the Association. In proof of this assertion, we refer to all our writings; but more especially to the declaration of Christian rights, facts, and documents, published in the city of Richmond last winter, by brother Thomas Campbell, for the express purpose of removing those unfounded imputations brought against us. Has any man living attempted to refute one fact or proposition therein? If so, we have never seen it. How men could, after much "prayerful deliberation," solemnly publish to the world such a libel, I cannot see. With these documents, which have been put into their hands, or forwarded to them by mail, how could they say that we held doctrines not according to godliness, but subversive of the true spirit of the gospel of Jesus Christ, disorganizing and demoralizing in their tendency? This is an awful warning to us of the baneful influence of a sectarian spirit. How we can be said to be dogmatical, or a sect, when we leave every person, who has constitutionally entered the kingdom of Messiah, in the full enjoyment of his religious opinions, so long as he does not impose them upon us as terms of fellowship, and while he maintains the character of a disciple, as drawn by the pen of inspiration, and the examples of primitive christianity--surpasses my comprehension. [13] Nor could we be called a sect until they made us one. Now, as we were willing to have remained among them, and to be long suffering, forbearing, forgiving, even as God for Christ's sake had forgiven us, and to extend to them the hand of charity, notwithstanding we were persuaded they were laboring under serious errors; we did not feel authorised, for a difference of opinion, to inflict any privation or punishment upon them, or any other men. We were willing to follow the instruction of the Holy Spirit--"Judge nothing before the time until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make known the counsels of the hearts; and then shall every man have praise of God." They are, to demonstration, the factionists. He that makes a division, is, according to all our conceptions, the factionist. But these sheep, what have they done? The large majority of the Baptist people we consider not culpable for these high-handed measures of a few of their leaders. They are within the kingdom of Messiah; that is, all who have believed with their whole heart in Jesus of Nazareth as the Son of God, and reformed their lives. This was our reason for wishing to continue with you, brethren; and for this reason we can still extend the hand of fellowship to all of you who maintain the character of disciples. Yes, brethren, we can take the New Testament in our hands, and meet every sinner under heaven, that believes it with his whole heart, and obeys it in the actions of his life and in the language of his lips. If this is dogmatism or sectarianism, so let it be. If this is of a disorganizing and demoralizing tendency, so let it be. We know that truth is great and mighty above all things, and will prevail; and this, I am persuaded, will be the only legitimate principle upon which the millennial day will be ushered in--if by moral means, and not by the terrific judgments of God, that glorious day is to dawn upon the world. The world can do no better than it has done on these sectarian establishments. If on the apostolic ground we cannot build, we cannot build on the sand of human opinions. Thus, brethren, we stand upon immutable ground, and before our superstructure can be razed, our foundation must be destroyed. We regard not the tongue of reproach or slander; none of these things move us. Let us, like the bee, draw honey from the bitterest herb. Let us live down the tongue of slander. Heretofore we have been oppressed, persecuted, and cast down. These things have too often embittered our spirits; but we have escaped with our lives in our hands; while thousands, from the same cause, have been sacrificed like the beast of the field. Let us be thankful to our heavenly Father, and take courage to press on toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. We have nothing to fear from such men, but that factious spirit which has always destroyed the disciples that obeyed God rather than man. If that get among us, alas for us! for it has been a hindrance to the salvation of the world. [See Rev. xii. 10.]

      I can inform you, that the proceedings of the Association will produce one of two things--the downfall of the Baptists, or the vassalage [14] of every member that joins them. This thing is of the Lord, and we ought to rejoice in all his works, though they are like the devouring fire. Every unprejudiced intelligent man and woman will refuse to submit to such a dictation. They will not, in this day of gospel light and liberty, make an association of intolerant clergymen, "whose craft is in danger," their Saviour. I have heard of friends coming forward to aid us in erecting houses of worship in several neighborhoods. Liberty is too sweet to be sacrificed to a few ambitious men, whose love of power and the fleece s greater than that of the flock. How such men as Andrew Broaddus Richard Claybrook, and John Goodall, who knew better, could have descended to such unchristian conduct, is astonishing to every intelligent man that has spoken of these proceedings to me.² It is well known that the author of the preamble and resolution has lost his standing with the intelligent and unprejudiced part of society in the city of Richmond. His oppressing, or rather impressing an intelligent pious female, contrary to her wish, into his service, drew forth from Mr. Broaddus a card which was published in the Herald in 1828. This "meek, pure, peaceable man, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy;" all at once ushered forth an angry reply, charging Mr. Broaddus with falsehood, and with being made a monkey's paw. Mr. Keeling stept forth and sustained Mr. Broaddus by documents taken from the proceedings of Kerr's church against this body. Broaddus then demanded an explanation, or reference to his brethren of this conduct of Kerr's; which was not granted as I have heard of: consequently, Keeling being under his government, was charged with the basest conduct, and every effort was used to sink his reputation, which this "oppresser of the brethren" so much delights in. Keeling came out of this furnace without even the smell of fire on his garment, tenfold more valuable than his accusers.³ This restless and ambitious man, whose love of power and the fleece has kept his church more or less in the fire of contention ever since, yet talks about others disturbing the peace and harmony of the churches. Many of you may remember what a state of things he produced in the city of Richmond, by collecting, by previous appointment, in the night, the colored people, in order to make a collection of money from these poor creatures for his support. You must have seen in the Herald of October 7th, 1831, the evidence of this man's "divine love," "the spirit and manner of his writings" how "remarkably he was filled with the mind of Christ;" "his suffering long; his kindness; not vaunting himself; not behaving himself unseemly; not puffed up; seeking not his own; not easily provoked; thinking no evil; full of charity to all men." Hear him in the [15] following words:--"Surely it requires a being whose heart is as foul as a nest of unclean birds, as poisonous as a den of hissing adders, to originate or to believe such reports. Hence I have considered the reports themselves, their malign propagators, and all those who for a moment affected to believe or countenance them, not only beneath my notice; but, if possible, beneath my contempt;" "Practical Atheists, aided by a host of sectarian bigots; nefarious hypocrites, professing to be Christians, while they are wolves in sheep's clothing:" "black mendacity;" "Satan's wooden nutmeg peddlars."

      I have thus given you a fair sample of this man's pious spirit when he is opposed or misrepresented. Now that he is guilty of the very same conduct that his accusers were, all is right. I have not mentioned these things to rail upon him--far from it; but it proves to the world the absolute necessity of a radical reformation, which he forbids us to go on with at the pains and penalties of his fellowship, and of such like kindred spirits. What a bugbear is this! This "opposer of the brethren" would make us believe he would lay down his life for the church of Jesus Christ, and yet seeks to destroy its peace, purity, and unity; nay, I am informed he said, when he produced the faction in his church, he "was willing to lay down his life for that church;" at the same time had a note in his pocket, written by himself, which was read to the church afterwards, saying, in substance--Unless that church would that night (I think it was) guaranty to him his salary of 1200 or 1,000 dollars, he should no longer consider himself their Pastor; which was done by four of the opposers of reformation. Thus you have the evidence before you of the absolute necessity of a radical reformation, in order to our freedom from the kingdom of the clergy, whose love of power and the fleece never will be surrendered without it. This is the reason of the turmoil, factions, and divisions. Hence the invitation to the churches to produce a faction, and then blame us for it.

      This Association admits they hold doctrines dear to their heart, distinct from the writings of the Apostles as they stand on the sacred pages. If they do not, they have wilfully injured us; for they all know we are opposing the inferences, seasonings, opinions, or deductions of any man or set of men, as articles of faith, or terms of union, and communion among the disciples of Jesus Christ; and in contending earnestly for the all-sufficiency and the alone sufficiency of the gospel of Jesus Christ for our salvation, as handed down to us in the sacred volume, without attaching any human opinion or scheme of men. Seeing this is the case, our opposers may take hold of either horn of the dilemma, and they are transgressors against the Lord Jesus Christ; and, without reformation, stand condemned at his bar with his laws in their hands. An awful condition, indeed!

      I will give you a fair specimen of the manner in which they teach the people. In the Religious Herald of the 21st September, 1832, under the editorial head, you will find a labored effort to produce a faction in the churches. The only mutilated Scripture, quoted for this purpose, was intended to prove that a difference in opinion or doctrine [16] was destructive of Christian fellowship. "Except two be agreed, how can they walk together? is the language of an inspired Apostle." No Apostle has ever used any such language; for it would destroy their own doctrine. Difference of opinion must, in the nature of things, be granted, or we cannot be accountable beings to God. The only Scripture that has any likeness to the one made and put into the mouth of an Apostle, you will find chap. iii. 3. of Amos: "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" Please read the 1st, 2d, to the 3d verse of the 3d chapter of the book of Amos, and you will find this Scripture was attempted to be quoted to justify their transgression against the government of our Saviour, which was used by the Prophet to show the justness of God in punishing the Israelites or that very thing--their wickedness; not that their opinions or doctrines were worse than those of Damascus, Gaza, Tyrus, Edom, Ammon, Moab, and Judah. "You only have I known of all the families of the earth; therefore I will punish you" [for a difference of opinion? No.] for all your iniquities. Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" Thus you see it was the conduct, and not the opinions or doctrines of the Israelites, God struck at. This is as correct an example of the teaching and preaching of our opponents, quoted above, as I am able to give of "their doctrines so dear to their hearts."

      Brethren. I would here remind you, that there is "a show of wisdom in will worship, in humility, and neglecting of the body, not in any honor to the satisfying of the flesh." This the Holy Spirit admits. Hence if we teach any thing not revealed in the New Testament, or enjoin any thing on the' disciples as an article of faith, or term of union and communion, for which there is not an express precept or precedent; this, to all intents and purposes, would be teaching the doctrines and commandments of men. And let all remember that such institutions, originating from the will of man, are opposed to the authority of Jesus, and to submit to them is will-worship. However wise, humble, and self-denying it may appear, it is WILL WORSHIP, not the worship of God. All commandments and doctrines of men are another gospel, different from that taught by the Holy Spirit. If those men could prove they were specially called and sent, or they were angels, yet they would be under the curse of God. See Gal. i. 8, 9. All additions, or traditions, bring their authors into condemnation; as much so, as if they had never believed the gospel. The closing address of Jesus to a dying world, stands as a lesson to us. "I, JESUS, have sent my angel to testify unto you these things in the churches. I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright and morning star. And the Spirit and Bride say, Come; let him that heareth say, Come," &c. These men say, "You shall not say, Come." What follows? "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add thereto, these things," [what things? Surely the things spoken of in the foregoing verse were included,] "God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the [17] book of this prophesy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." See Rev. xxii. 16-19. Who are they that can say with Paul, "Let God be true, though it prove every man a liar." Such, and such only, are the willing worshippers of God. No man that makes his opinions of truth terms of union and communion, can be a willing worshipper of God. A will-worshipper he may be, the Holy Spirit admits. Brethren, our serving God as Paul did before his conversion, "from his forefathers, with pure conscience;" our zeal for the traditions of men, compassing sea and land; our eloquence, like an Apollos; our self denying conduct, like the hermit; our voluntary humility, like the sisters of charity; or our show of wisdom, or mortification of the flesh--all, all will not do, if we knowingly add to, or take from, the written word of God. Gone, forever gone, damned, forever damned must we be. Seeing these things will be so, let us keep a watchful eye over ourselves, lest we should follow the opinions and doctrines of uninspired men. "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

	Yours in the blessed hope of a glorious immortality,
THOMAS M. HENLEY.

