"Behold, you despisers! and wonder and perish! | our correspondent seems mightily concerned for for I work a work in your day, which you shall not believe, though a man declare it to you!" Now, this is the way the populars preach about here. I do not know how they preach in your part of the world. Now the Lord Jesus veils the ancient gospel which they preach now, just as he used to do, from whom he pleased. According to the command, it is the duty of all men to seek the Lord, for all have sinned. But God has mercy on whom he will have mercy, (as you have shown in your remarks in your answer to the 19th Query, quoted above.) A man, therefore, cannot believet to the saving of his soul, unless God give him the power; for they that thus believe are blessed. Be pleased to give this a place in your paper, and thereby oblige a subscriber, who is A CONSTANT READER. Reply to the above. UPON reviewing the sixteenth and nineteenth queries referred to, it appears that the writer of the foregoing animadversions must have read these queries with a captious intention,-with a jaundiced eye. The sixteenth query explicitly states the exception which is amplified and illustrated in the nineteenth. Under the sixteenth query, p. 530, it is affirmed, "that all men, to whom the gospel is proclaimed, can believe it, if they choose; except such as have sinned so long against the light, as to have fallen into the slumber and blindness denounced against those who wilfully reject the counsel of heaven." Now, the above quotations from the answer to the nineteenth query, page 538, are expressly confined to such characters. "Those persons, then, from whom he studiously veiled the gospel, were those, whose characters he knew to be such, as to exclude them from repentance and forgiveness." But how, in the name of common sense, does the exclusion of such characters, by the righteous judgment of God, from a participation of the blessings of the gospel, furnish a key for the relief of the popular preachers from the religious legerdemain, or sleight of hand business, alleged against them? Does it necessarily follow as a universal truth, that, because some men have so sinned as to render themselves incapable of reformation by the belief and obedience of the gospel, that all, to whom it comes, labor under the same incapacity? Or, does it necessarily follow, that because some have so abused the divine goodness as to render it inconsistent with the immaculate dignity of the divine character to admit them to a participation of the blessings of salvation; that all to whom the gospel comes must be considered precisely in the same condition? Surely no. And if not, how does it go to relieve the populars from the impeachment of tantalizing mankind with a mock gospel, while they indiscriminately assert the entire incapacity of all, to whom the word of salvation is sent, to believe and obey it? While they assert, that without something more than either the preacher or hearer can do, the gospel can neither be believed nor obeyed; consequently, that it can only minister condemnation, for he that believes not shall be damned." Did Peter or Paul so preach the gospel either to Jews or Gentiles? Let the populars produce the specimen, and they will stand exonerated. But If God, peradventure, will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth. † It pleased God by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe. the character of the popular preachers. He alleges their ignorance of the characters of their hearers; and gravely asks, "How would you have them to preach? Would you have them to tell lies? and say, that each and every one of you can," &c. Surely no. We would not have them tell lies; nay, we would not have them even to hazard such a thing; and, therefore, would have them to preach just as did the apostles. When Paul preached to the Antiochians, Acts xiii. we may justly consider him as ignorant of the personal characters of his hearers, as any of our modern populars can be; and yet he did not tell them that they were incapable of believing; nor yet, "that every one of them could, by reading the sacred scriptures, become partakers of the divine nature." Instead of this, he preached to them Jesus and the resurrection, and through faith in him the remission of sins, with certification, "that whosoever believes in him, is justified from all things." And concludes by warning them to beware, lest that which was spoken by the prophets should come upon them; saying, "Behold, you despisers, and wonder, and perish," &c. Let our modern preachers go and do likewise; and they will neither risk preaching lies; nor yet expose themselves to the just censure of tantalizing their hearers with a mock gospel, as they are in the habit of doing; when, after laboring with apparent fervor to convince and persuade their hearers, as Paul did in the passage above cited, they gravely conclude, by assuring them, that after all that can be said or done on both sides, it will be all lost labor without the intervention of a supernatural influence, over which neither preacher nor hearer has any control; so did not Paul nor any of the apostles. Nor have we a single petition for such an influence on record in the apostolic writings; neither as offered up by the apostles, nor by the churches at their request, in behalf of the success of the gospel in the conversion of sinners. It seems to have been the happiness of our correspondent to have heard the ancient gospel before he ever heard of the editor of the Christian Baptist. This will not be thought strange, since the said gospel was in the world seventeen hundred years before said editor was born. But the query is, Did