• "Agents for the Christian Messenger, pp. 73-74.
• "History of the Christian Church--No. I.," pp. 74-79.
• "Thoughts on Preaching," pp. 79-83.
• Notice of Annual Conference, p. 83.
• Comment on Article on the Trinity, pp. 83-86.
• Comment on Report of Revivals among the Presbyterians, pp. 86-90.
• "The Colonization Society," pp. 95-96.
• "To Correspondents," p. 96.

FROM

THE CHRISTIAN MESSENGER.
BY BARTON W. STONE, AN ELDER IN THE CHURCH OF CHRIST.
"Prove all things: hold fast that which is good.--PAUL.
VOL. IV.]	GEORGETOWN, KY. FEBRUARY 24, 1827.	[NO. 4.

      KENTUCKY.--Stephen G. Marshall, and Alex'r. McHatton, Georgetown. Benjamin Cassell, Lexington. Michael Rice, Jessamine. C. C. Moore, Winchester. Josiah H. Yager, Elizabethtown. Richard Hart, Flemingsburg. John Bryan, Hopkinsville. John Jones, Liberty. Andrew Henderson, Everret's house. Thos. Hall, Frankfort. Thos. M. Allen, Union meeting-house. H. F. Wilson, and H. Parker, Paris. Wm. Morrow, Cynthiana. Wm. Rule, Falmouth. David Cassell, Bethel. A. Perrin, Stanford. Jas. Houston, North Middletown. Dr. A. W. Bills, Millersburg. Dr. John Sanders, New Castle. Wm. Read and Ephraim R. Osborn, Richmond. James Durham, Perryville.

      INDIANA.--Thomas Parsons, Terre Haute. Wm. Armstrong, Bloomington. George Perry, Greencastle. Clement Nance, Nanceville. Joseph Graham, Crawfordsville. Obadiah Seward, Rushville. David Stewart, Tuckersville. M. Morris, Indianapolis.

      OHIO.--Henry Montfort and D. Purviance, Eaton. Levi Purviance, New Paris. Isaac N. Walter, Dublin. George Alkire, Williamsport. Wm. Miller, Columbus. G. Foose, Springfield, Clarke co. E. Vickars, Franklin and Monroe, Butler co. Nathan Worley, Dayton. Saml. Kyle, Piqua and Troy. Isaac Sparks, Jas. Carnahan, and G. Vanousdol, Cincinnati. Richard Simonton, Lebanon. Joseph Baker, Chillicothe. Levi Jennings, Greenfield. Wm. Ruble, Wilmington. Robert M'Coy, Hillsborough. John Miles, Canaan. Matthew Gardner, Ripley. Joseph Thomas, Grassy Point. Dr. Dameron, Moscow.

      MISSOURI.--Philip Love, Nine Miles Prairie.

      TENNESSEE.--Wm. D, Jourdan, Sparta. Dr. Joel B. Sanders, Columbia. James Shelton, Rudon Lick. John Green, Lebanon. Andrew Davis, McMinnville. Wm. Read, Readyville. John Bowman and Wm. Moore, Murfreesborough. Wm. Bell, Gallatin. Moses Steel, Franklin. John Wilkinson, Bolivar.

      ALABAMA.--James Matthews, Florence. Wm. J. Price, Doyal's mill. John Cawart, Bellefonte.

      ILLINOIS.--Daniel Travis, Lawrenceville.

      VIRGINIA.--Parker Lucas, Giles Court-house. Jno. Welton, Moorefield.

      NEW YORK.--Simon Clough, N. Y. City.

      KENTUCKY.--Benjamin Cassell, Lexington, and Henry F. Wilson, Paris.

      OHIO.--Garret Vanousdal, Cincinnati.

      TENNESSEE.--Dr. Joel B. Sanders, Columbia.

      ALABAMA.--Elder James Matthews, near Florence, and William J. Price, Jackson county.

      INDIANA.--William Armstrong, Bloomington, and elder Clement Nance, Nanceville.

      ILLINOIS.--Daniel Travis, Lawrenceville.

[The Christian Messenger 1 (February 24, 1827): 73-74.]