      Being requested by our correspondent, and by other brethren in Virginia, to give a place to the preceding address, under the assurance that the crisis in Virginia required it, we comply with their wishes, and reserve the second part of our address to the Virginia Baptists till next month. The allusions and direct references to one or two individuals in the preceding document, is, perhaps, necessary to the object of the writer, to enforce the necessity of reformation; but the propriety of such illustrations may be questionable, as it gives a conspicuity to certain individuals, which, while it may be gratifying to them, affords them an opportunity to ring the changes on the eight notes of persecution. Though no man, with but one eye, and that of imperfect organization, can think that either the honor, reproach, or persecution of such men is "for righteousness sake." For our part, we sympathize even with Mr. Kerr and his associates in this crisis. They are alarmed for "the double honor" which they have so long enjoyed; and as the moment of fear, or anger, or strong passion, is not the time of reason nor reflection, they are precipitated to acts and deeds, of which, at another time, and in other circumstances, they would have considered themselves wholly incapable. And no doubt the time may come, when reason resumes her throne, that they will mourn over the rash measures and ill-advised councils which must ultimate in their own prostration and disgrace. "He that exalts himself shall be humbled, and he that humbles himself shall be exalted." As the intelligence of the community rises, such men and measures must, in the same ratio, fall in public esteem. And he who would keep pace with the growing intelligence of the community at this [18] day, must double his diligence, or he will be found far in the rear of his contemporaries--in company with men of other times, who could not spell the words which our children now pronounce with the utmost ease.

EDITOR.

      THE following heart-touching appeal from the sons of Israel, deserves the most sympathizing attention from all among the Gentiles, who are the children of Abraham by promise. Will not the Gentile, who is grafted into the good olive tree, when he reads the following letter from the remnant of Jacob according to the flesh, remember this oracle of Moses. It was written 3330 years ago:--

      "The land of your enemies shall eat you up. And they that are left of you shall pine away in their iniquity in their enemy's lands; and also in the iniquity of their fathers shall they pine away with them. If they shall confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their fathers, with their trespasses which they trespassed against me, and also that they have walked contrary to me, and that I also have walked contrary to them, and brought them into the land of their enemies; if then their uncircumcised hearts be humbled, and they then accept of the punishment of their iniquity; then will I remember my covenant with Jacob, and also my covenant with Isaac, and also my covenant with Abraham will I remember; and I will remember the land. I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the heathen: for I am the Lord their God."

EDITOR M. H.

From the New York Courier & Inquirer.

      WE beg leave to invite the attention of the benevolent to the following statement of the distressed situation of the Jews in Jerusalem, and to their appeal for aid. We indulge a hope that the aid they seek will not be withheld; and as the society established in this country for the conversion of the Jews, have a large fund, without any ostensible mode of appropriating it to a good purpose, it is presumed that they will transmit it to Jerusalem with as little delay as possible.

From the Christian Intelligencer.

      DR. WESTBROOK--The following is a literal version of the letter which the Rabbi Enoch Zindal, now in our city, brought from the Jews of Jerusalem. On Monday evening last this learned Jew met a party of our clergymen, and other friends, in Dr. Brownlee's study. Mr. Roy, an eminent Hebrew scholar, presented this version which he made, together with the original document, written in beautiful Hebrew letter, without points. It was examined by the learned gentlemen present. The evening was spent in hearing the Rabbi, who is [19] a truly polite and accomplished man, detail many interesting things relative to Jerusalem, the holy city, and the condition of the Jews there.

      He spoke of the famous Mosque, which stands on the site of Solomon's Temple; and stated that it was the custom of his afflicted and bowed down people, especially the Priests, to go to the west wall of the Mosque, where once stood the west wall of the Temple, and, kneeling down, to offer up prayers to Jehovah the Almighty God in behalf of their nation. This explains a singular expression in the beginning of the following letter.

      He admitted the fact that his people had more than once attempted, in olden times, to rebuild the Temple; but that infallible proofs of God's displeasure had always prevented it. This tradition may refer to the attempts in the Emperor Julian's time.

      He gave replies to many difficult questions proposed to him on various passages of the Hebrew Bible. His views of the Nahash, the serpent who tempted our first parent, exhibit fully as much originality as those of Dr. Adam Clark. The latter decides this shrewd being to have been the ourang outang. Our Rabbi makes it a singular kind of beast, having a kind of a soul; and appointed by God to be a waiter, a body attendant on our first parents. Into this creature the devil entered, and made him an instrument of the temptation. This, however, he gave out of the Cabbals and Targum.

      He gave some original views on the giants of the days of Noah; showing them to be different (as in the Hebrew expression they are strikingly distinguished) from the Goliaths, and the Anakim. They were giants in wickedness, the wicked children of profligate great men, and nobles!

      The Rabbi, who is a thorough-going Jew, felt some difficulty when requested to explain how the Jews are to determine the evidence of their coming Messiah, proceeding in lineal descent from the tribe of Judah, and house of David. For he admitted the lists of the genealogy had utterly perished. When requested by Dr. Knox to explain his views of Daniel's seventy weeks, the Rabbi shrugged up his shoulders, and declined the task. He is fully in the belief of the Jews being recalled to their own land; and, by the calculation he makes, this recall is at the very door. It is to commence in the year 1841--only nine years hence. He believes that the present movements of the victorious Egyptians are now working out their deliverance. The Jews consider the Mahometans as the head of their oppressors, and the Court of Constantinople as the head of the Mahometan power. That being laid low, (and he supposes by the Pacha of Egypt, who is the avowed friend of the Jews,) their deliverance will then be speedily hastened.

      The Rabbi's people of Jerusalem had heard of the exceeding benevolence and charity of the Americans. These are his own words:--"You did much for the Greeks; and will you not admit, even as Christians, lovers of the Old Testament Patriarchs and Prophets, that you owe at least as much--nay, much more, to us the Jews?" "Yes," [20] said a gentleman present, "we love your people for the love of Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob." "Yes," said another, "we should love and aid them for the sake of Joseph and Mary!" "And above all," said a third, "for the Son of Mary: Our Redeemer, according to the flesh, was a Jew!"

      And as this is the first appeal made to us as Christians, by the Jews, direct from Jerusalem, we should, by responding to the voice of suffering humanity, give them an evidence that we are, as Christians, their true and sincere friends.

      The Rabbi begs leave to refer those who may feel disposed to aid the poor suffering Jews at Jerusalem, to the following gentlemen, who have kindly undertaken to receive any funds which benevolent Christians may condescend to give, viz.--The Rev. Mr. SCHROEDER; the Rev. JACOB BRODHEAD, D. D.; the Rev. W. W. PHILIPS, D. D.; the Rev. W. C. BROWNLEE, D. D.

      From the City of the Great King: Peace and blessing to the great and good gentlemen who are disposed to be benevolent to all friends and foes.

      Mordecai Noah, we have written to you from the Holy Lands and from the City of Jerusalem. We pray always by the west wall of the Temple, and by all the holy places, for all the nations of the earth who remember us in our low estate. The voice of Zion speaks weeping and lamenting for the wretched state of her children; for their faces are black with hunger. All the people of foreign nations here are very poor, and unable to give us relief. The learned men and Rabbis, widows and orphan children that were supported by Russia, Poland, and Germany, are cut off from their former supplies, and receive no compensation from those nations. We are so poor, and in such distress, that we cannot represent our situation in writing. We are hungry, thirsty, and naked. Our children ask bread, and we have none to give them. And, in addition to this, the Turks have laid us under a contribution of fifty thousand dollars, which, if not paid, will be the ruin of all the Jews here. Dear sir, we did not know how to help ourselves; and we heard of your great and benevolent feelings, and have sent on the Rabbi Enoch Zindal, of Jerusalem, son of the great Rabbi Hersh, one of the most learned men in the world. He will fully explain to you our afflictions. We, therefore, pray you to help him by any way and means in your power, by obtaining donations, and forming societies among all denominations. And we will pray for you in all the holy places, and from the sepulchres of the holy Prophets; 'and we hope with all the scattered tribes, and the Messiah at their head, to meet you soon in the Holy City, the desire of all nations.

(Signed)

Rabbi TOBIAS SOLOMON,             The High Priest of Jerusalem, [and others.] [21]

      THE celebrated Dr. Beattie, of Aberdeen, well known in the republic of letters, in a volume of his epistles to his correspondents, expresses himself in the following, style concerning the literary labors of the author of the version of the Testimonies of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The learned reader needs not to be informed that Drs. Beattie and Campbell were Professors in the same University, and occupied a large space in the chronicles of Scotch literature in the close of the last century. The judgment of such a man as Dr. Beattie is of more moral weight than the decision of a generation of partizans fired by a misguided zeal, or shackled by the restraints of religious prejudice. The reader will perceive from these letters, what sort of spirit actuated this illustrious critic, who spent so many years in completing a version of about one-third of the apostolic writings.

EDITOR.

"ABERDEEN, 25th October, 1782.

      "ELPHINSTON'S 'Martial' is just come to hand. It is truly a unique. The specimens formerly, published did very well to laugh at; but a whole quarto of nonsense and gibberish is too much. It is strange that a man, not wholly illiterate, should have lived so long in England, without learning the language.

      "I have lately been very much entertained' and instructed with a work of a different nature, which will do honor to this country, and be a blessing to mankind--Dr. Campbell's Translation of the four Gospels, with explanatory and critical annotations. I have revised the first eighteen chapters of Matthew; and am really astonished at the learning and accuracy of the author. He had before given the world sufficient proofs of both; but this will be his greatest work. It will be accompanied with preliminary dissertations, for explaining what could not be conveniently illustrated in notes. I have read the titles of the Dissertations, and shall soon have them in my hands. The whole will make, as I guess, two quarto volumes. I have several times studied the gospels in the original; but had no idea, till now, that the common translation stood so much in need of a revisal."

"ABERDEEN, 2d March, 1783.