he hear it from the populars? If we believe his own account of their character and preaching, we should think not. He styles them "living witnesses, who stand as in Christ's stead." Who preach, saying, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand; repent you, and believe the gospel." According to these characteristics, we should first conclude that they are false witnesses, because they never witnessed one single item of what they preach, if so be it is contained in the bible; for this plain reason, they were born too late. We should next conclude them shameless pretenders, if they assume to be in Christ's stead, either to the church, or to the world; for none ever occupied this place but the apostles, who had power on earth to forgive sins, and to settle for ever all the affairs of his kingdom in this world. And lastly, as to the subject of their preaching, (if our informant be correct,) that "the kingdom of heaven is at hand," they belong not to the gospel dispensation at all, but to the preparatory dispensation of John the Baptist; for this was his text,-the subject of his introductory ministration. That the Baptist's gospel was really gospel; that is, good news, in its day, no one will question; also, that it is more So, then, they that are of faith, are blessed, with faith. ancient, than what we, at this day, call the an cient gospel, will be readily granted; but what ful Abraham. The lastic jargon; the bible knows nothing about it; is this to the purpose? The ancient gospel, of which we speak, began to be preached on the day of Pentecost, Acts, chap. ii. It announced the coronation of the King and the commencement of his kingdom by the Holy Spirit sent down from heaven; with the remission of sins, through baptism, to every believing penitent sinner, thenceforth to the end of time, that should take the benefit of the institution, divinely appointed for that purpose. The successive publication of this pure apostolic gospel is what we plead for, without any additions, or intermixture of human opinions. If our correspondent and his populars be in the full possession of this bliss-off those who were under law"-under the curse; ful, ancient, apostolic gospel, we should rejoice to know it: but from the spirit and tenor of the above communication, we have our doubts that it is far otherwise. For as already stated in the close of the reply to the sixteenth query, "that only is gospel, which all can believe who wish to believe." Or, in other words, that only is good news to all, which presents a good adapted to the capacity, the condition, and reception of all that choose to receive it. And such most evidently, is the apostolic gospel. T. W. alias THOS. CAMPBELL.* Query. DID Christ die in our law room and stead, according to the popular preaching? Answer.-This is one of the many ignorant, unprofitable, vain questions, so strongly reprobated by the Apostle in his letters to Timothy and Titus; "whereof come envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds," &c. "rather than godly edification which is in faith." and, that this was accomplished by the manner of his death; for it is written, "Accursed is every one that hangs on a tree." To the believing Corinthians-that "he died for our sins according to the scriptures." To the believing Cretans that "he gave himself for us to redeem us from all unrighteousness," &c. &c. What need, then, for the above artificial barbarous question, except to support some abstruse speculative theory? If we want to know why Christ died-why on a cross-for what-for whom-the effects of his death, &c. the bible affords direct pertinent answers to all those interesting questions; and this should suffice. Why should we desire to be vainly wise above what is written? T. W. THE following letter from Richmond, Virginia, is from an intelligent and amiable brother, who was called home to the king's own country in August last. "Mr. Campbell, EDITOR. "RICHMOND, JUNE 12, 1829. Lover of Truth," in a communication to the Constitutional Whig, so entirely correspond with mine, that I cannot withhold my mite of encouragement in the dissemination of your opinions. They are based upon the Rock of Ages, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against them, nor all the arts of priestcraft subvert them. We are yet in that state of the church represented in Revelations by the beast and his image. The time is coming, however, when the Angel of the Covenant shall preach the everlasting gospel. As an advocate for a genuine scriptural refor"DEAR SIR-YOUR views of the christian remation by the re-exhibition of the ancient apos-ligion, as given by one who styles himself "A tolic gospel and law of Christ, once delivered to the saints, I feel imperiously bound to protest against all such impertinent and unprofitable questions, as have no direct tendency to godly edification, of which there are thousands in this speculative, contentious age. For this purpose I would humbly suggest to all who desire to promote and enjoy this desirable reformation, to meet all religious queries with a direct appeal to the Bible; viz. What does the Bible say? Does it afford any direct and explicit information upon the subject? If so, well. Let it be so. But, if not, we have nothing to do with it. Let it pass as an untaught, unprofitable question, with which we have no concern. By so doing, we shall continue in the Apostles' doctrine; for so they teach. But if this should not at all times satisfy the querist, we may next for his sake, reasonably appeal to common sense, by inquiring what good, what utility will result from the solution of the question, provided it could be solved with certainty? Would