      Towards the close of the eighteenth century, there was an unusual death in the professors of religion, throughout the western country, both among the preachers and the people. In the commencement of the present century, the more pious became seriously alarmed at the prevalence of vice and the declension of vital piety. They agreed to meet often in prayer to God to revive religion, which appeared ready to die. These meetings were frequent, and began to attract general attention. The humble Christians prayed fervently, and sang the praises of God with warm devotion. Their prayers reached the ears of the Lord; he answered by fire; for he poured out his spirit in a way almost miraculous. This powerful work was first experienced [74] in Tennessee, and in the lower parts of this state, among the Presbyterians, in the summer or fall of 1800.

      At this time I had gone to Virginia and North Carolina. From Carolina I was returning to Kentucky in company with Dr. Hall, who was going on a mission to Natchez and the low countries. Never shall I forget the events that transpired on our journey. We were met by a company returning from Tennessee, who had letters to Dr. Hall. We stopped in the woods. The Doctor began to read silently; but soon cried out aloud, and burst into a flood of tears. At first we were at a loss for the cause; but soon learned from the bearer of the letters, and from the letters themselves, that which equally affected us all. It was an account of a wonderful meeting at Shiloh in Tennessee--that many had been struck down as dead, and continued for hours apparently breathless, and afterwards rose, praising God for his saving mercy--that the saints were all alive--and sinners all around weeping and crying for mercy--and that multitudes were converted and rejoicing in God.

      The work spread and progressed like fire in a dry stubble. The sparks, lighting in various parts of the field, would quickly raise as many blazes all around. So the Christians from various and distant parts met together; and returning home in the spirit and power of religion, they became preachers, successful preachers, in their neighborhoods, by simply stating what they had seen, heard, and felt; and so spake that many believed and turned to the Lord. I knew an old Presbyterian in a barren neighborhood. He heard of this strange work, and went 60 or 70 miles to one of those meetings. The work was very great and strange. He felt the flame of it in his own heart, and returned home in the power of the spirit. He had a very wicked son. He went to see him, deeply impressed with the situation of his child. As soon as he saw him, he burst into a flood of tears, and cried out, O my son Reuben. The son was instantly convicted of his sins, and immediately repaired to the woods, and cried for mercy; nor did he [75] cease till he obtained it. He straightway began to exhort and warn his companions in wickedness to repent and believe the gospel; and many turned to the Lord. From that period to his death, about 20 years, he laboured without ceasing, in the vineyard of the Lord, and was eminently useful.

      In the spring of 1801, the Lord visited his people in the north of Kentucky. In Fleming, and in Concord, one of my congregations, the same strange and mighty works were seen and experienced. On the fourth Lord's day in May, we had an appointment for a communion at Concord. Various causes collected an unusual multitude of people together at this time,--between five and six thousands, of various sects, and many preachers. The house could not contain them, and we repaired to the woods. Worship commenced on Friday, and continued without intermission day and night, for four or five days. From this meeting, the flame spread all around, and increased till the ever-memorable meeting at Caneridge, in August following. Here an innumerable multitude collected, estimated at 25,000 souls. The meeting commenced on Friday, and continued six or seven days. It was truly a solemn scene to see the multitudes coming together, and the number of wagons and carriages bringing provisions and tents to stay on the ground; for it was found that no neighborhood could entertain and support the multitudes that came together. The members of the church and the neighbours brought their provisions to the encampment, for themselves and strangers. Long tables were spread with provisions, and all invited to eat. This was the beginning and introduction of camp meetings. During this time, night and day worship continued. Hundreds were lying as men slain in battle; many engaged in prayer for the distressed in every part of the camp; many in the woods around crying for mercy; many rejoicing aloud in songs of praise. In other parts many of the preachers of various names, were proclaiming the gospel of salvation. The number of converts could never be ascertained: it is thought to have been between 500 and 1000. [76]

      The doctrine preached by all was simple, and nearly the same. Free and full salvation to every creature was proclaimed. All urged faith in the gospel, and obedience to it, as the way of life. All appeared deeply impressed with the ruined state of sinners, and were anxious for their salvation. The spirit of partyism, and party distinctions, were apparently forgotten. The doctrines of former controversy were not named; no mention was made of eternal unconditional election, reprobation, or fatality. The spirit of love, peace, and union, were revived. You might have seen the various sects engaged in the same spirit, praying, praising, and communing together, and the preachers in the lead. Happy days! joyful seasons of refreshment from the presence of the Lord! This work from this period spread throughout the western country.