      "I HAVE been more idle, and more in company, this winter than I used to be; which the Doctor tells me is good for my health. But I [22] have not been quite idle. I have revised, with all the attention I am master of, Dr. Campbell's new translation of Matthew and Mark, with the notes upon it, and ten or twelve of his preliminary dissertations; and that this revisal has been the work of some time, you will readily believe, when I tell you, that I have written, of critical remarks, not less than seventy or eighty quarto pages. Many of these, indeed, I thought of little moment; but as lovers before marriage are advised to be as quick-sighted, and after marriage as blind as possible, to one another's faults; so I consider it my duty to be as captious as possible in the revisal of a friend's work before publication, and when it is published to be captious no longer. The Principal, however, is pleased to think more favorably than I do of my strictures, and tells me he has adopted nine-tenths of them. Of the translation of Luke and John, and the notes upon it, and of four or five more preliminary dissertations, he has the materials almost ready; but they are not yet put together. The whole will amount to two large quartos at least; and will, in my opinion, be one of the most important publications that has appeared in our time. It is really a treasure of theological learning, exact criticism, and sound divinity; and has given me more information, in regard to what may be called scriptural knowledge, than all the other books I have ever read. His translation conveys the meaning of the original very correctly, and, so far as i could observe, neither adds nor takes away a single idea; but I have told him, that I wish it had been more strictly literal, and more conformable to the Greek (or rather to the Hebrew) idiom, which is in many things congenial to the English. His love of conciseness makes him sometimes, less simple, though perhaps not less expressive, than the original, and sometimes less harmonious than the common version. But I believe most of the passages of this sort, that I objected to, will be mended."

"ABERDEEN, 25th March, 1789.

      "MY friend Dr. Campbell's great work (a new translation of the Gospels, with preliminary Dissertations, an Notes critical and explanatory, in two volumes 4to) is published at last. I carefully read the whole manuscript, and wrote many a sheet of remarks and criticisms upon it; and have no scruple to say, that it is one of the most important publications in theology, if not the most important, that has appeared in my time. It will give the public, at least the rational part of the public, a very high idea of the learning, acuteness, industry, candor, and piety of the author; who is my next neighbor, and with whom I have lived in the same society, upon the most intimate terms, for almost, thirty years. It is about forty years since he engaged in this important work; and yet I am afraid he will not get so much by it as Mr. Sheridan did by the comedy of the Duenna." [23]

"ABERDEEN, 31st January, 1791.

      "I HAVE too often sent you letters that must have given you pain: I am happy in having it in my power to send one that will give you pleasure. I beg you will let Mr. Baron Gordon and Mr. Arbuthnot know the contents of it.

      "Our Principal Campbell's disorder has taken an unexpected and very favorable turn. I sat with him half an hour today, and found, to my inexpressible satisfaction, that his fever is gone; that he has little to complain of, and that he now begins to have hopes of recovery. I have seldom seen him more cheerful: and he would willingly have talked much more than I would allow him to do. Few things have ever happened to me in life that gave me more satisfaction than the prospect of his recovery. It is a blessing to the public, of inestimable benefit to Marishal College, and to me a very singular mercy. In consequence of it, I feel my heart more disengaged and light, than it has been these many months. May God confirm his recovery, and preserve him! The physicians both entertain sanguine hopes.

      "You, my dear sir, and I, have seen several instances of the power of christianity in triumphing over death. I saw many instances of it on a late occasion, that nearly affected me. I must give you a little anecdote which Mrs. Campbell told me today:--At a time when Dr. Campbell seemed to be just expiring, and had told his wife and niece that it was so, a cordial happened unexpectedly to give him relief. As soon as he was able to speak, he said that he wondered to see their countenances so melancholy, and covered with tears, in the apprehension of his departure. At that instant, said he, I felt my mind in such a state, in the thoughts of my immediate dissolution, that I can express my feelings in no other way, than by saying, that I was in a rapture. The feelings of such a mind as Dr. Campbell's, in such an awful moment, when he certainly retained the full use of all his faculties, deserve to be attended to. When will an infidel die such a death!

      "I have a thousand things to say; but after what I said last, every thing else is impertinent. Adieu. May God bless Lady Forbes and your family."

FOR THE MILLENNIAL HARBINGER.

      The Spirit breathes where he pleases, and you hear the voice of him; but cannot tell whence it comes and whither it goes: so is every person who is born of the Spirit.--John iii. 8.

      'TO err is human.' This the experience and observation of every man attest. But to confess, our errors, how hard! How much more natural--how much more congenial to the mind of the flesh, to justify, excuse, or palliate them. And yet, 'To confess that we have erred, [24] when convinced of the fact, is only saying, that we are wiser today than we were yesterday.' And when the TRUTH requires it, alike do our duty and our happiness.

      For several years past, the TRUTH with us has been the pearl of great price: in the pursuit of it, we have had occasion, on many points, to change our views--to yield up opinions; and some, from their supposed value, very dear to us. But this is the common experience of all, whose object is the same, and who take the same course of examining, thinking, and re-examining for themselves, to attain it. Three years ago, having added to our faith from testimony; and to our knowledge, from studying the Scriptures; we were constrained to give up a whole set of opinions, and with them (they having been principles of action) 'a living,' that we might keep a good conscience, and the better follow and serve our Lord and Redeemer. But still we are 'human.' Since our essay on "Wind and Spirit" of December last was published, we have discovered in it the following errors:--

      1. "It," referring to the Holy Spirit, is several times used for he.

      2. There being nothing in Greek expressed for the English nominative to "comes" and "goes"--as the pronoun may be either "it" or "he;" and may refer to sound, report, "voice," or "Spirit;" we would now, after the sentence, "As you know not whence the Spirit of God comes, and whither he goes," have supplied; or the voice of him, or the report of his breathing.

      3. We said, "We have but one word," &c. "Pneuma."

      We meant not by this, that Pneuma was the only word in the Greek language translated into English by either wind or spirit. We knew that anemos, in the Septuagint of the Old, and in the Greek of the New Testament, was also rendered wind. But we meant that Pneuma was the only representative of both. But, "but" in this sentence may be an error. But, again--(We now come to the CAPITAL mistake.) Knowing the Septuagint use of the word Pneuma, we supposed the New Testament use to be the same. This we have since found to be an error.

      What now have we lost, and what gained by this discovery? As on the above supposition rested the corner stone of our edifice; what comes of the superstructure--of the new translation? Is it wind--all WIND? Nay, verily: but spirit--all SPIRIT! The wind is all blown away, and with it the sand of supposition. We know our translation to be based upon rock. It is spirit and not wind, three hundred and thirty-nine to one! John iii. 8. if it be an exception, is the only one in all the New Testament, in which the word Pneuma occurs three hundred and thirty-nine times! Pneumata, Heb. i. 7. translated in the common version spirits, being a quotation from the Old Testament, (Psalm civ. 4.) we do not regard as an exception; and would not, if in this place translated winds. "He makes winds his angels." But anemos is the New Testament word for wind. This occurs twenty-nine times; in all of which it is translated wind, and in none spirit. Anemos for wind, twenty-nine to two. John iii. 8. and Acts ii. are exceptions, or rather supplements, in the common version of wind being [25] made from other words. Putting both together, three hundred and thirty-nine, plus thirty-one, minus the exceptions, we have THREE HUNDRED AND SEVENTY to TWO!!

      Now had Pneuma been used in the New Testament as in the Old, for both wind and spirit; having also this more definite word, anemos, for wind; we would here have offered two additional arguments for our translation on our first premises:--1st. From the Saviour's knowledge and previous use of anemos; and 2d. From the meaning of thelei, (pleases,) in construction with Pneuma: but now we need them not. It now appears, that we have two words in the Greek of the New Testament, viz. pneuma and anemos, for the two English words spirit and wind; and that they are never used in these writings interchangeably: therefore, if spirit in English means spirit, and not wind; and if wind in English means wind, and not spirit;--then must Pneuma, John iii. 8. be translated, as we have rendered it, spirit first and last.

      A word or two farther now, on the meaning of this passage. In the beginning, of Acts ii. we are informed, that 'when the day of Pentecost had fully arrived, the Apostles and their companions were all, with one accord, in one place; and, suddenly, there came from heaven, echos, a sound, as of a rushing, mighty pnoes, breathing, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.' The effect of this was, 'there appeared to them separated tongues, as of fire; and it rested upon each of them. And they were all filled pneumatos agiou, with the Holy Spirit.' How happily correspondent are our two exceptions! In the first (John iii. 8) we have to Pneuma pnei, the Spirit breathes; and in the second (Acts ii. 2.) pnoes Pneumatos, the breathing of the Spirit, shown. Now, for 'the report of it'--'the sound,' or 'rumor of the Spirit's breathing;'--or, as we have translated ten phonen autou, at the head of this article, the voice of him.'--"And they began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance" The 'report of it,' or 'the Spirit's voice,' it hence appears, was then heard in the Spirit's word. But, as with Nicodemus a short time before, who heard it from the mouth of him, 'who spoke as man never spoke;' so now with the multitudes here assembled; 'they were all in amazement and perplexity, and said one to another, What does this mean? Others mocking, said, These men are filled with new wine.' They knew not whence the voice came, nor whither it went; nor whence nor whither the Divine Agent, who spoke to them. But what said Peter? "These men are not drunk, as you suppose; but this is that which was spoken of by the Prophet Joel: "And it shall come to pass, in the last days, says God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh."

PHILOLOGUS.

      SIR WALTER SCOTT, the star that beamed with such effulgence in the heavens of romance, has vanished from the gaze of mortals. The lovers of poetry and fiction are in deep mourning; [26] and all the votaries of Waverly are clothed in sadness. The fall of a monarch, from the giddy heights of his ambition; or the demise of some mighty chief, who guided the destinies of nations, could not call forth such a display of sorrow, as the exit of this most accomplished story-teller. The genius, the admirable genius of the author of fifty tales of fashion, dwells upon the tongues of all the young Misses and Masters, who riot upon the delicious products of imagination. The veteran maids and the ruthless odd fellows, who frequent enchanted fields and castles, exclaim, that the immortal author of a hundred romantic visions has "paid the debt of nature," and that mortal eyes shall never see his like again. The critics and reviewers, the poetasters and novelists, the romancers and fabulists, are in bitterness because their model is no more--because this liberal purveyor for their amusement has left the world of shadows, and has mingled with the nations of the dead in the world of realities.

      The world often most admires that which has the least true merit. If some extraordinary genius, or some giant of prodigious stature, appear upon the stage, the pigmies are all amazed, and know not how to limit their admiration. But if real goodness, which is only another name for real greatness, happen to appear among us, only one in a thousand sees any thing divine in it. Yet even the giddy multitude, in some reflecting moment, is constrained to admit that no person is worthy of praise for his intellectual stature, more than for his animal dimensions: and that matters of choice, and not of contingence, are the proper subjects of praise or blame.

      But no man is a scholar, a poet, or an author by the mere force of genius. Much labor, care, and toil are necessary to furnish the most splendid genius with the materials for future creations. Grant all this, and more: the miser too is laborious; so are all the votaries of pleasure. Neither talent nor toil, apart, or united, are worthy of admiration, unless consecrated to some high end, pregnant with real good to man.