it increase our faith, our hope, our love to God or man? Our piety, temperance, justice, benevolence? Would it make us more devout, more humane, more humble, more pure, more spiritual? In short, would it advance our moral or religious character? If not, why spend time, why exhaust our mental energy in vain speculation? By proceeding thus, we shall avoid those vain janglings and strifes of words, whereof comes envy, &c. so vehemently and repeatedly prohibited by the Apostle. Of this sort is the above query. The gothic barbarism of its form, the awkward abstrusity of its import, consign it to the dark era of monastic ignorance, of schoA Correspondent now at Bethany, to whom was re ferred the above letter in the absence of the Editor, "Sectarianism is, indeed, the greatest enemy to christianity. The Spirit of Christ never made a sectarian. Come from what source he may, he is none of Christ's. The apparent good that is done by sectarians in spreading the gospel, arises rather from party emulation, than the love of our Master. Sectarianism has been, is now, and ever will be, so long as the monster lives, a great obstacle to the progress of christianity.— Does this need illustration? Send forth, as missionaries, to a heathen people, a Romish priest, an Episcopal clergyman, a Presbyterian, a Baptist, and a Methodist. Each in the pomp and circumstance of his peculiar tenets, styling himself the ambassador of Christ, teaches the christian religion-all in different forms, and none adhering simply to the Book which all profess to follow. What is the conclusion of these poor heathen, forming a judgment, as all ignorant people do, from the sight?-any other, methinks, than that these ambassadors are sent by one Master for one and the same purpose. And reasoning to prove it would be in vain. Every christian knows that this is a stumbling block to unbelievers, even in christian countries, where the people are comparatively enlightened. The mischiefs of sectarianism are not confined to its effects on the heathen. This monster still tyrannizes in our land of liberty and gospel light, and thousands are kept from the Redeemer by the shaking of his many heads. In this country sects are free, while sectarians are slaves to the prejudices and dogmas of their sect. Where is the love of Christ, that when one would not sacrifice a cassock or a wax light, and another would not give a little more water, to save these souls from perishing; lest the pope, the archbishop, the presbytery, or what not, of temporal lordlings, should anathematize? Here the civil law, as it should do, tolerates all religions: but it does not follow that God will bless idolatry, will-worship, or any departure from the purity and simplicity of his instituted worship. We want missionaries to preach the gospel to our doctors of divinity, right reverend, and reverend clergy, and fashionable-very fashionable laity. "Sectarians will do some good by uniting on the Bible Society, if they do not counteract it by their sectarian Bible Classes. "Persevere to the end. You are in a good cause, and the Lord will own and bless your efforts. "One that loves you for your work's sake, "A DISCIPLE OF CHRIST." LOUISA, AUGUST 22, 1829. BROTHER CAMPBELL-YOU will be much surprised, no doubt, to hear of the rebaptism that has lately taken place in this neighborhood, (Louisa county.) In the summer of 1827 sundry persons were immersed into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, by brother James M. Bagley. As some of those persons lived in the vicinity of the Fork church, Louisa county, it became a matter of question by said church, whether they should be received into their fellowship. They finally agreed to refer the matter to the last association. This, however, was not done. One of those persons (a colored man) wishing to join the Fork church, could not be admitted, it seems, because he had been baptized in the "new way," as they said; that is, because the preacher said, "I immerse thee into the name," &c. instead of "I baptize thee in the name," &c. They determined, therefore, to hear his experience over again, and to baptize him in the old way. On the first Sunday in June, he told his experience to their satisfaction, and on the last Saturday in July he was rebaptized by the Rev. Timothy T. Swift!! after being disappointed several times; and the poor negro exclaimed, as he came out of the water, "I an't no Campbellite now"!! Is not this a new thing under the sun? And was it not taking the name of the Lord in vain in the most solemn manner? When we consider all the circumstances of this case and of exemplary character-I say, when all THE following documents are worthy of an attentive perusal. A very amiable young physician, of good education, and of a clear, discrim inating mind, who lately embraced the ancient gospel, is addressed in the following letter from an Episcopalian minister, from whose cathedral he had strayed into the fold of Christ. The parties are both known to myself, and the circumstances relative to his immersion. This letter was written to him by the reverend Episcopal teacher on hearing of his having rode off some hundred miles to be immersed for the remission of his sins. His reply to his former pastor, contains so much good sense and christian independence, that I could wish it to be read by every Episcopalian in the United States. This young disciple, was formerly very taciturn when addressed by his pastor on religious topics, which will explain one allusion in his reply. ED. C. B. JULY 9th, 1829. MY DEAR YOUNG FRIEND,-You will not, I trust, take it amiss if I express to you the surprize and regret with which I heard from your father, of