      It should not be concealed that among us Presbyterians, there were some, both of the preachers and private members, who stood in opposition to the work, and the doctrine by which it was promoted. They did not like that the doctrines of their confession should be neglected in the daily ministration. They therefore became jealous lest those doctrines should be entirely rejected by the churches; they began to preach them, and oppose the doctrine of the revival. The other sects began to take the alarm and to oppose the doctrine of Calvin. The war commenced; and now there appeared to be more solicitude to establish certain dogmas, and to enlist members into a particular party, than to preach the gospel, and win souls to Christ. The pious wept at the sight, and were groaning at the devastations of Zion, the breach of union, and the unhappy check put to the work of God! Never before did partyism to my mind appear so hateful, so destructive to the progress of truth and vital piety, and to the salvation of souls. Many saw it in the same light, and felt determined to stand fast in the gospel of Christ, and labour to promote his work.

      But here we were not permitted to rest. We must come into the party views and party spirit of the [77] denomination by which we were called, and cease from preaching that doctrine which was considered contrary to the doctrines contained in our confession of faith, contemptuously called Arminian. These doctrines were, that the provisions and calls of the gospel were for all, and to all the family of Adam; that Christ died for all, and was the constituted Saviour of all; that the poor sinner must believe in him, and that he was capable to believe from the evidences given in the gospel. In this strain of preaching, a number of the Presbyterian preachers had been for some time past engaged. But these by no means suited the sticklers for orthodoxy. Richard McNemar, a member of Washington Presbytery, was zealously engaged in preaching these views. At the session of this Presbytery in Cincinnati, Oct. 6, 1802, a lay elder, a member of the Presbytery, arose and entered a verbal complaint against McNemar, as a propagator of false doctrine, and desired the Presbytery to look into the matter. Though McNemar protested against this measure as disorderly, yet he was overruled, and the Presbytery, as a court of inquisition, proceeded to examine him, on the doctrine of particular election, human depravity, the atonement, the application of it to sinners, the necessity of a divine agency in the application, and the nature of faith. The result of the examination was, this his views were essentially different from Calvinism--and that his principles were strictly Arminian, "which, (say they) are dangerous to the souls of men, and hostile to the interests of all true religion." A copy of their judgment was ordered to be sent to all the churches under their care. What appeared extraordinary is, that this same presbytery in the same session, in which they passed a vote of condemnation on his principles, as dangerous to the souls of men, and hostile to the interests of all true religion, appointed McNemar to preach among the vacancies, as usual, as their minutes shew.

      At the next session of this Presbytery in April 1803, a petition was presented, praying Presbytery to examine McNemar on the fundamental doctrines of religion; [78] and that the Rev. John Thompson undergo the like examination. The Presbytery rejected the petition as improper; and presented McNemar a call from Turtle-Creek, which he accepted. The minority of Presbytery protested against these acts of the majority.

      In Sept. 1803, the Synod met in Lexington. Here the books of all the Presbyteries were to be examined, and their improper conduct arraigned at the bar of this court. Through the committee of overtures, the business of the Washington Presbytery in their sessions in Cincinnati and Springfield with respect to McNemar and Thompson, was laid before the Synod. The Synod soon determined, that the Washington Presbytery acted orderly in examining McNemar, and of publishing their vote of condemnation of his principles, as dangerous, and contrary to the constitution of the Presbyterian church, and that they were disorderly in giving him appointments to preach. They also determined that the Presbytery acted disorderly in rejecting the petition to examine McNemar and Thompson at Springfield, and in presenting McNemar the call from Turtle Creek. It was now evidently seen that the way was prepared to censure any minister of the gospel without charge, witness, or prosecution, through the short medium of Presbyterial inquisition. We, who were of the same sentiments, now plainly saw that the proceedings of the Synod not only involved the fate of McNemar and Thompson, but equally our own. We saw the arm of ecclesiastical authority raised to crush us, and we must either sink, or step aside to avoid the blow.