      To whom, then, let us ask, is the memory of Sir Walter Scott most dear? To those, doubtless, to whom the labors of his pen administered the most gratification. And who are they?--

      We ask not whether he offered incense to the Whigs or Tories, or labored to prop the falling glories of the British Throne in his Life of Napoleon. We ask not, whether he sought to rivet again the chains of a heartless hierarchy upon the lacerated necks of an oppressed people. We do not inquire whether he labored to erase from the escutcheons of English Lords and Scottish Peers the stigmata of their ancestors, either in his poems or his novels; but we ask, To what taste, and to what fashion, and to what sort of minds did he devote the whole labors of his life?--The airy, frothy, and fantastic minds of those who live without an object, and die without a hope.

      But "he wrote some sermons." So did the author of Tristram Shandy and the far-famed Swift. Yes, these versatile genii have ministered to the stage, the toilet, and the pulpit with equal impartiality and eclat. They have made the theatres resound with acclamations; and on Sundays, their sermons, well pronounced, have extorted from the [27] eyes of sinners, tears of the deepest contrition. Admirable men! No wonder the glare of their genius so dazzles the eyes of their admirers that they cannot see objects of real worth.

      The world, however, knows how to appreciate them that appreciate it, and will be lavish of its praises upon them who minister to its taste. But it has no honors nor encomiums for them who honor God and their own race. The closest imitator of the great model of every perfection--the most devoted follower of the Saviour of the world, who spends his days and nights in acts of human kindness--who points the perishing sinner to the Lamb of God--who visits the abodes of affliction and distress--who wipes the tear of misery from the cheek of woe, and pours the wine and oil of Christian sympathy into the wounds and bruises of the unfortunate--gives up the ghost, and the world is silent! No panegyrist dilates upon his excellencies, or recounts his hundred acts of heaven-born charity, the least of which will shine with incomparably superior splendor in the true heaven of real glory, than ever shone this meteor in the ideal heavens of the idolators of fiction.

      It is thus, however, the god of this world holds in homage to himself the sons of the flesh; and by such rewards he allures and binds to his interests the best talents, as well as the thoughtless crowds who feel not the majesty of Almighty Love, and brooke not submission to the Prince of Peace. Alas, for the times! Alas, for Christian nations! when the taste and fashion, which fill the higher circles and the lofty places in society, can bestow such unmeasured praises on the inventor of a thousand fables, because he has told them in a graceful style; and allow to die neglected and unnoticed the sons of God, the unassuming disciples of him who assiduously went about doing good.

      But they are not of this world, and the world acknowledges them not. Yet there is a world where they will shine in brighter glories; where their virtues will be all appreciated: for there is one whose judgment of human worth, of true greatness, and true goodness, cannot be biassed by false appearances, and which infinitely preponderates over the reviews, and criticisms, and verdicts of the whole race of sycophants who judge after the flesh. He it is that can bestow an immortality of fame on earth, and an eternity of honor in the highest heavens. It was he who said, 'Wheresoever in all this world the gospel is preached, this token of love to my person, which this woman has bestowed, shall be told to her honor.'

      Christians, let us aspire to the honor which comes from God, and let us devote our talents, whether few or many, to the honor of our Lord, and to the good of those he loves; and thus our names, though not enrolled amongst the mighty, and the noble, and the illustrious on earth, will be found engraven on the heart of him who wears the eternal crown of unfading glory in the Palace of the Universe.

Dear Brother Campbell,

      AN Editor, I apprehend, occupies, in some degree, the place of a Moderator or President of a deliberative body. It is his part to see that due decorum be observed on the part of correspondents, and also that they speak so as to conduce to the purposes of edification in reference to the subject in hand. Recognizing you fully in this capacity on the present occasion, I venture again (and intend to be brief) to address you; and, through you, Philalethes, on the subject of his late reply to me, leaving you vested with full discretion to exercise the call to order.

      In the first place, I thank you for your kind effort to conciliate, and to show that there is no real difference between Philalethes and myself. This I was inclined to think, when first his criticism on "matheteuo" appeared. It seems to me, however, that the use of the epithets "real," "formal," "nominal," and "avowed," instead of doing good, do but "lead to bewilder." We see no such terms in the Scriptures--they take a straight forward course--we see no such distinctions as "real and avowed disciples." When they speak of disciples, they mean what they say exactly, and do not turn aside to obviate the quibbles which we poor erring mortals frequently find it necessary to anticipate. If any are disposed to quibble in reference to God's communications to us, they do it at their peril.

      Philalethes says, "It is untrue, that however real a disciple or person may have been, he would not have been recognized by the Apostles as such, unless immersed." I assert, and he denies. I say an unimmersed person would not have been recognized as a disciple by the Apostles. Philalethes says he would. Now where is his proof? He does, indeed, seem to think he has proved it; for he says, "It is, therefore, untrue;" but where is his proof? Nothing but his own argument, not a scrap of Scripture, not an example from the authoritative book. Where is one called a disciple from the opening of Messiah's reign, who was not immersed? Sir, I conceive there was more in the critical remarks offered by yourself on this point some time ago, than has been generally conceded. My observation and reading have not been sufficiently extensive to authorize me fully to assume the position which you took with regard to the imperative mood and the active participle; but this much, I am very much inclined to think, that as a general position, the participle is a word of circumstance to the verb in connexion with which it is used--that it conveys the idea of either cause, manner, time, &c. I think Philalethes will allow that immersing is at least one of the circumstances or adjuncts attending the making of a disciple. But he talks a good deal about the "examination previous to immersion, to which the Apostles subjected all applicants for immersion in their day,", and the subsequent practice "even in our day;" and offers this as "conclusive evidence" that persons were recognized as disciples before [29] immersion. What this examination was, is, or should be, he presumes not to say. For my part, I should be glad to know what the examination was, to which the Apostles subjected candidates for immersion. We hear much about examining candidates: I wish some one would show from Scripture what the examination should be. I know of nothing required by them, but some overt act, by which they openly declared their hearty disposition to acknowledge Jesus as Lord, indicating their full belief that he is the character he claims to be, and their wish to be his disciples. Philalethes talks about nominal⁴ disciples; that is, disciples having the name; and seems to admit, they acquire the name in immersion. This, I think, is conceding a good deal. A body, without a name, is, I apprehend, in law, a nonentity, not known authoritatively to exist, can neither act, nor be the subject of action. So an unimmersed disciple, ("Christian,") if I may be allowed the expression,) that is, a disciple without the name, or without being named--in old style "christened," is no disciple at all--he may be prepared to, be made a disciple; but a disciple he is not, until lawfully named. By the way, let not Philalethes suppose that I think the bare circumstance of being immersed can make a disciple. No; far from it. We have heard much said about the "fruits meet for repentance," which John required of candidates for his immersion; and his is called "the immersion of repentance," &c. But what were these fruits? Were they fruits ascertained to exist by an examination into the previous lives of the candidates, or was it simply a confession of sins, or being sinners? It is said in one place, "They were immersed confessing their sins." I apprehend from all I can learn from the New Testament, the fruits consisted in the confession of sins, with such, external appearance of sincerity as was exhibited at the time. We hear too, in our days, of fruits meet for repentance; and I admit we ought to ask for all that was called for by the Apostles. Did they consist of any thing more than a professed hearty belief in the Lord Jesus Christ as the Son of God, accompanied with the manifestation of a disposition immediately to commence a hearty obedience to him in all things? I have assumed the name of Inquirer, not merely for the sake of a name: I do profess in earnest to be an inquirer, and if Philalethes has any light to bestow from Scripture on the subject, I beseech him to bestow it. He says, "No person, for example, can be considered as bound to perform the act of immersion before he has performed many other acts prescribed by God." Now what these "many other acts" are, I beg him to particularize. I know there are previous acts to be performed: we must hear the word of the Lord--we must believe and also repent--and we are required to manifest the sincerity of this repentance by a prompt obedience; and the first thing required to be done, is to be immersed in the name of the Lord. Really, it appears to me the difficulty of being prepared for immersion is represented to be so great, and so many things to be [30] performed, that we can hardly expect many "little children" to be prepared to perform the act of immersion. Finally, upon this point, I would ask, Can a person who feels it his duty to obey the Lord Jesus, and is also willing and desirous to obey him, be unprepared to perform the act of immersion, provided he knows it to be his duty to be immersed?

      I beg Philalethes will not be offended at my suggesting that he is an old man and a Scotchman. I declare I did not use these as terms of reproach or ridicule. I do feel it my duty to pay respect to grey hairs, and their being on the head of a Scotchman does not at all diminish this feeling of respect--nay, it rather enhances this feeling. His being a Scotchman rather adds to his weight of character with me. To the Scotch the world is much indebted. Neither did I intend (if it had that appearance) "to dismiss with a sneer the distinction which Philalethes has made between the terms commission and command." Had I expressed a preference for either term (although I did not think much about the difference) I should have given it to his choice.

      It only remains for me to notice the manner in which Philalethes has got over what he is pleased to call "the inconsistency of Philalethes sentiments." And I cannot but think, that when he holds up to light the expressions "God's own unadulterated, unmixed message," and "blundering translation," applied to this very same message, he must still see inconsistency, covered as they are by paint of a different color, which he has spread over them. If he knew that our common version was worthy of terms of exception so strong as he has used, and in the conviction in which he has used them--viz. the case of an individual who professed to be "engaged in trying to lead his fellow-creatures to subjection to the Saviour of sinners," using as the instrument this "unadulterated, unmixed message," an instrument which he himself had commended in terms so emphatic; I say, if he knew this, why did he use these terms? Sir, does Philalethes mean to say, that no person unacquainted with Greek and Hebrew, should venture to talk to his fellow creatures on the subject of immersion or baptism, and to express his conceptions of the action to be performed in submitting to it, and of the import of the institution to those who do submit to it? If we are not to rely upon translation, we are in a sad condition; for we have none among us who have the Scriptures in any other way--none who use the Greek and Hebrew languages as their mother tongue: even our erudite friend and brother is indebted to translation for his knowledge of the Scriptures. How comes he possessed of the meaning of a Greek word, but by translation? Does his lexicon more for him than to furnish him with a translation; and can he as a teacher of Christianity do more for those whom he instructs, than furnish them with a translation? Aye, and does he "venture to assure his fellow-creatures that he is publishing to them God's message, and nothing but God's message?" If he does, I can assure him he ventures upon more than I have ever heard our brother John do. I have never known him make assertions so bold and sweeping; he is too modest to assume so much. Sir, there are bounds in things; there is a point beyond and on this side which right cannot be:--and [31] if Philalethes has not gone beyond the right point, in speaking of translations, and of Greek and Hebrew, I labor under considerable misconceptions. Will Philalethes assert that the candid, unprejudiced reader of our common version cannot learn from it all that it is needful for him to know and practise; or that one who wishes to lead his fellow-creatures to the Saviour of sinners, cannot find in this "blundering translation" the instructions necessary to be imparted? By the way, he ought to be informed that John professes not to be a clergyman.