the change in your religious sentiments. But my design in troubling you with this, is not a controversial one. I merely wish to set before your excellent judgment a few reasons for questioning the propriety of your course, even supposing that your conclusion were a right one. You are the eldest of a numerous family; I believe may add, the best endowed both by nature and by education, and engaged in a highly respectable profession. That you should be looked up to in a great degree by your brothers and sisters, and peculiarly cherished by your parents, is, under these circumstances, a very rational consequence. That you are so, is a fact with which you must be perfectly acquainted. I do not myself know any young man, therefore, to whose opinions a more ready and favorable attention might have been expected to be paid by his immediate connexions, and certainly none who could have calculated more fully on being allowed, after due consultation, to have his own way. In the honor due to our father and mother, I am sure you will agree that a sacred regard to their feelings and their principles must, of necessity, be included; and that a son, who is at once warmly beloved and greatly respected by them, is the last who could, with any piety or justice, act without regard to either, or show, by any decision of his, the slightest contempt of their opinions. But in abandoning the church of your father, in which you had taken your place as a member in full communion, at your parents' request, and in doing this without one word of previous communication with them-without one attempt to debate the propriety of the measure with those towards whom the word of God directs every reasonable manifestation of gratitude and kind consideration-without a single exhibition of any anxiety to prepare them for the change, or of solicitude to lighten the blow about to be inflicted on their comfort and joy in their save the sanctuary of the Lord from the desolating abom eldest and favorite child. Have you done as you would, one day, wish your son to do by you? that the preacher who immersed this Ethiopian, in 1827, was regularly ordained according to the Baptist order, and a member at that time of a regular Baptist church; a man of intelligence He should have said, I, having been baptized into my own experience, and agreeably to the commandment of Mr. Swift, I am a Swiftite now. As Mr. Swift is, perhaps, the first protestant on earth who has ever committed such a deed, I think it due to him and to posterity, that he should have the honor of it-therefore, to distinguish this ism from all others, I move that it shall be called Swift ism. In the vocabulary for the next theological diction ary Wallerism will be found to denote the burning of the into baptism, and of into into in. If men can thus pro holy scriptures; and Swiftism the rebaptism of immersion fane the most sacred institutions in obedience to their own antipathies and envy, what "ark of the covenant" can inations of the Roman eagles?-ED. C. B. Have you acted according to the spirit of the gospel? Have you not been led by your zeal to do a positive evil, at least in the mode pursued to secure your object? And are you sure that your course has produced to others the hundreth part of the pleasure, that it has inflicted pain, on those whose love for you is probably greater than that of the whole united world besides? I trust you will pardon the frankness of this expostulation. I am a father, and therefore may presume that I can estimate the misery of a parent who sees and mourns over the estrangement of a darling son, much more correctly than you can yet do. God grant that you may never experience the terrible reality of such a visitation. But beholding, as did, the grief of your father; hearing him say that he had passed a sleepless and a wretched night in consequence of your conduct in this matter, and observing the tears of strong emotion which his manhood could not restrain while he spoke, I could easily conjecture the state of your mother's mind, and thought it a duty to intrude myself no longer as a pastor, but as a christian friend, to ask you whether you are not bound in conscience and in principle, to acknowledge your error in taking such a step without consulting them? Whether you are not bound by the precepts of Christ Jesus to reconcile yourself to your parents by every acknowledgment consistent with truth? so, I suppose, it happened with me, that I was born and bred an Episcopalian; but, more mutable than the tailor, I am not an Episcopalian still. At least as soon as I knew my right hand from my left, I found myself an EpiscopalianI don't know how-perhaps by hereditary descent; and full, too, of sectarian prejudice, derived probably from the same source from which the children of Papists derive their Babylonish propensities. I was bred an Episcopalian, as far as compulsory attendance on Episcopalian ceremonies could constitute me one, and lived, until my sixteenth year, without religion and without God in the world. About this time a beloved Christian brother (not an Episcopalian) directed my thoughts and affections, in some degree, towards the Lord Jesus, as the Rose of Sharon that had no thorn; and the occasional reading of the scriptures, and a more particular attention to prayer and to sermons was the consequence. After some time, being taught to consider the Episcopal church as my spiritual mother, and supposing (like any other silly child) that she was the handsomest and best in the world, I introduced myself, at my father's request and yours, to what I then considered her privileges. And although I believed in the doctrine of the scriptures, and wished