series on this subject in twelve essays, we shall now proceed to the second, which has respect to the character of man.

And what is the moral character of man? It is not his personal endowments-the height of his stature, the symmetry of his frame, the elegance of his figure, nor the beauty of his countenance. Neither is it his natural or official relations to society. Nothing adventitious, nothing circumstantial, nothing extrinsic forms an element of moral character. No more can any one imagine that talent, tact, or genius, however eminent or extraordinary, are the ingredients of which it is composed.

Nothing conferred upon us by the hand of God or man constitutes our own moral character. It is a creation, and it is the only creation of our own. It is an acquisition, the fruit not of a single effort, but of a series of efforts terminating in fixed habits; lasting as life and commensurate with the reign of reason over our actions from the dawn of laind to the last lingering ray of its sun. It is the habiliments of our souls, spun, woven, and made by our own hands out of our intellectual and moral nature, and worn as the regular and standing costume of our lives. It is the combined result or compound product of the understanding, conscience, and affections as displayed in all the actions of our lives towards God and man, things temporal and eternal-celestial and terrestrial.

Being then the manufacture of our spiritual and moral nature in reference to the whole universe of which we are a part, and with especial reference to our relations to society, time, place, and circumstance, it is of all our possessions the most valuable, and to be guarded and preserved at all risks and hazards, even at the sacrifice of life itself. It is the only property acquired on earth, within the confines of time, Z that can be transported beyond the Jordan to the shores of eternity. It is all we gain on earth though we lived all the years of Methuselah; and, therefore, its formation and preservation merit the supreme regard of every responsible agent. Even in this life "a good name is better than great riches," as said the wisest of kings; and therefore, as sung the greatest master of the drama and of the human heart

"He that steals my purse steals trash:

'Twas mine, 'tis his, and has been slave to thousands;

But he that filches from me my good name

Takes that from me which not enriches him,

And leaves me poor indeed!"

Is it not then most evident that a just regard to the reputation of our fellows must always be an essential element of Christian righteousness. Hence it is that slanderers, revilers, calumniators, or, as they are sometimes called, "backbiters, whisperers, and revilers," stand blotted out of the kingdom of heaven.

But that we may speak intelligibly on this subject, it is expedient that we should mark distinctly two or three leading species of sins against the reputation of our brother. There is the active and bold, as well as the silent and timid slanderer and detractor: for slander and detraction are not specifically the same. The active and bold slanderer is one that unjustly imputes erroneous opinions, false doctrines, and irreligious and immoral actions to his brother; whereas the active and resolute detractor only filches away the virtues and excellencies of his neighbor; while the silent and dastardly calumniator or detractor is the person who hears these malicious allegations and unfriendly subtractions, and knowing them to be unjust refuses to open his lips in defence of oppressed innocence and injured virtue.

Now the golden rule which all the world admires, as well as every principle of the new dispensation and the broad precepts of both Testaments absolutely condemn and reprobate the man who doeth these things. Such characters are the vermin of society. Their tongues are set on fire of hell, a world of iniquity, which corrupt and torment all within their venom. The poison of asps is under their lips, while their throats are open sepulchres, from which issue the putrid exhalations of a corrupt and desperately wicked heart. But besides those who devote their lives to this demoniacal profession, there are others who only occasionally indulge in it, and as these are the persons in our view, for the others are hopeless, we shall speak with a single eye to their correction and reformation.

But in attempting to take a correct and comprehensive view of this species of injustice, we must not only consider its more striking varieties, but the wide range of its operations as respects the objects affected by it; for unlike every other sin, this may be committed against the dead as against the living. It is indeed the only sin against the dead which we can commit. They have neither person nor property among mankind; but they have still in the keeping of posterity through many generations a name and a character, for which some of them sacrificed their dearest interests while they lived on earth.

Many and grievous sins have been filed in heaven against the pulpits and the pews of our modern synagogues for their violent assaults upon the reputation of the religious dead. No class of the dead can be sinned against with less hope of impunity than the righteous dead; for even their ashes are precious to their God and Father, and are safely guarded to the resurrection of the just. Can any one think that he who permitted Michael to wrestle with Satan about the dead body of Moses will suffer auy one to violate with impunity the reputation of his beloved children! No, he cannot. "He that toucheth them toucheth the apple of his eye."

Now who can listen to the doctrinal opinions and religious views ascribed to Calvin by some Arminians, and to Arminius by some Calvinists; or to the faults and errors ascribed to Luther by the Romanists, or to the allegations preferred against the Waldenses, the Zuinglians, the Wickliffites, by their opponents, and not feel the spirit of slander and detraction breathing in his face? Could the spirits of these mighty dead appear among us, and confront face to face their traducers and perverters, with what shame and confusion of face would these reckless declaimers retire from their presence! And if it be criminal to misrepresent the present, is it not more criminal to misrepresent the absent living; is it not most of all criminal to pervert and misrepresent the views or actions of the dead?

