I have written this from home, and have not before me the last number as printed, and may therefore have omitted something. If so, I am glad to think that it may be considered again.

All of which is respectfully submitted.

Bank of the Rappahannock,

King & Queen county, Va. S

A. CAMPBELL.

CHRISTIANS AMONG THE SECTS.

"WHAT is truth?" is the most important inquiry ever made by man. How boundless the field which it opens before us! It involves every thing dear to us in time and in eternity. The object, however, of the present essay is not to launch on the boundless ocean of inquiry as to truth in general; but to confine myself to one point; and inquire, What is truth with respect to Christian character? Who is the Christian? Yet here we are at once presented with a difficulty, because the idea both of state and character is involved in the term; and it will be ad mitted that there are many Christians in character, who are not so in state; as there are many republicans in England, and monarchists in the United States.

Shall we, then, choose the word disciple? Its Greek representative, mathetes, is from manthano, and it from the obsolete matheo, "to learn.” This would be definite; and we should have the plain declarations of scripture before us; for the Saviour says, "Come unto me," as the first requirement; then, "Learn of me:" and he elsewhere teaches us the requisite state of mind; "Except you be converted, and become as little children, you shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of heaven." We know that it is characteristic of children to believe what is told them; and their unoccupied minds are peculiarly adapted to receive instruction. We are, then, assured that every one who comes to the Saviour with child-like simplicity, and, like Mary, sits at his feet, and hears his words, is his disciple. But here I am embarrassed again; for I have finished the argument almost before I had stated my premises; or I am at port, before I had well put out to sea! Neither have 1 attained the object of my inquiry; since this only sets forth the beginning of things. "Better is the end of a thing than the beginning thereof." We wish to inquire concerning the end of things-concerning character-Who is the character approved of God?

I have been led to the most careful examination of this subject from seeing, on one side, a disposition to undervalus positive ordinances; and on the other side,a disposition, equally dangerous, to overvalue them. The controversy about baptism is particularly before me; before leaving the subject I wish to present a scriptural view of the nature and intention of positive ordinances generally.

In the mean time, can an unimmersed person be an acceptable worshipper of God? I answer unhesitatingly, that the man whose heart is bowed to the Divine will, (however imperfectly he may understand that will) is accepted. Our heavenly Father estimates men according

to the state of their affections and passions, not according to the state of their understandings or the amount of their knowledge. "Though I understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and have not love, I am nothing.' "If any one thinketh that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet, as he ought to know; but if any one love God, the same is known [or acknowledged] by him.' Knowledge puffeth up, but love buildeth up." "Thus saith the High and Holy One who inhabits eternity-I dwell in the high and holy place; with this man also that is of an humble and contrite spirit-and that trembles at my word." "My son, give me thy heart," says the Most High. But need I array scripture to prove that devotion of soul and purity of heart and life are the great essentials? If there be one sentiment in all the Book, written as with a sun-beam, it is that expressed by the lawyer to the Saviour; "And to love the Lord our God with all the heart, and all the soul, and all the understanding, and all the strength, and to love one's neighbor as bimself, is more than all whole burnt offerings, and sacrifices." But it may be objected that this man will surely obey in all things; for we are divinely informed that "this is the love of God that we keep his commandments:" and again the Saviour says, "If a man love me he will keep my word. This is cheerfully-yea, joyfully admitted: yet there is an obeying in spirit, and not in the letteran obedience of the will, without the power to perform the deed, which is equally as acceptable to the Lord as the most literal obedience. The case of Abraham is one in point. See Gen. xxii. 15, 16. "And the angel of the Lord called unto Abraham out of heaven the second time, and said, By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord; for because thou hast done this thing"- &c. And how had Abraham done this thing, viz. offering up his son? Surely not in letter, but in spirit: yet it was upon the performance of this act that the new and better covenant was based. Paul affirms that "if there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to what a man hath, and not according to what he hath not." If it be objected that this was spoken particularly of pecuniary contribution for the poor, I reply, True-yet it is so spoken as to involve a general-yea, a universal principle. The instance of the poor widow, who cast in two mites into the treasury, is to our purpose. Our Lord says "she cast in more than they all." How was this? She showed that trust in God, and that devotion to his cause, that would have prompted her to have poured the wealth of Croesus all into the treasury of the Lord, had she possessed it. Now the most zealous advocates of literal obedience to positive ordinances, do admit that physical inability may constitute a valid excuse: but does not our Lord admit moral inability as an excuse? "He that knew not his Master's will, and did commit things worthy of stripes, the same shall be beaten with few stripes." And does he not also say to the Pharisees, "If I had not come and spoken to you, you would not have had sin"? Need I add more to show that the man who loves God and sincerely desires to know his will, that he may do it, is accepted of God, and must be happy in time, and in eternity? If more is required, the words of the Master are at hand-"Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." But it may still be objected that these scriptures are general and indefinite, and do not prove that an unimmersed person may be an acceptable worshipper of God. We have, then, Acts x., the case