to obey it, yet, having no certain testimony in my heart or life that my sins were forgiven-that I I do not mean at all to impeach the soundness was born of water and Spirit, and united to of your religious views. My sincere desire is to Christ, (and I could not have this testimony behave you unmolested and entirely free, even cause Episcopacy had already carefully deprived from any unwelcome solicitation on that subject. me of the only one the scriptures have appointBut I do beseech you not to suffer this breached, and that, too, at a time when, on account of between you and your parents to remain un-infancy, I was unable to agree to, or resist, the closed for want of a speedy and thorough effort to heal it. In the mode of your procedure, you have been exceedingly to blame, because this mode was a plain declaration of want of confidence, want of kindness, want of reverence, want of filial submission. I confine myself to this single point, believing it a plain one, and in the hope that, however your light may exceed mine in the other doctrines of christianity, we shall agree in the practical application of the moral law: "Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long in the land which the Lord your God gives you." May the good spirit of the Most High direct and bless you. Your affectionate friend, &c. Reply to the above -Letter 1. J. JULY 15th, 1829. measure,) the Lord's supper was to me rather a punishment, than a comfort, because I did not realize my title to it; and yet I was unwilling to disobey what I knew was a command of God, and my conscience was sometimes quieted with the Episcopalian or Pharisaical reflection, that I also had gone through all the preliminary ceremonies of the church, and had therefore as good a right to her ordinances as any other Episcopalian. Still no motive had so strong an influence over my conduct in this matter, as the fear of disobeying my earthly parent. The fear of the Lord, however, soon began to sink deeper into my soul, and I made stronger efforts to get rid of the burden of sin-but in vain; and my life afterwards was compounded of long seasons of torpid religious despondency, "that frost of the soul, that binds up all its powers, and congeals life in perpetual sterility;" a species of hopeless carelessness, if I may so happiness which religion would have afforded me if I had possessed it in its purity. MY DEAR FRIEND,-As it would be highly in-speak, alternated with transient glimpses of the consistent with my profession to take amiss any friendly attempt to convince me of a supposed error, I am very far from doing so in regard to "When I was a child I thought as a child, I that which you have made. On the contrary, acted as a child; but when I became a man I I have to thank you for endeavoring to convince put away childish things"-that is to say, when me that I was at fault in not consulting my pa- I began to look about me, I became weaned from rents upon my choice of religion, although my my spiritual mother, because I perceived that own heart as yet acquits me. As I cannot, she was neither so well favored nor so good as I however, exonerate myself from the charge be- was taught to believe. And it seemed to me fore others, without declaring the motives which that a simple rule of judgment would apply. prompted me to that choice, it becomes necessa-it would be unwise to consider a lady identical ry for me to offer to you an apology for preferring with the house she lived in, the garments she Christianity to Episcopalianism. An apology wore, the professions she made, or to judge of for becoming a Christian!-and to a professed her by these, it would be equally so to esteem minister of the gospel! This is strange-but a church to consist in a meeting-house, a liturgy, circumstances require it! or a profession, or by these to estimate her real character. A church is composed of members, and by their conduct the purity of the church (i. e. their purity) must be decided. As old Mr. Wrenshall set forth in a petition which he wrote for a tailor, that "he had been born and bred a tailor; and, notwithstanding all the vicissitudes of human life, was a tailor still," As After musing on these things and reading in me. and to take the holy scriptures as my guide. Believing that my Heavenly Father meant what he said, and that in every thing essential to salvation his words were plain, I threw behind me all sectarianism, and took up the bible. And I took it up with the resolution that what I discovered to be my Father's will, I would endeavor to perform: and if the idea of consulting any human being about the propriety of doing what I believed to be the command of God, had ever entered my thoughts, it would have done so only to be discarded as a suggestion of Satan. Considering the Christian church as it was first formed by the Apostles, and the ancient gospel as preached by Peter on the day of Pentecost, I perceived that faith in Jesus, as the Son of God and Saviour of sinners, was the first duty; the second, repentance; and the third, baptism for the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit; and the fourth, that we should walk in newness of life. the Book of God, as I reclined on the verdant | time for me to apply to a teacher sent from God, carpet of nature, beneath the luxuriant foilage of a spreading tree, I insensibly fell into a reverie. I beheld at a distance an elegant mansion, whose gothic minarets and battlements broke against the light, and whose lofty towers raised themselves towards the clouds. Presently a lady, with her train-bearer, descended from the building and entered into a magnificent carriage, in waiting at the door, and attended