      I believe I have now said all that was upon my mind on this subject, except to repeat my assurance to Philalethes that I have no wish to wound his feelings, and to beg him not to take any thing herein written as dictated by any feelings of hostility to him. I did think a wrong construction had been placed upon his essay on "matheteuo;" I had long thought so, and I took the liberty of expressing this conviction. And I cannot but think, that upon mature reflection, he will see that he went too far in his "strictures on John," when speaking of that very translation which he had himself so strongly recommended. I pretend not to vie with him in him in point of erudition, nor would I enter into a grave controversy with him in any matter in which we should have to range widely in the fields of literature.

	Yours in the Lord.
INQUIRER.

      MR. CLELAND, like the scuttle-fish in danger of its enemy, has muddied the water by a discharge of the most atrabilious scurrility. His No. 7. now lying before me, than which a more impotent and vulgar document has not lately appeared, even from the licensed retailers of political abuse, exhibits a pravity rarely excelled by any of the hoary veterans in the crusade for orthodoxy. When argument fails this has usually been the resort of knaves; but we expected better things from this revered Pastor of ancient Presbyterianism.

      The Editor of this paper, among the numerous analogies and illustrations submitted to the candid reader, indicative of the design of Christian immersion, always gave a preference to those found in the Christian Scriptures; amongst which birth, circumcision, marriage, citizenship, death, burial, resurrection, are most conspicuous. But these were always used as illustrations--not as arguments. It is admitted that there is some argument in well selected analogies, especially when these have been introduced by infallible teachers, and not carried beyond the obvious limits; but these are not with us the grounds of reliance. We rely upon the unfigurative and positive declarations of the Holy Spirit, that great advocate and pleader for Messiah. [32]

      We have, however, used no other declarations, and expatiated on no other analogies than those unequivocally asserted in the Christian Scriptures. But for doing this--for using the words of Peter--we have been by Mrs. Cleland accosted in the following courteous and gentlemanly style:--

      "This successful patentee"--"of this wonderful invention"--"this moral mechanician"--"inventor of a watery machine"--"the safety valve"--"of this soul-chilling, heart-rending, new discovered institution"--"this wonder-working affair"--"this wonderful moral machinery."

      These are the compliments of Mr. Cleland, bestowed on us for quoting Peter ii. 38. as understood by all the writers of note for four centuries after Christ, and as explained in most of the old standards of the modern sects. Thus this mild and dignified father of the Kentucky Synod--this very spiritual metaphysician and advocate of metaphysical regeneration, honors us.

      But for using the analogies introduced by Jesus, and expatiated upon by himself, John, Peter, and Paul, I allude to the analogies of "being begotten," "born again, &c.--we are told that "it is impious, irreverent, and blasphemous"--"the cheek of modesty must redden at the sight of such gross analogies, and immodest representations"--"this is a most urgent case of midwifery"--"his ministerial coadjutors will have the characteristic office and operation (of baptizing) of physico-theological midwifery."

      Reader, is not this enough? These are not the words of a scolding and denouncing vagrant peddlar of divinity, but of the talented, aged, meek, and revered Dr. Cleland of Kentucky. But you say, 'Why complain of all this? Mr. Cleland knows what best suits the spiritual taste of his own parish and people, as he helped to form that taste, and ought he not to be allowed to minister to its gratification? His parochial address compliments the judgment of his brethren; and you know what is clownish in one company is courteous in another. Mr. Cleland doubtless is the best judge of what is courteous and polite in the high circles of Presbyterians, amongst which he shines as a star of the first magnitude!'

      After excepting a few assertions which he will never prove, the marrow and fatness of his number Seven is couched in the above specimens--all the rest is skin and bone. He affirms that "the philological mistakes of Drs. Campbell and Macknight on the translation of the word baptism (by immersion) have been long ago detected and exposed." By whom?--Dr. Cleland, I suppose! He may tell this story to his congregation at home, from the sacred desk, or by the fire side, but he ought to fear the assertion of it abroad; for he will as soon prove that every student in Kentucky is as great a master of eloquence as Demosthenes himself, as the above assertion.

      I will state but one fact on this subject--and I can call it a fact in the full sense of the word; and that one fact forever puts it out of the power of Dr. Cleland to prove his assertion. The fact is this, that although bapto and its family are found more than one hundred [33] times in the Christian Scriptures, neither King James' FIFTY FOUR translators, nor any Greek Lexicon in England or America, did even once translate the word bapto nor any of its family by the words sprinkle or pour. No translator, ancient or modern--no classic dictionary, not even Parkhurst, in all the meanings of bapto or baptizo, translate it to sprinkle or pour. The King's translators have three times translated it to dip; and this, with their never translating it by sprinkle or pour, will make it a hard task for Dr. Cleland to redeem his pledge.

      He almost repudiates Drs. Campbell and Macknight from his brotherhood, (worthy, indeed, to be repudiated, for their honesty, from such an alliance,) because they dared to defend immersion as the legitimate and unequivocal meaning of baptisma.

      If the Presbyterians did not revere Dr. Cleland, I would offer a long apology to my readers for the quotations which I have made from this Number Seven. Such vulgarisms coming from any other quarter, should not have been printed on these pages. Has it, indeed, come to this, that because the Saviour declared that "unless a man be born again," "born of water and Spirit," "he cannot enter into his kingdom," that every professed Christian who uses this analogy, or quotes these words, must be held up as immodest, irreverent, and blasphemous--and that those who immerse must be tauntingly called from the "sacred desks" "physico-theological midwives!" Tell it not to the disciples of Thomas Paine, the admirers of Hume, Volney, and Voltaire, that the Rev. Dr. Cleland of Kentucky did publish in Elder Skilman's Western LUMINARY, in Lexington, Ky. Sept. 12, 1832, such a slander upon the figures, analogies, and words of the Great Teacher sent from God, and of his holy Apostles!

      There is not one sentiment, which we avow, assaulted in the above number. It is all a forgery throughout. We never taught the doctrines which he ascribes to us. The same management of the words of the Apostle Paul will make him say the most absurd things:--"Behold I, Paul, say to you, if you be circumcised," "you shall be saved;" "for every one that is circumcised" "has the remission of his sins, and an inheritance among them that are sanctified." These are all words of Paul, but not in this connexion. Thus Mr. Cleland has tortured my essays.

      If Jacob Creath, Senr. and other proclaimers of the apostolic institutions, do not cease to labor on the borders of Dr. Cleland, he ought to complain of them to the Grand Jury, or have them sent to the Lunatic Asylum, rather than pour forth such a flood out of his mouth over all the land of Kentucky, until it has ascended up the Ohio, even to Bethany.

      There are yet five Nos. of Dr. Cleland's most learned analysis of C------m, or rather his ingenious defences of Presbyterianism; from some of which, as Sampson found some honey in the dead carcase of a lion, we may extract a few grains of edification--if, indeed, an expose of such errors and manoeuvres can be edifying to any one.

EDITOR. [34]

For the Millennial Harbinger.                     PULASKI, WEST TENNESSEE, October 29, 1832.

Respected Sir:--

      I MUST desire you to believe, that neither suggestions of vanity, nor sentiments of irreverence for the genuine spirit of the christian religion, have any participation in the motives which dictate this communication. Attentive perusals of those of your writings which have fallen under my notice; the favorable opinions I have been morally compelled to form of those writings, and the doctrines they are intended to support; to say nothing of my impressions respecting the intellectual character of the writer, induce me to state to you, with entire candor, some of those prominent, and to me yet insurmountable difficulties, which present themselves against an implicit confidence in the authenticity of all the doctrines of the Christian religion. I am not the only person interested in an explicit and condensed commentary on the statements which are subjoined; thousands, perhaps millions, in every christian country of magnitude and intelligence, are surrounded by the same obstructive, and, to them, invincible barriers to implicit faith in the doctrines of christianity, which I, sir, am compelled to acknowledge--and especially that Christianity which manifests itself under such a multiplied variety of creeds, many of which, instead of affording consolations to mankind, under the pressure of innumerable calamities, seem to involve the hopes and destinies of the whole human race in contradiction, mysticism, and impenetrable obscurity.

      I do not wish you to refer me to the records of your public debates for the desired information; it is possible that the umpires who presided, occupied the judgment-seat with preconceived and dogmatical opinions: and you cannot be a stranger to the important truth, that among the generality of mankind, OPINIONS on nearly all subjects are formed in the first instance, and ARGUMENTS afterwards sought for to support them. This process seems to me to be fraught with innumerable mischiefs to the cause of truth; it seems to be at open war with the cool and deliberative exercises of reason--and, is probably productive of more dissensions in opinion among men, than they are willing to acknowledge. In many of those popular conflicts, you have been compelled to reply to captious, and often puerile objections, not unfrequently beneath the dignity of rational consideration, urged and reiterated by those who reason from their prejudices and passions, argue without acknowledged and established facts, and who are often found to raise the shout of triumph, without having obtained the victory.

      First. Why are there so many, and such greatly diversified religious creeds among men; whilst reason, and the great interests of mankind, would seem to require but one religion, capable of embracing the welfare of the whole human race? [35]

      Second. Why do the votaries of nearly all these creeds, claim the exclusive privilege of being the chosen flock of heaven; always in the right, and never erring in opinion, to the exclusion of all others from divine mercy, who may chance to differ with them in principles and practice--especially considering, that those others are equally rational with themselves, equally interested in discovering and embracing the truth, equally created by the Almighty fiat, and equally susceptible of happiness and misery?

      Third. Why do most of these narrow sectarians, of whom I have just spoken, dare to profess charity to all mankind, and "on earth peace and good will towards men," and at the same time breathe a spirit of vengeance against those who cannot conscientiously embrace their doctrines:--especially considering, that those they doom to destruction are their fellow-beings, are equally unfortunate with themselves, and are seeking the right path with a candor, perseverance, and avidity equal to their own?

      Fourth. Why dare these sectarians, in the face of their own professions of faith, in the face of reason, mercy, justice and humanity, impiously attempt to wrest the high prerogative of judgment from the lofty and unerring tribunal of Heaven, and to sit as umpires between man and his MAKER!

      Fifth. Let it be supposed, to show the impious absurdity of such professions as have just been set forth, that the doctrines of any one religious sect were to be made the rule of judgment and condemnation by the Almighty, at the GREAT DAY OF ACCOUNTS--and, I would ask these exclusive sectarians, what would be the awful condition of countless millions of the human race, who would have existed between the commencement and the termination of time?--Here, sir, all arithmetical computations, as to numbers, absolutely fail; and all the boasted powers of the human imagination sink and expire, in attempting to grasp so vast, so unbounded a spectacle of human misery and ruin!

