tendency to promote the outward prevalence and inward influence of the Gospel, to strive to gain souls to Christ, by a forcible representation of our own views of the evidences of his divinity and truth, set forth in the winning words of meekness, than by the most irrefragable demonstration of deistical errors, accompanied by the sharp and bitter reproaches of the pen. At least we may assume, that whoever ventures in the discharge of the duties which attach to the office of Christian Preacher, to introduce the violence of forbidden passions, and the use of ungentle language, will not only act inconsistently with the name he bears, but also transgress the positive rule which the wisdom of the Founder has laid down for his observance; the rule, I mean, of demonstrating in the most convincing and persuasive manner, the truth and excellence of Christianity. For he who renders railing for railing, may reason indeed or rebuke men into sullen silence; but never will he be able by his bitterness to "persuade" them into an acknowledgment of the truth of what he defends, or by wrath to "convince" them of the excellence of the Gospel; whilst proving to demonstration, by his own conduct, how little is the efficacy which its precepts and principles have obtained over his own heart.

Mr. Hulse has thought it necessary to impose only two restrictions in the choice of subjects upon

those who may be appointed under the direction of his Will, and both these restrictions appear to have been dictated by the purest and soundest feelings and views. One of them relates to the evidences, the other to the difficulties of Revelation.

With regard to the evidences of Revelation, he distinctly prescribes that the Christian Preacher shall direct his efforts principally against those

66

notorious infidels, whether atheists or deists," who are the enemies of the common faith, and never descend (to use his own words) to any of those

particular sects and controversies, which are so much to be lamented, amongst Christians themselves, except some new or dangerous error, either of superstition or enthusiasm, should prevail. In this latter case alone does he permit the multiplied differences and disputes of Christian divines. to be nourished and perpetuated by attaining to the dignity of an authorised and public refutation. It would have been well for religion had this rule been more generally observed. Without alluding to any existing controversies, I think it may be fairly admitted, that many of those which eccle-siastical History presents to our view, as disturbing the beauty of the Church of Christ, were idle and unimportant in themselves. Yet were they often, in their day, as warmly debated, as the most vital doctrines, or precepts of religion, and were

accompanied by as much hatred, and variance, and emulation, and strife, as could have been supposed to arise from the passions of men, when interested in questions essential to the virtue or salvation of the world. That the faculties of the human mind were exercised and improved in these wars of reason may certainly be true, and I am not disposed to deny that some pearls may be detected amidst the filth and rubbish with which the Scholastics defended themselves or assailed their adversaries. We cannot however deny, that their talents might have been much more beneficially employed, in illustrating the simple doctrines of the Gospel, or enforcing its appropriate precepts. It may and indeed it must sometimes be necessary to resist the progress of error and correct the perverse disputers of this world by argument; but we should never needlessly descend into the arena of controversy, never forget the temper and prudence which the Christian contest requires, or make use of weapons disproportionate to the magnitude of the warfare. Every man is apt, either from a desire of stimulating his own energies, or from the effect of long contemplation upon one subject, to magnify the importance of that point of polemical Divinity upon which he is engaged, beyond its real merits, and to attribute such evil consequences to the opinions of his opponent, as that opponent himself would absolutely shudder at,

and an impartial examiner would never have perIceived. The Deist has not forgotten to take advantage of this weakness. He has judged the Gospel out of the mouth of the polemic, and, collecting together into one mass the numerous disputes of Christian Churches or writers, and estimating their importance by the lofty terms in which the disputants themselves have spoken of their different sentiments, has very artfully inferred-that, since the religion of Jesus has left, even in the confession of its friends, so many and such essential doctrines in a state of absolute uncertainty, there cannot be much satisfaction in embracing it as a rule of faith, or a ground of hope for the happiness of a future state. In the very same manner the Papist reviles the purer form of the Protestant system of belief, and deduces, from the variation of Protestant creeds, the necessity of an infallible guide upon the earth. That the inferences of both these sorts of reasoners are invalid, is allowed; but where men permit the liberty of thinking, and expressing their thoughts, to degenerate into licentiousness, they must needs expect that the Infidel will turn it to his own account, and that the unconfirmed and wavering Christian will be misled by his specious conclusions, into a rejection or doubt of the credibility of the Gospel scheme of salvation. No course, therefore, would appear to be more useful or prudent than that which Mr. Hulse has so earnestly

D

recommended, of giving our principal diligence to guard the rock upon which the Christian city is built, from the open or concealed attacks of its acknowledged adversaries, and never too rudely to assail its sincere well-wishers, even though we may conceive them to be mistaken in their notions, unless their errors should be new, or dangerous and prevalent. If new and prevalent,

it

may be wise to check and correct them, before they become inveterate by long establishment. If dangerous and prevalent, the duty of resistance is too plain to require a single word of exhortation. But if they be neither prevalent nor dangerous, it would be manifestly imprudent to give them, whether new or old, that additional degree of importance and notoriety, which necessarily attaches to every thing which has been made the subject of public and systematic disquisitions. The very best method of opposing many of the minor wanderings of the human intellect is, to leave them to fall by the weight of their own absurdity, or else gradually to die away and be forgotten because neglected.

In selecting for the subject of his inquiry "some of the more difficult texts or obscure parts of the Holy Scripture," Mr. Hulse directs the Christian Preacher to understand him, as alluding chiefly, if not exclusively, to such as he may deem