by a retinue of servants, which then rapidly approached me, and halted near the place where I was. The lady immediately alighted and came towards Her person seemed to be adorned with the gorgeous trappings of fashion; her step was slow and measured; and the striking affectation of her manners could only have been acquired in what I was accustomed to hear called the highest and politest circles. She thus addressed me: "My son, why have you forsaken my house? Why have you not appeared with me on the appointed days, to render praises to my spouse and seek his face? Is not Christ my spouse? Do I Having been all my life dwelling upon the two not enjoy his smiles? Behold I am rich, and first principles of the doctrine of Christ, i. e. reincreased with goods, and have need of nothing.pentance from dead works and faith towards My servants are many: they are clothed in silk God, (and, as far as my observation extends, this and fine linen; I reward them liberally, and they little primer constitutes the entire library of most praise me, for I am pure and holy." So you did sectarians, and the consequence is, that very few teach me, I replied, that you were the spouse of of them ever learn to read,) it became necesChrist; and in him who is altogether lovely, my sary for me now to think of baptism. I need soul delighted; therefore did I seek his face not detail the progress of that examination which with you; but I perceived that he hid his face forced me to conclude that infant sprinkling from you, and that I could not gain his smiles. was not baptism. Suffice it to say, that both You gave me a little book that I might praise in the Septuagint and New Testament, I found him and call to him by reading therein; but he that the words BT and Bar signify to imtold me that out of the abundance of my heart merse, or dip; and that to translate them thus my mouth must speak, and not out of the abun- would make complete sense and harmony of the dance of your little book. Nay, your own speech passage in which they occur; whereas, to introbetrays you. Say you, "I am pure and holy?"duce the idea of sprinkling, would frequently and does not your little book testify of you that you are a "miserable sinner?" that you have "no health in you?" and that the "burden of your sins is intolerable?" And truly you seem to mourn grievously for your iniquities. Would not sackcloth and ashes become your situation better than this gorgeous apparel? And I beheld also that hatred and enmity, revilings, drunkenness, profanity, and every evil prevailed in the conduct of most of your children. O! you daughter of Babylon! if he whom you call your spouse, had sanctified you, would not your children be holy? You did profess to appear before God one day in the week, while not only then, but during the whole week, your actions showed that your heart was far from him. Therefore, did I refuse to take any longer your counsel, but resolved to follow the directions of him who could not deceive me. My Lord smiled upon me, and in his presence my soul takes delight: therefore do I rejoice in the God of my salvation, who "never leaves me nor forsakes me." Perceiving that pride curled her lip into an insulting smile of incredulity, I added, "You know not that you are wretched and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked." Repent of your wickedness, therefore, and obey Christ. I now observed anger sparkling in her eyes; and her servants, emulous of each other, began to raise their voices in her eulogy, and withal occasioned such a din that it awoke me. I could not deny that the Episcopalians, and the Presbyterians, and other sects had faith; but I perceived that it was Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and sectarian faith, producing nothing but Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and sectarian works; that each would boast in his own scheme and hate his neighbor. I therefore concluded it was high make absolute nonsense of scripture, (ex. gra. Rom. vi. 3, 4, 5. Coloss. ii. 12, &c.) I also found that faith and repentance were absolute prerequisites for christian baptism, if we wished it to be of any benefit to us, and that the word of God commanded me to be baptized for the remission of my sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. Coming to this conclusion, therefore, I could not conceive that I was bound, by any principle, to consult my parents, or any body else, about the propriety of fulfilling this duty, any more than Abraham was to consult his wife Sarah about the propriety of sacrificing Isaac in obedience to the command of God. Besides this, my father's "feelings and principles" in religion, which you say, are worthy of "sacred regard," I knew to be strictly and exclusively Episcopalian; and, as such, I considered them unworthy of that regard. For I do not accustom myself to pay "sacred regard❞ to any thing which I do not believe sacred and holy; and I cannot admit without reservation, a principle that sanctifies the "feelings and principles" of all parents from those who cause their children to pass through the fire to Moloch, or set them beneath the wheels of the image of Juggernaut, to those who bring them up in papal superstition, or impiously presume to "sprinkle them into Christ's death," (as their traditions would make the scriptures say,) while the parents themselves, at the very time, though they may go to church, and the children, as soon as they are able, show by their works of unrighteousness whose children the word of God declares them to be. I might, indeed, have gone as Lot went to his sons-in-law, and said, "Up, get you out of this place!" but I would have "seemed as one that |