      Sixth. But let us take these exclusive and inhuman sectarian doctrines a little further: let us admit, according to the Mosaical account, that the world is nearly six thousand years old; let us also admit, and it is said to accord with philosophic calculation, that ten human beings are born, and that ten die, in every second of time:--here, as before, all numerical calculations seem to come short of the aggregate number of human beings who have been born, and who have died, in the long period of six thousand years, allowing ten for every second of time. But this is not all. There are probably, at this present time, a population of between ten and eleven hundred millions of inhabitants on the globe. Now I would ask these sectarians, who consign all mankind to destruction but themselves, what proportion does the aggregate of all the Christians now on earth, bear to the immense population of the whole globe? Let these charitable followers of Christ cast their eyes over the immense nations which inhabit the great continents of Africa and Asia, and tell me how many Christians, of any possible denominations, can be found among the numerous [36] and powerful nations of those continents? Next, let them turn their eyes to the continents of Europe and America; and, after taking a deliberate survey of their whole population, including those savage and barbarous nations to whom even the name of Christ is yet unknown, tell me how many, out of the vast population of these two immense regions, are professors of religion in any Christian shape. Accurate calculations, on these interesting subjects, would probably have the merciful effect of bursting the fetters of narrow sectarian prejudices asunder--and of assigning to man, no matter of what color, of what climate, or what distant and benighted region of the globe, that rank in the mercy and affections of the GREAT CREATOR of the Universe, to which he is and must be entitled, (or I am mistaken,) by the principles of unerring and eternal justice! Next, let those sectarians take into consideration, particularly as regards their own dissensions in belief,--1st. That truth is ONE. 2d. That their BELIEFS are DISCORDANT. And 3d. That but one of all the religious sects existing CAN BE RIGHT. And then let them exhibit, according to their own exclusive doctrines, what would be the afflicting spectacle presented to them at THE GREAT DAY OF ACCOUNTS, were the Almighty to adopt but one of all their numerous and conflicting creeds, as the rule of his final decision? I speak it without impiety, or irreverence for the great principles of the Christian religion--which no man in his senses can treat with indignity--that they would behold an abortive, though divine scheme of redemption, for their miserable race; they would see the regions of the damned peopled with countless myriads of their fellow-beings--a Universe in ruins--and an almost SOLITARY GOD!!--These, sir, seem to me to be facts and inferences too plain for the subterfuges of sophistry--too strong for even sectarian prejudices--and too stubborn for either denial or evasion.

      Amidst all the sectarian doctrines which pervade the world--amidst the vast and complicated variety of religious opinions diffused among mankind, opinions which have led to martyrdom for the support of nearly every cause--what is he to believe who seeks order among such chaos; truth among such contradictions; and safety among bitter and reciprocal denunciations of vengeance against unbelief, and even against dissension in opinion? These are some of the difficulties I experience in the selection and adoption of any particular code of Christian faith; these are some of the prominent reasons why I have hitherto been, and still am compelled, though reluctantly, to reject all the merely sectarian codes with which I have become acquainted. To me they seem to stand on too narrow and exclusive, not to say uncharitable and misanthropic foundations, to embrace that enlarged and boundless beneficence of Heaven, which we see every where displayed, for the benefit of man, in the visible Universe! No one of them, that I am acquainted with, can be so charitably extended as to embrace the present and future destinies of the whole human race: and I cannot, if I even desired it, subscribe to the truth of any religious creed which comes short of this. Individuals and nations, of whatever country or remote climate, seem to me to be equally the [37] offspring of one GREAT and UNIVERSAL PARENT; equally the objects of attention and tenderness with that Parent, throughout every region of the habitable globe. He has surely bestowed on the whole race of man the same physical organization, the same susceptibilities of pain and pleasure, of happiness and misery; and although he seems to have imposed religious conditions on the whole human race, as well as moral ones, which carry with them penalties for disobedience, of no ordinary magnitude; yet even these religious conditions and moral penalties, it would seem to me, are certainly regulated not by caprice and partiality, but by principles of reason and unerring justice!

      But, Sir, I have other objections to mere sectarian codes. It seems to me that the proofs usually adduced in support of them are founded on the mere antiquity of certain dogmas, generated in the night of time and the infancy of nations; on the prejudices of early precept and example, which always substitute mere authority for what ought to he rational evidence; on forced constructions of detached portions of Scripture; and, if I may be allowed the negative expression, on the want of that moral and intellectual intrepidity, possessed indeed by few, which leads to profound investigation, not subsequently, but anterior to the adoption of opinions. With me, in religion as in politics, and in the words of the great patriot Sidney, "Implicit faith belongs to fools; truth is comprehended by examining proofs, as the foundation of principles." No man can believe what he pleases, or even what he wishes; I mean no rational and unprejudiced man. No man can believe, if his belief be rational, that two and two make five; that a straight line occupies the longest distance between two points; or that the sun and moon appear triangular. A man, it seems to me, must believe according to the strength of the evidence presented to his reasoning powers; and, I think, it would be as difficult for an unprejudiced and intelligent man to avoid believing on sufficient evidence, as it would be for him to believe implicitly without any evidence at all. In fact, I know of no such thing as faith, by which I here mean entire belief, that is not founded on testimony calculated to carry irresistible conviction to the human mind; and, until the principles of narrow and exclusive sectarianism are better supported than I think they are at present, I must continue to defer a selection from among them of any particular code. I wish to witness the establishment or adoption of some religious faith and practice, on rational, charitable, and beneficent foundations--capable of embracing the whole human race, and of doing ample justice to those sublime attributes of the DEITY, which we denominate wisdom, justice, mercy, divine love of the human family! Exclusive partialities cannot comport with the wisdom, the justice, and the all-absorbing love of the ALMIGHTY, for his feeble and erring creature, man! But it is time to conclude this portion of my letter:--and I will now state to you, with the same candor hitherto observed, my serious and solemn objections to the Mosaical account of the Creation, as it appears in the first book of Genesis, according to the present translation of the Bible.

      On every side of him, in the planetary system, in the depths of the ocean, and on the whole surface of the solid and habitable globe, man beholds an infinite assemblage of objects, which he denominates the physical universe. He sees the great planetary system, regulated by laws which never deviate; he distinguishes that the unfathomable depths of the ocean are pervaded by aquatic animals, and even growths of vegetation, which could no where else subsist, except in that unstable and tumultuous element, and that they are all subject to the same invariable laws; he sees the solid domains of the whole globe, embracing all the parallels of latitude and longitude, and every temperature of climate, from the frozen atmosphere of the poles to the burning rigors of the equatorial regions, covered with an infinity of vegetable growths, suited to those varied temperatures, and with almost countless races of animals, calculated also to exist under all those varied temperatures, and that all of them are subject to the supreme domination of equally immutable laws. Then, turning an eye of curiosity and wonder on himself, he beholds a frame exquisitely and astonishingly organized--physical senses fitted for the examination and rigid scrutiny of all objects which present themselves--and intellectual powers calculated to hold dominion over every thing around him; and he easily distinguishes that this frame and its exquisite organic structures, these physical senses and their capacities, and these intellectual powers, so varied and extensive in their genius and energies, are all subject to the influence and government of laws, equally unchangeable, and equally beyond his control! Hence, in my opinion, sir, first arose among mankind the idea of a GOD, self-dependent and supreme--the origin of all things--THE GREAT CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE.

      The immense, and to us unbounded machinery of the physical universe; the steady and unerring revolutions of the great planetary system, which produce for man the changes of the seasons; the periods of seed-time and harvest, and all the vast phenomena of vegetable life; the unchangeable relations or laws, which pervade and regulate the great system of nature, through all her departments of vegetable, animal, and intellectual existence--in fact, all objects of which the human mind can take cognizance, demonstrate conclusively to the rational faculties of man, and to the exercise of his best judgment, not only the existence of a GOD, autocratical and supreme, but also that this great being must possess infinity of wisdom, omnipotence of power, and perfection of design:--infinity of wisdom to PLAN: omnipotence of power to CREATE and SUSTAIN; and unerring perfection of design to produce and perpetuate EVERLASTING HARMONY, not only in the great system of nature, measurably known to us, but in the sublime, and to us incomprehensible evolutions of A UNIVERSE WITHOUT BOUNDS!

      But, to be a little less general:--We distinguish the glory of GOD in the visible beauties and magnificent splendors of created nature; his omnipotent power in the support and perpetuation of all the departments of animated nature known to us, from the life and organization of the vegetable of the fields and woods, up to the complicated organization and superior vitality of man; his infinity of wisdom in the fitness or co-aptation of each portion of his great works, however minute, to all we can comprehend of those works: and we can certainly be at no loss to observe INFINITE PERFECTION OF DESIGN in all natural objects cognizable by our senses, our understandings, and our reasoning powers, so far as the grand designs of creation and Providence can be developed by the feeble and limited energies of man. The truth is, sir, that these attributes of an almighty and unerring God, are as visible in the analysis of a physical atom, or even the chemical compounds of a rock, as in the complicated and exquisite structure and vitality of the human frame--or the immutable and infinitely harmonious laws which regulate the great movements of the universe!

      Amidst this great and glorious assemblage of natural objects, subjected to the same invariable and infinitely harmonious laws, man seems to stand conspicuous and alone. He is the only being, absolutely known to himself, capable of raising his contemplations to the Deity, and of experiencing a sentiment of awe, veneration, and devotional love for the unknown author of his existence--the only being in creation, known to his perceptive and rational powers, whose mental capacities are capable of embracing the wide horizon of physical nature and her laws--and of experiencing a sublime and comprehensive sentiment of IMMORTALITY. With all these immense capacities and powers, and endowed with sensitive and mental energies, which have laid open to his genius for enterprize the geography of the whole globe which he inhabits; which have disclosed to him the vast and apparently unlimited boundaries of the oceans and the land, and conducted him through trackless and tumultuous seas to distant and unknown coasts, scarcely yet found in delineation on the mariner's chart; which have taught him to measure and, calculate, by the aid of the magnetic needle, the unerring principles of mathematics, and the science of numbers, not only the solid surface of the globe he inhabits, but the relative distances and locations of all the planetary objects embraced by the great science of astronomy; which have enabled him, by the subduing and destructive power of his warlike inventions, to subjugate or destroy, and hold undivided dominion over all the inferior orders of animated nature; which have taught him the exercise and principles of all the mechanic arts, and enabled him to clothe his body with attire, to shield it from the frosts and snows of winter, and the sultry and oppressive heat& of summer; to raise sheds to cover and ramparts to defend himself against his natural enemies--in fine, to conquer nearly all the objects which stand in the way of his enjoyments and happiness:--can it be possible, sir, that man, thus nobly endowed, and thus most exquisitely [40] organized, physically and intellectually, should have been placed by his Maker in a garden, merely "to dress it, and to keep it?"--"And the Lord God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed. And the Lord took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden, to dress it and to keep it."

