at least, convince our Baptist brethren that we have some reason on our side, and that there is some among us capable of stating our reasons kindly and strongly.

We wish there might be more controversy of this kind before the public; for it throws light on the subjects it treats of, and tends to lead candid and intelligent men to agreement on points where they now conscientiously differ. Intemperate zeal, even in a good cause, defeats its own object; for it so distorts all arguments, as nearly to annihilate their influence on the impartial, and so irritates opponents, as to close their minds forever against conviction. For what confidence can they place in men who seem to despise and hate them on account of their errors? Who would trust a physician that begins his prescriptions by falling into a passion with his patients, and abusing them because they are sick?

Intemperate zeal, besides being injudicious, shows a bad state of moral feeling. Supposing the errors of our opponents to be fatal, is it not misfortune enough for them to wander in darkness while in this world, and be consigned to eternal woe in the world to come? Must we hate those who are in this sad condition, and do what we can to abridge their brief comforts, and debar them from all hope of recovery, by exciting their prejudices against the truth, and casting odium on their name?

There are times indeed, when severity is necessary to silence insolent and unreasonable opposers, and to make the indifferent feel the importance of truth. All the irrepressible and sarcastic vehemence of Luther seemed requisite for the conflict with such opponents as he had to contend with, and for the task of arousing the world from the dead sleep of the dark ages. But with all our reverence for the character of Luther, we should be inclined, in ordinary cases, to say with Melancthon, a contentioso theologo, bone Deus, libera nos.

But this acrimony is even absurd, when manifested in controversy respecting errors which are confessedly unessential. Why should we be so much excited about that which God does not see fit to mark with disapprobation? Why should those, who believe that the interests of eternity depend entirely on the state of the heart, be so blinded by their zeal for a religious rite, as, for the sake of it, not only to neglect, but even to destroy, religious feeling. The church is too poor in piety to squander it in this manner. There is wickedness enough in the world to afford ample employment for all the pious feeling that can, by any means, be brought to bear against it. And yet, even in times of religious revival, when every feeling of every pious heart ought to be engrossed in the one great object of saving the souls of men, misguided zeal has often withdrawn the attention from the spiritual duties of religion, and fixed it on this unimportant, and comparatively useless controversy respecting Baptism. The relenting sinner is stopped in

the midst of his inquiries; anxiety for his salvation is lost; his feelings are irritated; he returns to his indifference, despising a religion which he considers the source of such vexatious contention. Why should the soul be ruined through zeal for a particular mode of baptizing the body?

Yet such is human nature; continually withdrawing from what is real, and fixing on what is circumstantial, in religion. So it was even in the days of the apostles; and the constant and fierce contentions respecting forms among the new converts to Christianity, gave their teachers incessant trouble and perplexity. They remonstrated, they attempted to fasten the mind on spiritual things, they urged the importance of conformity to God in heart and life; but all in vain; for their disciples would dispute on subjects of no real importance. Paul, to avoid contention with the Jews, circumcised Timothy; he rejoiced that he had baptized so few at Corinth, as, otherwise, he might have been drawn in as a party to the disputes which were reigning there; and he indignantly rebukes the Galatians for their attachment to the weak and beggarly elements of the world.

Would men be so zealous in their contentions respecting ritual observances, if they had adequate conceptions of God, or vivid impressions of eternity? Can God, that spiritual, eternal, almighty Being, the Creator and Ruler of the universe, look on the mode of applying an external rite as a matter of so much moment? What is the form of baptism in this world, to the eternity of heaven or hell, towards which we are hastening, in the world to come?

Under the ancient dispensation, it was necessary that religion should be made, in a high degree, an object of sense; that one people should be singled out for its preservation, and by a multiplicity of peculiar customs, be separated from the dangerous society of pagans. Under such circumstances, God viewed rites as of great importance, and accordingly he gave such minute directions concerning them that mistake was impossible. Had he viewed them as of the same importance under the new dispensation, he would have pursued the same course.

But when the fulness of time had come for the manifestation of the Son of God, it was no longer necessary that one people should be kept separate from all the rest of the world, in order to prevent the total obliteration of the knowledge of the true God, and that religion should address itself so much to the senses of men. Christianity was designed to be a spiritual and a universal religion. Hence, under the new dispensation, rites and ceremonies are comparatively unimportant. The people of God are. no longer in bondage under the elements of the world; they have been called unto liberty, and should not be entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Slight differences with regard to the forms of religion, which the inspired teachers of Christianity did not deem of sufficient. importance to merit particular notice, have too often given rise to the fiercest controversies; and these have frequently been conducted with a spirit unworthy of Christians, and unworthy of rational men. How many volumes of such controversy have been deservedly consigned to oblivion! We hope the same fate awaits what works still remain of the same spirit. They are the passionate freaks of the childhood of the church. She has now grown old enough to behave better.

TRACTS PUBLISHED BY THE AMERICAN UNITARIAN ASSOCIATION.

(Continued from p. 191.)