Some may excuse themselves, alleging that to impute to these leaders of religious parties opinions abstract views which they may not have entertained, is a very venal offence compared with the imputation of unworthy actions affecting their moral character. This, to some, may perhaps be an intricate question in casuistry; but who can doubt that to impute to any man an opinion which he did not entertain, for the sake of impairing his influence in society, when it is known that the alleged opinion is as obnoxious to public condemnation in the quarter from which we wish to exclude him, as an immoral action, and more likely to destroy his influence, is, to say the least, as criminal as to impute to him that moral impropriety which would fully blast his reputation. And he that ascribes obnoxious sentiments or opinions to the dead, without knowing them to have been their identical sentiments, and not his own glosses nor those of other men, differs but little from him who knowingly misrepresents their views. The opinions of religious men in an age of opinionism are likely to be quite as important as their moral actions; and to deal in these without an accurate knowledge of them is a very hazardous business.

No person who is supremely in love with truth, can presume to speak of the sentiments, views, or practices of other men, but from the most exact knowledge of them. Now if none were to quote Calvin, Wesley, Luther, Knox, Baxter, Sandeman, Glas, Pelagius, Arminius, Austin, Athanasius, &c. &c., but those who have read their works and carefully ascertained their sentiments, we would not hear those names from the pulpit nor the press once for at least a hundred times. The love of party is so great, and the spirit of detraction and slander so rife in the land, that perhaps a majority of even the public speakers, writers, and lecturers of the age, without waiting to examine the words of those whom they desire to oppose, are in the habit of quoting them from the seventh hand, or from some confused and indistinct remembrance of them, or out of their true and proper contextual meaning.

I do not know that I have ever heard an Arminian fairly meet the doctrines of Calvin, or a Calvinist the doctrines of Arminius. In the warmth of controversy and the zeal for party a man must be a true Christian indeed that will quote the words of his opponent as his opponent has expressed them, and in the full, precise, and definite meaning which he has attached to them.

I have chosen the Pulpit and the Press, not as if they were more crowded with such frailties than the other walks of life, but because they are supposed to be the most circumspect and veracious, and thence to caution all against a species of injustice so awfully prevalent even in the sacred places of the earth: for if it can be fairly alleged that this vice has seized the most elevated posts in society, what shall we think of the more common casts and thoroughfares of life! But some may say that I am better acquainted with religious and moral instructors than with other men. Be it so, if any one pleases: and sorry I am to acknowledge that my acquaintance with a great many of that class will not warrant me to form or express a more favorable opinion of their high regard for the intellectual and moral reputation of those whom they feel themselves called upon to assail. There are a few reform preachers whom I suspect to have lived so long in such associations, who, I am sorry to say, seem not to have entirely reformed from this loose and unguarded way of quoting and applying the words of those them. oppose

who

A. C.

Brother Campbell,

NOTES BY THE WAY.

I HAVE found it useful to enter upon my common-place book such thoughts and reflections as occurred to me upon various subjects, and which seemed either forcible or just. If the following fragments be worthy of a place upon your pages, they are at your service.

When weak arguments are adduced to sustain a good cause, and are refuted, it is a common error for men to suppose that the contrary side of the question is established. The point at issue is yet untouched. To show the inconclusiveness of an argument is not to adduce one upon the opposite side of the question. *** It is very important in debate to introduce but few arguments and sustain them well. In war, Philip of Macedon and Alexander owed their success to the introduction of the phalanx. Napoleon gained his victories by concentrating his forces upon a single point.

The existence of an efficient eldership is absolutely necessary to the prosperity of a congregation. It is a vain thing for the Evangelist to attempt to make the whole church proficient in Christianity by weekly discourses. His labor would be more productive if he were to select a few of the more faithful and zealous members, and devote himself for some time to their improvement by giving them lectures daily upon the gospel, church history, chronology, sacred times and places, order, discipline, &c. &c. so that they might after his departure teach the congregation. The things which thou hast heard of me," says Paul to Timothy, "commit thou to faithful men who will be able to teach others." These men, having given sufficient evidence of their proficiency and fitness, should be appointed to the elder's office, and should visit the members of the congregation often from house to house to instruct and watch over the flock. The church should be subject to them. Without proper subordination, there can be no proper rule-no union-no strength.

ANGER. The feeling of anger or displeasure may be useful if it be properly governed and directed. To be insensible is to be in perhaps as vicious an extreme as to be irascible. True meekness consists in a medium. Christ once looked round upon the wicked with anger.— God is angry with the wicked every day. This feeling is properly directed against sin. Strong passions are like strong winds—not so dangerous if the vessel be in good trim, and the pilot at the helm. They are certainly better than a dead calm. It is not said of the elder, who is an example to the flock, that he is not to be angry-but that he is not to be "soon angry." It is not said that the Christian may not be angry with his brother, but that he must not be "angry with his brother without a cause." But when anger gains the ascendancy and produces works of the flesh, it is a most dangerous passion. The Christian, indeed, should carefully watch all strong emotions, nor should he permit himself to be long under their influence. If he do, he gives an opportunity to the devil. The stormy wind may continue so long that the vessel, however prudently guided, may be driven from her course into an unknown and dangerous sea. Hence the Christian precept, "Let not the sun go down upon your wrath." In the kingdom of heaven every one must be in a good humor at sun-set. As the angry heats and fervors of noon subside, so should the brief excitements of the Christian give place to calmness and serenity; and while a few tears may be shed, like evening dews, for the frailties of humanity, he will lay his head upon his pillow in peace and charity with all the world.