[The Christian Messenger 1 (February 24, 1827): 75-79.]

      We have seen many and great improprieties in this particular among ourselves, as well as among others. To correct these is our present design, in a few of the following pages. In times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord, all Christians are more or less affected with the importance of truth, and feel a deep concern for the prosperity of Zion, and for the salvation of [79] souls. It is a liberty granted by the Head of the Church, that all may prophesy and exhort one another. In this way parents are often successful preachers to their children, and neighbors to their neighbors. In a congregation, great and good effects have been produced by a plain, simple, and short address, made by an unlettered person, who felt the force of truth; while the learned and polished doctor may have rhetorized and philosophized the people to sleep, or to careless indifference.

      There are many persons in those times of refreshing, who, feeling the worth of souls, and a great desire for the interests of Zion, are impressed with the belief that they are called to preach the gospel. Should they be possessed of correct information or knowledge, and be endowed with a capacity of communicating that knowledge to the edification of their hearers, the church should encourage such to exercise their gifts in their meetings--in their meetings; for such speakers should first learn at home, in the church of which they are members, before they go abroad to preach; nor should they go abroad as preachers until they are sent and recommended by the church.--II. Cor. iii. 1.--Acts xiii. 1, 4. We view it an impropriety for a person, impressed with the idea that he is divinely called to preach, to go abroad, and travel from country to country preaching, without being sent by the church with letters of commendation. Paul did it; but he was miraculously called and inspired by the Holy Spirit, as an apostle of Christ. Hence he so frequently says, that he was not sent by man to preach. This person going abroad contrary to gospel order, frequently does more injury than good to the cause of Christ. Had he believed and not have made haste, he might have become a profitable member in the church. Many have acted thus for want of information on the subject. It is hoped this hint will cause such to examine the New Testament, and that the churches as well as themselves will in future attend more closely to the order of our Head, the Lord Jesus. [80]

      We have seen with pain another impropriety amongst us. We have seen a person eminently qualified to preach the gospel with clearness, spirit, and power, confined to one particular charge or church; who before his confinement laboured extensively; and by whose labors the saints were every where revived and sinners converted. This person should not be confined to one church, but should travel among all as much as possible. For fact proves that as soon as he is confined to one place, his labours become unprofitable, and both himself and the people too frequently sink into unfruitfulness and death. On the other hand we have seen men eminently qualified with the gift of government, to keep and put in order the things that may be wanting in the church, yet have not the gift of preaching with profit--we have seen such men travelling and labouring extensively, when it was evident to all, they ought to labour and govern at home. In this they would be useful. That there is a diversity of gifts is evident.--Rom. xii, 6, 8.--I. Cor. xii, 28, 31, &c. Of these gifts the church is the best judge. We are grieved to see those preachers among us, who are capable of edifying the churches, generally confined at home; and those of very limited knowledge, capacity, and influence, travelling abroad. A course opposite to this is certainly correct, and ought to be pursued by us.

      It is commonly objected, that by travelling and preaching abroad, the preacher would lack a support for himself and family. Nothing is more reasonable and scriptural, than that he that preaches the gospel should live by it; and if every church stood in gospel order, each would have a pastor, or overseer, and meet together every Lord's day for worship; and on that day each member would give to his deacon, as the Lord had prospered him, for the help of the needy; and who in our free country are more needy than they who devote their time to the preaching of the gospel? We fear that the objection to preaching extensively may arise from a covetous spirit, which requires more, in order to live in the style of the day. For this trifle, shall [81] souls be forever lost? Shall preachers neglect their duty? Shall they spend the Lord's day at home, doing nothing to advance the cause of God? Let them think how they will meet their judge in the great day of account.