The fourteenth in this series of Tracts is on the very important and interesting subject of "experimental religion." After remarking that Unitarians are commonly represented as "no friends to experimental religion," the writer proceeds to shew in what sense this is true, and in what sense it is not true. Unitarians, he says, do not agree with those who "talk and write about experimental religion, as if it were a mysterious, unintelligible process or possession, the badge to be worn by those few only, who are the special favorites of heaven. What such understand by experimental religion, seems to be a certain tangible object which is to be seized or acquired altogether, or else nothing is gained. It is the result of a peculiar call of God, comes from influences entirely supernatural, and is in fact a sort of miraculous power, which enables them, and them only, to step at once out of darkness into light, to leave what is termed the world, and join what is termed the company of the saints. Hence they sometimes speak of getting religion, and losing religion, as they would speak of getting or losing property, as if it were an outward possession, and not a temper of mind and heart; as if it were a certain point, at which, when they arrive, they are to stop and congratulate themselves on the possession, and not a principle of increase and improvement in piety and holiness; as if it were a kind of charter for heaven, put into their hands they know not how nor whence, and insuring to them, by one stirring process, the benefits of salvation." pp. 3, 4. The persons here spoken of, with whom Unitarians do not agrec, are farther represented as "talking in vague and high wrought strains about. conversion;" as "pointing out a specific time, when a certain swell of feeling, they scarcely know what or whence, passed over their minds;" as "thinking themselves a great deal better than all the rest of the world, and saying, in the spirit of the Pharisee of old, 'God I thank thee that I am not as other men are ;" and as

"denying the name and character of Christians to those around them, whose lives and conduct are, at least, as near the Christian standard as their own." p. 13. They "speak of their fellow Christians as children of darkness and of wrath; pity the whole world besides themselves; regard and talk of the enclosures, within which their sects have fenced themselves, as a kind of privileged Goshen; and thank God, with a very strange sort of gratitude, that he has made them so much wiser and holier than other human beings." They "make boastful comparisons of themselves with others, and point the finger of reproach at such of their fellow men as do not see with their eyes on religious subjects." They "think that experimental religion is showy and noisy, that it seeks public exhibitions, that it is not satisfied till it has been registered before the world, and that it loves to blow a a trumpet, or hang out a flag." p. 18.

66

With views such as these of experimental religion, the writer of the Tract assures us, Unitarians do not agree. And who, we ask, in the name of reason, does agree with them? What sect, or sects," to use his own word, is this writer describing? Where do they live? What are their books? We wish to examine them for ourselves, that if their views have been fairly stated, we may unite with our worthy friend, the tract-maker, in holding them up to merited rebuke and scorn.

But, to be serious, for the subject is of a most serious nature; we have quoted the sentences above given, for the purpose of shewing our readers how some Unitarians can suffer themselves to talk and write on experimental religion; how flippantly they can retail the vulgar, commonplace slanders respecting it; how they caricature and abuse evangelical Christians; how clearly they manifest, either the bitterness of their spirit, or their total ignorance of the subject; and how they thus verify the declaration of the apostle, "The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."

The author next proceeds to give us his own views of experimental religion, and observes, "We understand by it, that thorough, vital religion, which is planted in the heart, and sanctifies the thoughts, the purposes, and the life, and which stands opposed to mere speculation, or mere profession, to idle clamors, or boastful words." p. 5. Very well; this is just what we understand by experimental religion. It is a religion which is felt; a religion which is experienced and exemplified in all its sanctifying and saving power.

"The elements which enter into the composition of experimental religion," the author observes, are these: first, to "receive a sense of the truths of religion as realities;" second, to have “ personal interest in the subject;" and third, to make it "a govern

ing principle of life and conduct." We have no objection to all this, especially if we may be allowed to explain the terms. To regard the truths of religion as realities; to receive them as personally applicable to us; and to make them the rule of our faith, our feelings, our conversation and conduct, is, doubtless, to be experimentally and practically religious. But here an inquiry presents itself, which is seen at once to be fundamental, and on which we shall inevitably split: What are the truths of religion? It has been a favorite maxim of the Unitarian school, "No matter what a man believes, or disbelieves, if his life is good." But if the first principles or "elements" of experimental religion be such as have been mentioned; if we must regard the truths of religion as realities which are strictly and personally applicable to us, and by which we must regulate our feelings and conduct; then it is of vital consequence what we believe. It is essential to the value and efficacy of religion, that correct ideas be entertained of the truths of the Gospel. Here is a person, who regards certain propositions of a religious nature as realities-realities in which he is deeply and solemnly interested, and by which he endeavors to form his character; but it happens, that every one of these propositions is untrue. Is this person a subject of true experimental religion? The heathen believes his gods are angry, and that nothing will appease their wrath but the blood of his child. All this is, in his apprehension, a reality-a reality which comes home with dreadful interest to his feelings, and agreeably to which he dares not refuse to act. He rises and immolates his child. But is this bloody transaction justifiable? Is this man a subject of experimental religion?

The design of these comparisons is to show, that, according to the first principles or "elements" of experimental religion, as exhibited in the Tract, and to which, with proper explanations, we do not object, the inquiry obviously is essential, What are the truths of religion? To experience a false system of religion, is one thing; and to experience the true religion, is another. To believe in the reality of Unitarian doctrine, to apply it, and practise it, is one thing; and to believe and obey the truth as it is in Jesus, may be quite another. Let a person believe fully that there is a holy and sovereign God, such as the Scriptures representthat he has issued a just and strict law, denouncing death upon every transgressor-that our race not only have transgressed, but, while in a state of nature, do continually transgress, and, consequently, are under sentence of eternal death-that the divine Word, who "in the beginning was with God, and was God," in the fulness of time "was made flesh," became a man, and suffered and died to make expiation for sin,-that, through him, pardon and salvation are promised to all those who repent and believe, but that a most aggravated destruction is denounced against those who