of Cornelius directly to the point. The angel said, ver. 31, "Cornelius, thy prayer is heard"-("now we know that God heareth not sinners""and thine alms are had in remembrance before God." And when the whole matter is related, Peter said, "Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but that in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness is accepted with him." Still it will be objected that Cornelius was not in a saved state, because it is said, chap. xi, ver 14, that Peter should tell him words whereby he and all his house should be saved. To this 1 answer, Cornelius certainly needed more light in order to his enjoyment, but not in order to his acceptance with God. Cornelius realized the assurance of the Saviour, who said, "If any man is minded to do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God; or whether I speak of myself."

But, perhaps, my reader may now be ready to ask, Do you, then, make sincerity the ground of acceptance with God? Certainly I do: but I have, in the meantime, my own definition of sincerity. I esteem that man alone sincere, who obeys all he knows of the Divine will, and faithfully improves every opportunity for acquiring more light and knowledge. A man is as truly culpable for voluntary ignorance as for wilful disobedience; for he shows that very state of mind that would prompt him to disobey, if his understanding were enlightened. Pilate showed no sincerity when he asked the question, "What is truth?" and then, without waiting for an answer, turned and went his way: but those characters spoken of the Prophet Jeremiah showed great sincerity, "who asked the way to Zion with their faces thitherward; saying, Come and let us join ourselves to the Lord in a perpetual covenant that shall not be forgotten." But suppose they had inquired the way with their faces in an opposite direction; and upon being told their mistake, they had said, "We believe this way will lead to Zion as well as any other;" would this have been sincerity? Surely not. But I shall be told of the sincerity of Uzzah in putting forth his hand to steady the ark of the Lord. This case is greatly misunderstood. It was a rash presumptuous act of disobedience to a plain and positive command; and he did but receive the threatened penalty: see Num. iv. 15, 18, and 19. We cannot suppose he was ignorant of this command; and if he were, he was equally to blame for his ignorance. But I shall still be reminded of the Jews, "who thought they were doing God service" by putting to death the disciples of the Saviour. To this I reply-Men often come by their sincerity (if this be sincerity) in a very dishonest and wicked way. For example, there are many who endure great conflicts in their minds on the subject of baptism. They search the scriptures night and day-not, indeed, for the truth; but to confirm them in error. Their struggles are all like those of old father Bunyan's Pliable in the slough of Despond-"directed toward the side of the slough nearest his old home:" so these are striving to get away from what is manifestly the true and right way. Immersion stares them in the face; but this they reject, and seek for something to satisfy their minds that sprinkling "will do." At length they succeed in stifling their convictions of truth--the voice of conscience is hushedthe struggle has ceased-they are perfectly satisfied with sprinkling, and exceedingly thankful that this perplexing subject is put to rest with them. Alas for their tranquility! Conscience will yet speak 48*

VOL. 1.---N, S.

out "in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men's hearts by Jesus Christ according to the gospel." So of those Jews: they had long rejected the light of truth; and the Lord had given them over to judicial blindness. And in them was fulfilled the saying of the Prophet Isaiah, "The heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and understand with their hearts, and be converted and healed." What, indeed, were their consciences? They were ready to stone the Saviour for healing a man on the Sabbath; while they were, at the same time, violating every moral precept in the law of Mosesas Paul in the 3d of Romans affirms. Look at the chief priests in the very act of instigating the foulest murder ever committed, yet so tenacious were they of outward forms, that they would not set foot into Pilate's house, (he being a Gentile.) "lest they should be defiled; but that they might eat the Passover." Look at forty thousand of these Jews, stained with every crime, yet voluntarily submitting to death, by the soldiers of Cestius Gallus, rather than draw a sword in their own defence on the Sabbath day.