      We shall mention one more impropriety among the preachers in general, and that not the least. Many destroy their usefulness by ever preaching controversy. On a few particular subjects their attention is fixed, and on these they dwell till they are almost brought to conclude that they are the sum of truth, and the very essence of religion, and that all who reject them must be destitute of both. The doctrines of eternal election, absolute decrees, perseverance in grace, trinity, the atonement, and their opposites, have long engaged almost the sole attention of many; or if they occasionally touch on the practical points of religion, it is evidently done with a cold indifference, their zeal having been expended in the defence of their peculiar dogmas, and in handsomely drubbing and anathematizing their opponents. Such is the popular cant of many in the present day, and this, though unprofitable, is the popular preaching of this time. This fault is chiefly found among the younger class of preachers, the old having learned by good sense and experience the inutility and folly of such labours, and that the hearts of the preachers and hearers are left barren of devotion, communion with God, and brotherly love, after such addresses. Let such carping controversialists as themselves, if what they preach to others, is living food to their own souls? If not, how can they expect to feed the sheep, and cause them to thrive? Does not such preaching destroy brotherly love and Christian union, and therefore must be a serious injury to society? To declare plainly our views on controverted points at proper times and places, is certainly proper; but wisdom should regulate, and moderation and meekness should ever be manifested.

      The attention of the churches and preachers is earnestly invited to this subject; and as we expect to meet in conference shortly, we request communications on [82] this subject from brethren who have made it their study.

EDITOR.      

[The Christian Messenger 1 (February 24, 1827): 79-83.]

      Our annual conference will be on Friday before the first Lord's day in April next, at Upper Indian Creek meeting house, near Cynthiana, Harrison county, Kentucky.

[The Christian Messenger 1 (February 24, 1827): 83.]

      We have lately read a piece in the Western Luminary, entitled The Trinity.--Vol. III, No. 28. We have yet to learn what the writer had in view in publishing this to the world. It could not be fore the conviction of the anti-trinitarian, nor for the establishment of the trinitarian; for the arguments used are presumptive, and not calculated for either conviction or establishment. We cannot but view it as a beacon of alarm, raised up to excite the fears of the weak, and to inflame their angry passions against fellow creatures, who may be as acceptable to their God as themselves. The writer appears to have forgotten a solemn precept of Jesus: Judge not, that ye be not judged. To us the piece under review, is a perfect exhibition of the intolerant spirit of the fourth century, by which piety, peace, love, and union, were almost driven from the church.

      In the first paragraph the writer expresses his opinion that Unitarianism (by which term he understands Socinianism) is the most dangerous of doctrines, with regard to the Christian religion. We shall not contend with him as to the degree of danger attached to this doctrine; for with him we agree in rejecting the doctrine as "inconsistent with the simple and plain declarations of the Bible. But we fear to judge, as he has done, that it assumes a ground or station, which is entirely repugnant to the experience of every child of God." We think there is a numerous and growing class of Socinians in the present day, who disseminate the doctrine under the cloak of orthodoxy. For how many nominal trinitarians at this time, deny the pre-existence of the Son of God, and affirm that the Logos [83] or Word, which was made flesh, was not a distinct mind, or spirit, or intelligent being, but was the only true God himself. What then but man was born, grew up, lived, and died? The professed Socinians are no doubt, highly pleased with this change of professed trinitarians, and look forward with pleasure to the period when a union between them shall be effected.

      In the second paragraph, the writer says: "If our Saviour in his essential character, was not God--the eternal being--the creator of the universe--the creator of all things, whether in heaven or on earth, he was the greatest impostor the world ever saw." But on the supposition, the Saviour never assumed one of these characters to himself, what then? Could he be called the greatest impostor the world ever saw? We boldly affirm that he never assumed one of the characters to himself; nor are we afraid of a contradiction from the Bible. The highest character he ever assumed, was, the Son of God.

      The writer proceeds: "And his apostles were a simple, infatuated people, not worthy of the least regard--seeing they have asserted that to be a fact, which is not true." That the apostles ever asserted this to be a fact, that Jesus Christ in his essential character was God--the eternal being--the creator of the universe, is denied by many, probably as learned, as honest, and as good as the writer. It is a subject of long and endless controversy, into which we have no desire here to enter; as enough and too much has been already written on this point. But should the writer hereafter makes specifications of the apostles' testimony to this fact, we shall not decline an investigation.