      The laws of nature, at least to me, sir, speak in a voice not easily to be misunderstood. Our first parents must have been formed physically, morally, and mentally, precisely like ourselves, or I think they could not have been our progenitors: throughout all animated existence, as far as I can judge, like produces like. If they were invested with organic procreative powers, those endowments could not have been bestowed in vain: to presume otherwise, would be virtually to impeach infinite wisdom with folly: if given, they were to be exercised--"And God said unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it," &c.--and if exercised, the difficulty with me is, was the garden of Eden capacious and productive enough to afford ample room for, and to furnish with subsistence, the whole race of Adam? But, even suppose that the garden of Eden were made to embrace the whole habitable surface of the globe, would even that vast domain have afforded space and subsistence for such a race as must have now been in existence, had not Adam fallen, and the curse of death been denounced against the countless myriads of his race? If Adam was not intended to procreate his species, his prolific energies must have been bestowed in vain, and the whole inhabitable globe, except the small space occupied by himself and his partner, who must also have been doomed to perpetual barrenness, must have remained a wild and uncultivated desert, and left eternally to the undivided empire of inferior animals. But this state of things, according to the Bible itself, seems not to have been the intention of the Creator--for Adam and Eve were commanded, even previously to their fall, as well as I can understand the requisition, to "increase and multiply, and to replenish the earth, and to subdue it." In fine, the whole of my difficulties respecting the correctness of the Mosaical account of creation, may be comprised in the following queries:--Was it intended by the ALMIGHTY Creator that our first parents and their innumerable progeny were to confine their whole attention and wonderful energies merely to the cultivation and dressing of a garden? Was that garden circumscribed to definite and unsurmountable bounds, or were its environs the ends of the earth, the circumference of the whole globe? In either case, and supposing that man had not fallen, by which fall alone we are taught that death came into the world, would there at this day have been room for the numerous race of our first parents in the garden, or even on the surface of the globe? If, on the contrary, those original parents were not invested with procreative powers; or, if endowed therewith, were doomed to perpetual barrenness, was the earth forever to continue an uncultivated wilderness, the undisputed and undivided empire of wild beasts? Did the introduction of death into the world, by the fall of man, change the original conformation of the jaws of carnivorous animals, and make the earth, [41] and the rivers, and the oceans of the globe, theatres of robbery, carnage, and bloodshed? In fine, did the original sin of Adam make the earth bring forth thorns, and briars, and noxious weeds--many, if not all of which, are calculated for the cure of the diseases of our race? And did that original sin produce all the physical, moral, and intellectual disorders, which we every where distinguish among mankind?

      This communication, sir, has been made longer than at first intended; but, because I consider the subjects important which it embraces, and because it was written in obedience to the request of several of your readers, and my own ardent wish for information, I trust you will excuse some prolixity.

	With due respect and consideration,       I am, sir,             Your obedient servant,
CHARLES CASSEDY.
ALEXANDER CAMPBELL, &c.

      [Reply in our next.]

      A VERY interesting discussion from a brother in Stanford, Kentucky, was received some time since on the derivation and etymological import of the word pistiV, from pisteuw, to believe. Faith is, by us, usually defined "the belief of testimony" This is the definition of the term. The thing is, however, confidence in testimony--confidence in the person or thing testified. As a Christian principle of action, it is confidence in the Messiah, as revealed in the testimony of Apostles and Prophets. Having occupied so many pages on this term and the various definitions of it, we cannot think it expedient to occupy much room with this element of the Christian system.

      The word persuasion, or confidence, fully represents the term pistis, faith, when viewed as a principle of action, or as exhibited in Hebrews xi. 1. I have just now opened Professor Stuart on this passage, and I am so well pleased with his remarks, that I shall give his translation of this verse and a part of his defence of it:--

      "Now faith is confidence in respect to things hoped for, and convincing evidence of things not seen."

      On elegcoV, demonstration, proof, convincing evidence, he remarks--The meaning is, that faith in the divine word and promises is equivalent to, or supplies the place of, proof or demonstration; in regard to the objects of the unseen world; i. e. it satisfies the mind respecting their reality and importance, as proof or demonstration is wont to do." But in speaking more in detail on this faith, he says in his work on the Hebrews, vol. 2, p. 254--

      "That the faith here brought to view, and adverted to through chapter xi. is not specifically what some theologians call saving faith, viz, faith in Christ, in an appropriate and limited sense, is evident from the nature of the examples which are subjoined by the writer; e. g. verses 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 11, &c. In this chapter, faith is belief or confidence generally in divine declarations, of whatever nature they may be; for it does not always have respect even to promises or to the future; e. g. verse 3. Now the same confidence in what God declares, respecting subjects of such a nature as are brought to view in this chapter, would lead the person who exercises it, to confidence in all which God might declare respecting the Messiah, and consequently to belief in Christ. It is [42] then called, by theologians, saving faith. But it should be remembered, that this is only a convenient technical phrase of modern theology; not one employed by the sacred writers. The true and essential nature of faith, is confidence in God, belief in his declarations, and whether this be exercised by believing in the Scripture account of the creation of the world; or, as Abel, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Sarah, and others exercised it, in respect to specific objects; or, by believing on the Messiah; it is evidently the same disposition of mind, in all cases. It is confidence in God. It is, therefore, with perfect propriety, that our author here excites the Hebrews to persevere in their Christian faith, by various examples which exhibit the power of faith in the ancient worthies, as a principle of pious and virtuous belief and action."

      This is the nighest approach to our views on faith as a principle of action, which we have yet met with in the works of the very learned and popular theologians of this age. Subtracting from this the idiomatic expressions of one deeply learned in the theological lore of the current age, and with the plain import of this reasoning we express a very cordial concurrence.

      Faith, indeed, is the confidence of things hoped for; and the demonstration, or convincing evidence, of things not seen.

EDITOR.

      MR. and MRS. GOODAL lived in the neighborhood of Earl Moira's Castle and the village of Newtonfields. They had reared a very numerous family, who, with the exception of Maria, (the youngest daughter,) had married and settled around the ancient homestead, which had been in the family for four generations. Since the marriage of their eldest daughter to Mr. Fowler, the old gentleman had made it a family institution, that on every New Year's day, all his children and their families should dine at his house, together with the Pastor of the church to which they all belonged. And as soon as his sons Thomas and William had taken to themselves wives, they, and the husbands of their elder sisters, according to age, had each successive evening the same company at their respective houses. Some Christian friends were always partakers of these feasts, of natural affection; and the Christian graces consecrated these anniversaries to the Lord.

      On one of these occasions, Mr. Williamson, the author of this narrative, had the good fortune, by a singular incident, to be present; and having felt himself much benefited by the conversation of that evening, and five other evenings, spent in a similar manner, in the same vicinity, he preserved in his sketch book, a faithful narrative not only of the topics of that evening, but of the others, so memorable in the history of his life.

      Mr. Goodal, though a member of an Independent congregation, unassociated with any other is that country, did not fully harmonize with the views of his brethren: indeed, he had been a diligent and independent student of his Bible for forty years, and could not fully accord with any Christian community in the island. He was, in the true sense of the word, a natural and moral philosopher, without ever having read a volume on these subjects; and in the science of practical economy, he had no superior in the county of Down. He was, however, wholly a religious man; for he carried his religious principles into all the business of life; and in conversation scarcely a topic could be introduced which he would not, in a way peculiarly his own, consecrate to religion.

      Having been favored with Mr. Williamson's sketch book, we have taken from it the details of the six evenings spent in the vicinity of Newtonfields during the first week of the year 1800; and will, in regular order, though in small parcels at a time, lay it before our readers:-- [43]

JANUARY 1, 1800.

      "A happy New Year," said Elder Reed, "on entering Mr. Goodal's parlor, "a happy New Year to Father and Mother Goodal, and all the guests under their hospitable roof!"

      "And to Bishop Reed, his family, and flock," replied Father Goodal, taking him very affectionately by the hand, which he raised to his bosom.

      "Let me introduce to you and the guests, Mr. Williamson," said the worthy Pastor, late from New York, "a remote relative of mine, whose recent misfortunes have brought him back to the land of his fathers. In my usual familiarity I induced him to accompany Mrs. Reed and myself to celebrate this New Year's evening with your family and relatives."

      Mr. Goodal.--"Doubly welcome, because a child of misfortune and your relative, brother Reed. Mr. Williamson, be seated near me, as 1 wish for a more particular acquaintance."

      The family and guests being introduced to each other and seated round the room, Father Goodal called upon his daughter Maria for a song suited to the occasion. Maria very gracefully sang the song which begins with the following verse--

      After a pause, Father Goodal, turning to Mr. Reed, said, "Brother Reed, what do you think Paul meant by "redeeming time"? This command, you know, he delivered to two congregations--the Ephesians and Colossians."

      Mr. Reed.--"I read this passage the other day in the Bishop's old Bible. They translate it in the imperative mood--"Redeem time!" And on the margin we find this note.--"Bestow the time well which the malice of men every where plucketh from you, and causeth you to abuse it."

      Mr. Goodall.--"Very good sense, and a very good advice; but I am apprehensive that is not what the Apostle meant: for he connects it with "walk in wisdom to them that are without;" and to the Ephesians he adds, "because the days are evil."

      Mr. Reed.--"And in Theodotian's version of Daniel ii. 8. the phrase is adopted by that Greek interpreter as equivalent to protracting time. If, then, we put the connecting phrases in Eph. v. 16. and Col. iv. 5. together, we may discover that this gaining or protracting of time, had reference to the enemies of Christianity--those without, and those who by their persecutions were making it an evil time, or days of evil, to the Christians. Then it would mean, "Walk in wisdom, or in all prudence, towards your opposing enemies; for then you will prolong your days of tranquility, by the prudence of your behaviour, not incensing them to persecution."

      Mr. Goodall.--"That meets my common sense view of the passage: for with me the connexion is always the best commentator."

      Mr. Williamson.--"This touches my case. Inadvertence to that exhortation was the cause of all my misfortunes."

      Mr. Goodal.--"How came that to pass?"

      Mr. Williamson.--"My narrative would cast a shade over the occasion, and would engross too much time."

      Mr. Goodall.--"If it illustrates the text, let us hear it: we will not have any special topic till after dinner:--a brief sketch, if you please, Mr. Williamson."