In a subsequent number (should this find a place in the Harbinger) I shall endeavor to show that positive ordinances, when placed in competition with moral and devotional precepts; (or intended in any way to supersede them.) are very lightly esteemed by the Creator.

CHRISTIANOS.

A TRUE GENTLEMAN.

A TRUE GENTLEMAN is God's servant, the world's master, and his own man; his virtue is his business; his study, his recreation; contentedness, his rest; and happiness, his reward; God is his father, and the Church is his mother; the saints, his brethren; all that need him, his friends: and heaven, his inheritance; Religion, his mistress: Loyalty and Justice, his two maids of honor; Devotion is his chaplain; Chastity, his chamberlain; Sobriety, his hutler: Temperance, his cook; Hospitality, his housekeeper; Providence, his steward; Charity, his treasurer; Piety, his mistress of the house; and Discretion, his porter, to let in and out as is most fit. Thus is the whole family made of virtues, and he is the true master of the family. He is necessitated to take the world in his way to heaven, but he walks through it as fast as he car; and all his business by the way is to make himself and others happy. Take him all in two words-He is a mau and a Christian.

HOMER was a beggar; Plautus was a miller; Terrence was a slave; Boethius died in prison; Bogence starved; Tasso had not money enough to buy candles to write by: Cervantes died of hunger; Benteroglio was refused admittance into a hospital that he had founded; Agrippa died in a work-house; Vangelas left his body to the surgeon to pay his debts; Camoens ended his days in an alms house; Bacon lived in distress; Raleigh and More died upon a scaffold; League never knew comfort in pecuniary matters; Spencer died in want; Collins went mad from the world's negleet; Milton sold his Paradise Lost for £15 in three instalments, and died in obscurity; Dryden died in distress; Otway died prematurely and in want; Lee died in the streets; Steele was degged by the bailiffs; Gold smith sold, through Johnson, the Vicar of Wakefield for a mere trifle, to release him from prison; Fielding lies without a stone to mark his grave; Savage died at Newgate, at Bristol, where he was imprisoned for £2; Butler "lived neglected and died poor;" and the Bimmortal Chatterton, in consequence of want, put an end to his existence in his 18th year.

Dear brother Campbell,

EUCLID, Ohio, November 14, 18 38.

BEING appointed to communicate to you the proceedings of the "Preachers' Meeting," convened at Aurora, on the 2d inst., I send you the following sketch:

The meeting assembled according to appointment, and organized on the following morning, (3d,) by the appointment of brethren S. Rider and H. Baldwin as Presidents.

The preaching brethren present were, A. Bentley, R. Fergu son, M. Bosworth, C. Bosworth, W. Hayden, J Heury, E. Williams, S. Rider, J. Hertzel, Z. Rudolph, D. Atwater, J. J. Moss, A. B. Green, M. Willcox, J. P. Robinson, W. O'Conner, A. S. Hayden, and myself.

Until Wednesday there were three discourses each day, (at 10, 1, and 6 o'clock.) The time for criticism was at 8 o'clock in the morning till 10, and in the meeting house, in the presence of as many spectators as chose to hear, from Monday till Thursday.

Wednesday forencon was by appointment occupied in teaching and exhortation upon the subject of family religion, or family worship; and I feel quite confident that it was one of the most profitable days of the meeting to the brethren generally. The importance and utility of religion in the family every day was spoken of and enforced by many of the brethren, by reason and illustration of example. One of the brethren, beloved for his work's sake, while speaking of his own early history, took occasion to allude to the fact, that his grand-father and father were punctual in the worship of God in their families-that when he was 10 or 12 years of age, he was sent from home to reside in an irreligious family-that it was impossible for him to reconcile himself to the customs of the family: they did not thank God for the blessings of day and night, nor the bounties of Providence that were every day spread in rich profusion upon their table: in short, the God of his fathers was not worshipped there; he therefore left the place and returned home, being unable, even to this day, to assign any other reason for so doing than is intimated above. Our brother stated, in conclusion, that there was no doubt in his mind but that he was indebted to his religious ancestors, under God, more than to any other one means, for his religious liberty and happiness; and we all acknowledged our indebtedness to the same source for a most excellent public teacher and well beloved brother. I would here introduce the substance of the remarks of several others, but time and room forbid.

In the opinion of the writer, there was one excellent measure adopted ouching the next meeting of similar kind. It was this: That all criticisms shall be reserved till the close of the meeting,