      The writer in his great zeal has transcended orthodoxy itself, by confounding the persons of the trinity; for he says, "He is the Father; he is the Son; he is the Word." He asks, "Is he the Saviour of those, who do not believe him to be what he is in reality?" that is in his essential character, God--the eternal being--the creator of the universe. He boldly denies salvation to such, unless they renounce their unworthy pretensions, [84] and acknowledge "that he was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not." We hope there are none, professing Christianity, who would not willingly make this acknowledgment; we hope there are none who would not with Peter acknowledge that he was the Christ, the son of the living God. We hope there are none, who do not receive the witness of the Father, "This is my beloved son, in whom I am well pleased." How all things were made by him, we are informed, Heb. i, 1. Here God is said to have made the worlds by his son. In v. 10, the father declares of the son, that the earth and the heavens are the works of his hands. In v. 8 and 9, the father addresses the son:--"Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever; a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity, therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows." Such declarations need no comment; should any be thought necessary, we refer to Eph. iii, 9, I. Cor. viii, 6.

      "Christians, (says the writer) have the evidence within themselves, that Christ is God. But is not the evidence wanting in those who deny the fact?" This is bare assertion. With equal ease the contrary might be asserted, and the arguments or assertions be of equal weight. But the writer, and his copyist by this expression, have plainly manifested a perfect want of charity for such as receive not their dogmas on this subject. It would certainly do them no harm, but much good to read, and ponder well I. Cor. xiii.

      He proceeds: "If the doctrine of the adorable trinity be true, then are a large majority of professing Christians right." This is not so self-evident as he may think. If trinity be a doctrine of scripture, all the various and discrepant theories of trinitarians cannot be right--they may all be wrong; but one only can be right; and who can determine which is the right one? and whether the majority of Christians are in this right one? We know it to be a fact, that many professed trinitarians, made so by education, deny the doctrine [85] when stated to them fairly. They have received the doctrine as an incomprehensible mystery; yet by reading the scriptures they have formed correct notions of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

      The writer adds, "But if it (the trinity) is not true, then are a small minority correct; not, however, by reasons, or just inferences, drawn from the Bible; but from a course of reasoning, which has either sophistry or deism for its guide." This sentence appears to us strange, very strange! If the doctrine of trinity be not true, then a small minority is right, the Bible wrong, and Deism true! This brings to my recollection the sentiment of a late English writer. Speaking of the United States, he says: "In no country is the wise toleration established by law so complete as in this. But in no country whatever, is a spirit of persecution for mere opinions, more prevalent than in the United States of America. It is a country most tolerant in theory, and most bigoted in practice."

EDITOR.      

[The Christian Messenger 1 (February 24, 1827): 83-86.]

      The last number of the Western Luminary gave us cheering intelligence of revivals of religion among the Presbyterians in different parts of the United States. But great fear appears to be excited, lest these revivals should eventuate as that did in 1803, when so many rejected man-made creeds, and party names; and received the Bible alone as the standard of faith and practice, and the name Christian instead of party names. These the Luminary strangely considers as new notions and new lights; and solemnly warns his friends in the west, lest they should fall into the same fatal heresy! Astonishing! that in a Christian land, and by a protestant too, such a sentiment should be uttered. Yet he advances five arguments to persuade them to cleave to their party creeds and names, and to reject the receiving of the Bible as the only rule of faith and practice, and the name Christian as their only name. To these arguments we will attend.

      1st. That in all those place where the Lord is reviving his work, the churches of the different [86] denominations are going on "in the good old way, without carrying on a warfare against creeds and confessions." Vol. III, no. 30.

      The force of the argument is this: If you desire to be blessed of God, and have revivals of religion among you, continue in the good old way, by which the Luminary means the various, jarring creeds and confessions of the different sects and denominations. Though the Presbyterians condemn many of the doctrines of the Methodist creed and discipline, as errors; yet it is thought better for them to continue in those errors, than to receive the Bible alone, and the name of Christ. For they who have done so are not blessed with revivals. This is his second argument to dissuade his friends in the west from rejecting their human authoritative creeds and party names, and taking the Bible alone and the name Christian, in their stead. For he adds:

      2. "If there have been revivals in churches, in which the hue and cry have been raised on the subject of priest-craft," "the kingdom of the clergy," "the creeds and confessions &c. &c. we have not been informed of them."