      Mr. Williamson.--"To gratify you, I will relate a single incident which involved me in a train of misfortunes:--

      "I was educated a Presbyterian, and for four years was a member of Dr. M------n's church, New York. The Doctor was a great man; but not acceptable [44] to me. I received no salutary information from him. After joining another congregation I became restless there also, and finally betook myself to the Bible. I knew not at first whether the fault was in me or in the preachers. I was easy in my circumstances, but unhappy in my mind. My employers, one a Presbyterian, the other an Episcopalian, very respectable and wealthy merchants, gave me a good birth and a handsome salary. But as my knowledge of the Scriptures increased, I became incensed at the clergy; and, instead of reforming myself, aimed at reforming them. My acrimonious remarks offended one of my employers who had married the Parson's sister, and I was censured for neglect of duty, though never more faithful to my engagements, and finally dismissed. From that moment till I left that city, one misfortune trode on the heels of another. Had I then walked prudently to those without, I might have been equally pious, and have protracted the time of my tranquility, and prevented many a pang which I have since suffered--not for righteousness sake."

      Mr. Reed.--"There are many more persecuted now-a-days for unrighteousness' sake, than for righteousness' sake."

      Mr. Goodal.--"l can never grieve with those who are persecuted for righteousness' sake, because the Saviour commanded such to rejoice and be exceeding glad; but I can sympathize with those who are persecuted for what they think is righteousness. Therefore, Mr. Williamson, I can sympathize with you. But be of good cheer! If you love the Lord, the Lord will chasten and forgive you."

      Mr. Williamson.--"This incident may suffice for the present as an example of the necessity of conducting ourselves with prudence to them who are without, as well as to those within, who differ from us."

      Mr. Goodal.--"I have heard many a woeful tale about persecution; but have known only one or two instances of persecution for righteousness' sake. I have generally observed some imprudence, some departure from the meek and quiet spirit of our Master--some insolence, acrimony, or contempt on the part of those who have cried out, "Persecution!"

      Mr. Reed.--"This reminds me of an old lady who told me last Christmas what a cross she had to bear, and how painful it was. I asked her what it was. "Oh!" said she, "this mischievous tongue of mine--how hard to refrain from abusing my neighbors and domestics!"

      Mr. Goodal.--"Yes, brother Reed, she, like many others, confounded self-denial with bearing a cross. She never learned that Jesus distinguished between denying one's self and taking up the cross."

      Mr. Fowler.--"They are doubtless distinct, and not one and the same thing. But very few seem to understand that bearing a cross is a circumlocution for persecution. I had to instance this yesterday to my servant William, who was telling me what a cross he had to endure when he joined the Methodists, in abstaining from whiskey and tobacco."

      Mr. Williamson.--"But may I ask Mr. Reed, how, in this state of self-denial and trials, Christians can always rejoice, as Paul so often commands?"

      Mr. Reed.--"Paul's doctrine and experience agree. He could say, 'I am poor, naked, sorrowful; yet always rejoicing.' I have not, indeed, yet fully learned this lesson myself; but here is Father Goodal, whom I never saw dejected, and I think his experience would be edifying to us all.--Father Goodal, how is it that you are always so joyful?"

      Mr. Goodal.--"I wish always to be communicative, in every sense of that social word, and will tell you an anecdote:--When a lad I read to my father the 12th chapter of Deuteronomy, merely as a sample of my improvement in the art of reading. I was struck with the 7th and 8th verses where Moses tells the nation that when they would be very exact in attending upon the institutions, they "would rejoice in all that they put their hand to." But when I came to the 12th verse, and read these words,--"You shall rejoice before the Lord your God; yourselves, your sons and daughters, your men-servants and your maid-servants"--I was so overwhelmed that I had to stop and ask my [45] father, how could people REJOICE BEFORE THE LORD GOD. I thought they ought to fear and tremble. He seemed as confounded as myself, and said that all good people were happy, and that all happy people rejoiced. From that moment I wished to be good that I might rejoice before the Lord. Nor was I satisfied till I obtained that knowledge of God which enabled me to apprehend how I might always rejoice in his presence.

      "Before I arrived at manhood I did not find a Christian family that rejoiced before the Lord in every thing they put their hand to. Thought I, certainly the Christian religion ought at least to make us as joyful in the Lord, as Moses with his fiery law. I resolved that I should never be satisfied with a religion that fell short of this. This excited me to read, and to inquire of my seniors for instruction in this matter. But the more I knew of the religious world, the less faith I had in its views of Christianity, because I saw that it failed of the fruits of even the religion of Moses. The Jewish lawgiver describes a feast as a rejoicing before the Lord for seven days; and old Habakkuk sings, "Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vine; the labor of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no food; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there be no herd in the stalls; yet I will rejoice in the Lord, and joy in the God of my salvation!" This was the religion which I sought, and I bless the Lord I found it before I found my beloved Sarah who sits by my side; and she yet remembers the day I asked her, though more than forty years ago, if she could give her heart to the man who could say with Isaiah, "I will greatly rejoice in the Lord; my soul shall be joyful in my God: for he has clothed me with the garments of salvation; he has covered me with the robe of righteousness, as a bridegroom decks himself with ornaments, and as a bride adorns herself with her jewels." Since that day I can say, that I have rejoiced before the Lord, and in the Lord, with joy unspeakable and full of glory."

      Mr. Reed.--"Father Goodal, but do you not sometimes grieve for losses and disappointments?"

      Mr. Goodal.--"Suppose a man possessed the wealth of all the Indies, think you he would mourn for the loss of a guinea? So I estimate all losses, afflictions, and trials as nothing--

      Mr. Fowler.--"But, Father Goodal, will you tell us how you began to rejoice?"

      Mr. Goodal.--"The love of God in the gift and sacrifice of his Son, first moved my heart. My heart immediately led me to walk in his commandments. Then I found the great reward. It was in obedience that Israel rejoiced, that Jesus rejoiced, that Paul and the early Christians rejoiced in the Lord."

      Mr. Reed.--"There are not a few Christians, as we call them, who regard such joy as incompatible with our present circumstances and duties. For my part I am with you in theory, and I should rejoice to be with you in practice."

      Mr. Goodal.--"I once heard you say, there is no joy in theory; for joy dwells in the heart and not in the head. And for that saying I thanked you."

      Mr. Reed.--"It is a truth: for when the heart is surfeited with anxious cares, or with the pleasures of this life, and the lusts of other things, the justness of our theory will not eradicate these roots of bitterness."

      Mr. Goodal.--"Pure joy is a fruit that grows only on the Tree of Life in the Paradise of God; and therefore the fulness of joy is only found in the presence of God, at whose right hand there are pleasures for evermore."

      Mr. Fowler.--"But how far have we strayed from the first topic?"

      Mr. Williamson.--"I thought my tale of woe would change the theme; but I regret not that I have told it. If I could get rid of my anxious cares, I could figure to my mind some prospect of happiness. I could then think of joy." [46]

      Mr. Goodal.--"Well, after dinner we may find something that will suit your case. To heal the broken-hearted was a chief item in the Messiah's commission."

      Mrs. Goodal.--"There is a time for every thing; and now the dinner waits."

      Mr. Goodal.--"With gladness and singleness of heart, let us then, my dear, partake of it."

EDITOR.

JAMESTOWN, OHIO, December 17, 1832.

Dear Brother Campbell,

      I AM frequently reminded of an apology made by a worthy brother, for a congregation, that he had been laboring to convince of the necessity of obeying the gospel. After he had ceased to speak, the congregation were earnestly exhorted to obey, by another brother, but none came forward; whereupon I arose and observed, that, as a stranger, I could judge of the congregation in but two ways: first, that they had all obeyed the gospel, and that there were no sinners among them; or, if there were, that they did not know it. Upon which, the first mentioned brother arose and observed, that he had proved the world to be a bundle of contradictions; that he had once preached universal salvation to them, and they found fault--he now preached obedience to them, and they still found fault.

      We Reformers say that God works by means, but are not making the necessary exertions--the Populars say that the Holy Spirit does the work, and they are making every exertion. Those who say that man can do nothing, employ all the men they can to carry on the work--we who say that faith comes by hearing, doubt the necessity of proclaiming. So we go! When will men learn to be consistent?

	In haste, Yours, &c.
M. WINANS.

      I recently looked over the contents of a paper called "The Cross," printed in Frankfort, Ky. in which it is written:

      "In a sound form of doctrine, we do not hesitate to say that these doctrines, Election, Particular Atonement, Irresistible Grace in Conversion, Justification by Faith, and Perseverance of the Saints, are indispensable."

      But in another part of the same paper, I see Camp Meetings strongly advocated, by a writer who signs his name A. W. Clopton; from which I am led to make the inquiry, whether camp meetings be the means appointed of God to elect, &c.? If these be the means appointed, when was the appointment made, and where can it be found? I presume the writer would be understood to say, that by camp meetings much good may be done: viz. many may be elected, irresistibly converted, justified by faith, &c. [47]

      When reading, I was forcibly struck with the analogy between camp meetings and other elections; and although we read of no camp meetings among the primitive christians, yet there were a great many in Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost, at which time three thousand were elected.

      We read, also, that the Jews used to have camp meetings, once every year. They being an elect people, whether any were elected at these meetings, is not mentioned.

      Another difficulty has just occurred to me. If the general election took place before the foundation of the world, (as some will have it,) where the use of these camp meetings? But, from the warmth of Mr. Clopton in recommending camp meetings, I conclude that he does not give in to the notion that the election is past, although that notion is attributed to the denomination of which he is a member.

      The major part of christians (I think) agree that the gospel is the means appointed of God, in the Reign of his Son, for collecting the subjects of his kingdom. Then, as the gospel was to be made known, or proclaimed, before it is believed; and as it cannot to obeyed before it is understood and believed; as camp meetings have a tendency to bring people together, they are, in this our day, a good substitute for miracles, by which (last) means many were collected in the days of our Lord and his Apostles,⁶ and when collected they were taught, and many turned from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to the living God.

      I have put in the best plea I can in favor of camp meetings, and if it meet the approbation of Mr. Clopton, he shall be welcome to the use of it.

M. W.

      ON the catalogue of Yale College are the names of about 120 ministers who have received the doctorate, and fifty laymen. Of the laymen, the only persons that have borne the title of Doctor, are Benjamin Franklin and William Samuel Johnson, second President of the College in New York. Of the ministers thus complimented, only one has ever failed of wearing the title in common life. Even where the degree conferred is a doctorate of laws, if it is a minister that receives it, he always wears the title of Doctor. This looks as if ministers were more tickled with such baubles than intelligent laymen. Ministers, too, customarily receive the honor much younger than laymen. The youngest graduate of Yale College that has received the doctorate of laws, is John C. Calhoun, Vice President of the United States, who graduated in 1804. Still he is nothing but plain Mr. and every body would stare to hear one speak of Doctor Calhoun!

      When the proposal was made in the late General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church to erase these titular distinctions from the Minutes of that body, it was soon manifest that there was such an extreme sensitiveness as precluded the possibility of going at all into the merits of the case. So it was voted down for the sake of peace. Two Synods have adopted the rule--those of Kentucky, and the Western Reserve.

[Cor. of the N. Y. Evangelist.]

[The Millennial Harbinger, 4 (January, 1833): 3-48.]