      We think he must have lived a recluse in the west, not to have heard something of the many thousands, who, in the different revivals in the west, have been converted to the Lord, in those places too, where authoritative creeds and party names were zealously opposed, and the Bible alone warmly recommended to be received as the only rule of faith and practice, and the name Christian, as that given by divine authority. On the contrary, we profess never to have heard of one soul converted to God, by warring in defence of human authoritative creeds and party names, as being more acceptable and pleasing to God, than the Bible alone, and the Christian name. Is it possible that the Luminary thinks that the frowns of God are upon those who prefer his word, and the name he has given, to the jarring creeds and names devised by men?

      The revivals at this time among Presbyterians, we believe from the knowledge of facts, have not commenced and progressed by preaching the confession, or its [87] peculiar and leading doctrines; for these, in ever revival we have known among them, have been left out of view. The simple, plain doctrine of the Bible has been preached, and warmly urged; as the necessity of regeneration, faith, and repentance; the general calls and invitations of the gospel; the encouragements and promises to returning sinners; the willingness and sufficiency of Christ to save all that come to him, and the danger of rejecting him, and his grace. This is the doctrine blessed of God, when preached in the spirit, and received by faith, joined with obedience. A true revival always manifests its divine character by brotherly love, peace, union, and humility. Wherever these are found, we acknowledge it of God, and cordially unite in giving him the glory.

      The Luminary produces three more arguments to persuade his friends to cleave to the good old way, their jarring creeds and confessions, and to avoid the new notions and new lights in the west. He warns them of the danger of being carried away by them, from the facts which transpired in 1803.

      1st. A part of the Synod of Kentucky at that time assumed the Christian name, rejected creeds and confessions, and received the Bible alone without comment or explanation. Oh, what dreadful heresy is this! In what awful danger must such people be! It must be wonderful that the church of Christ for the three first centuries could have been preserved from ruin without the aid of a human creed, or party name; for they had the Bible alone, and the name of Christ alone! Alas for his friends in the west, should they be led away with these new notions! For of six Presbyterian preachers who did so, three were swept off by the Shakers. What is the conclusion? Surely, that the Bible is an insufficient guide--a dangerous book! So thought the Pope and his Cardinals long ago, and therefore in their wisdom and clemency, debarred the people from reading it. Protestants permit the people to read it, but they must understand it as explained in the confession, or become subject to censure and exclusion from the Church. Which of the two acts most consistently? [88]

      The argument used by the Luminary against the new notion of receiving the Bible alone will equally apply against receiving the confession of faith. For we might warn our friends in the West against receiving the confession, because several ministers were swept off by the Shakers. It must therefore be a dangerous book, an insufficient guide, and bond of union. So we might prove the danger of the Methodists' and Baptists' creeds, as many of their societies were swept off by the Shakers, and this before they had taken the dreadful leap of taking the Bible alone as their rule, and the name Christian for their name. These new notions they had not previously received.

      2. The Luminary states another important historical fact, as a beacon to warn his friends from going after new notions. Two others of the six preachers who assumed the name Christian, and took the Bible alone for their rule, return to the church from which they departed. As the design of stating this fact is to warn, let us hear it. Take warning from these two men of the west, not to follow after new notions, as they did in assuming the name Christian, and in taking the Bible alone, to the rejection of all authoritative creeds and confessions. They have found the Bible alone, by experiment, an insufficient guide--a book not profitable for doctrine, reproof, nor correction, nor for instruction in righteousness--that it cannot make the man of God perfect, it cannot thoroughly furnish him to every good work. They have after wandering in the wide fields of the Bible some years, become discouraged; and being convinced of the necessity of the confession of faith as a better guide, as the good old way, have returned to the Church which is built upon it. Look at this beacon and take warning.

      The last fact stated to warn his friends from going after new notions, is, that Mr. B. W. Stone, the remaining one of the six preachers, who took the Bible alone, is now at the head of the Unitarian sect in the west. Surely the Bible alone, without an orthodox comment or explanation, must be, in the eye of the Luminary, a very [89] mischievous and dangerous book: three preachers were made Shakers, two wandered long, and one became a Unitarian, by receiving it alone; and some other ism is hinted at towards the close, by which we presume, is meant deism; as this is the common epithet of the day. Though the arguments lead us clearly to this conclusion, we cannot for a moment think that the Luminary entertains this view of the Bible, or would put such a Bible--destructive weapon--into the hand of infidelity.

      The honor of being the end of a sect in the west Stone never claimed; the name Unitarian he never assumed, but equally reject with every other party name; and as to a party sect, he abhors, and for more than twenty years has opposed the idea. He stand with his brethren on the Bible, a ground safe and sure. This we know shall ultimately triumph over all opposition, when boasted creeds and confessions shall be known no more, only as monuments of the folly and weakness of poor fallible men. We know that the war between the Bible and human creeds has commenced, and will never cease till the weaker dies. We are in no doubt as to its issue. All the physical and moral means of the various parties, are brought forth into operation to defend their creeds and standards. A mighty effort is making in the east, west, north, and south. The heavens are shaking, and every thing which cannot stand the shock, must be shaken out. The Bible will stand, and all who stand on it, and are possessed of its divine spirit, shall stand firm and undismayed forever.

EDITOR.      

[The Christian Messenger 1 (February 24, 1827): 86-90.]

      The nation appears roused to this subject. The greater part of the state legislatures have expressed their decided approbation of it. Religious societies are every where lending their aid. It is our wish to awaken the attention of the West, and to engage all in the laudable work. The subject is now before our national legislature, and it is hoped, not in vain. We publish an extract from the speech of a distinguished citizen, for the information of our readers. The constitution shall appear in a subsequent number.

      "Mr. CUSTIS anticipated with exultation the results that would follow the success of the society's efforts in removing this wretched population from the American soil, and removing them to the land of their forefathers. When the bark that bore them approached the African shore, it would not be hailed with such shouts as welcomed Columbus when he bore the people of the Western Archipelago the emblem of the cross--an emblem that appeared only to both nations in each others' blood. We sent them the star-spangled banner, that constellation whose rising lighted the world to freedom. When that banner shall float over their corn-clad hills and plains, waving in harvest, they will not think of Cortez or Pizarro; the name of America will be hailed with enthusiasm by millions on that vast continent that are now unborn. He called the society to remember the first [95] colonization of this country. A feeble little vessel bore the adventurous band, but virtue and religion led the way; the genius of philosophy was perched upon the helm. Now we are a great nation; should we not pity others?

      "In his remarks upon the unhappy situation of the planters, Mr. C. said, that what he spoke, he spoke not from speculation; he brought not the dreams of others, but his own experience; touching all those evils, he might with truth say, "Quorum magna par fui." He had lived to see, and painfully to feel, the errors of the system. His great hope lay in the magnanimity of those who were happily free from that system, and who, when they understood and became convinced of the feelings and desires of the men of the south for its entire removal, and saw a plan for that removal that presented a feasible prospect of success, would not, could not, refuse their aid to carry it into effect. The nation possessed the power to effect it. The republic was not now feeble and panting from the mighty effort of its newly accomplished emancipation; it had had time to breathe, to recruit its strength, to be refreshed, and to prepare itself for new exertions in the cause of light and liberty, and human happiness. On the subject of this enterprize, the nation has been as if in deep sleep; but when the lion has slept, it was not the time to form conjectures on his power; would you see his strength, you must rouse him from his lair. With respect to the American republic, she had only to awake, she had but to

What had she not already achieved? If she could only be brought to think upon the subject, and once to turn her strength to its accomplishment, all difficulties would vanish before her way. The national genius, like the tube of Herschell, will discover satellites and suns that none believed had place within the starry sphere."

[The Christian Messenger 1 (February 24, 1827): 95-96.]

      To CORRESPONDENTS.--"Milton" and "Philip" are thankfully received, and shall be inserted in our next.

[The Christian Messenger 1 (February 24, 1827): 96.]