Note: Images of the original pages are available through the Making of Americal Collection of the University of Michigan's Digital Library Production Service. See http://www. Hti. Umich. Edu/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=moa;c=moajrnl;g=moagrp;xc=1;q1=Barker;rgn=full%20text;cite1=Barker;cite1restrict=author;view=toc;idno=AJK2731. 0001. 001;cc=moa

MODERN SKEPTICISM: A JOURNEY THROUGH THE LAND OF DOUBT AND BACK AGAIN. 

A Life Story

by

JOSEPH BARKER. 

Philadelphia:Smith, English & Co. 1874. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1874, byRev. Joseph Barker, In the office of the Librarian of Congress at Washington. Jas. B. Rodgers Co. , Printers and Stereotypers, Philadelphia. 

CONTENTS. 

PREFACE, 7

CHAPTER I. 

Introduction. --My early life. --Enter the Church. --The Ministry. --Happydays. --Sad change. --How happened it? 17

CHAPTER II. 

Causes of unbelief. --Vice. --Other causes. --Constitutional tendencies todoubt. --Disappointed expectations about Christianity. --Mysteries ofProvidence. --Misrepresentations of Christ and Christianity in humancreeds. --Church divisions. --Ignorant advocates of Christianity. --Wrongprinciples of reasoning. --False science, 19

CHAPTER III. 

Another cause of unbelief. --Bad feeling between ministers or amongchurch members. --Alienates them from each other. --Then separates themfrom the Church. --Then from Christ. --How it works. --My case, 26

CHAPTER IV. 

Origin of the unhappy feeling between me and some of my brotherministers. --Tendencies of my mind. --Rationalizing tendency. --Itseffects. --Reading. --Investigations. --Discoveries, 30

CHAPTER V. 

Modification of my early creed. --Unscriptural doctrinesrelinquished. --Scriptural ones adopted. --Some doctrinesmodified. --Theological fictions dropped. --Eager for the pure, simpletruth as taught by Jesus. --Doctrine of types given up. --Other notionsrelinquished. --Alarm of some of my brethren at these changes, 44

CHAPTER VI. 

How preachers and theologians indulge their fancies on religion. --JohnWesley. --His resolution to be a man of one book. --What came of hisresolution. --His sermon on God's approbation of His works, --unscripturaland unphilosophical throughout. --Illustrations and proofs. --And Wesleywas one of the best and wisest, one of the most honest and single-mindedof our theologians. --What then may we expect of others?--Evils oftheological trifling. --Mischievous effects of mixing human fictions withDivine revelations, 55

CHAPTER VII. 

Further theological investigations. --Unwarranted statements bypreachers. --John Foster's Essay on Some of the Causes by whichEvangelical Religion is Rendered Distasteful to Persons of CultivatedMinds. --Introduction of similar views to the notice of my ministerialbrethren. --The reception they met with. --No Church has got all thetruth. --Most Churches, perhaps all, have got portions of it, whichothers have not. --My attempts to gather up the fragments fromall. --Freedom from bigotry. --Love to all Christians. --Judging treesby their fruit. --Reading the books of various denominations, like foreign travel, liberalizes the mind. --I found truthand goodness in all denominations. --Appropriated all as partof my patrimony. --Results. --Suspicions and fears among mybrethren. --Mutterings: Backbitings: Controversy. Bad feeling, 65

CHAPTER VIII. 

My style of preaching. --Decidedly practical. --Using Christianity as ameans for making bad people into good ones, and good ones alwaysbetter. --Reasons for this method. --A family trait. --Hereditary. --Greatneed of practical preaching. --Folly of other kinds ofPreaching. --Littleness of great Preachers. --Worthlessness of greatsermons. --The Truly Great are the Greatly Good and Greatly Useful. --MyModels. --The Bible. --Jesus. --My Favorite Preachers. --Billy Dawson, DavidStoner, James Parsons. --My Favorite Books. --The Bible--Nature. --SimpleCommon Sense, instructive, earnest, moving books. --How my preaching wasreceived by the people. --Its effects on churches andcongregations. --Uneasiness of my colleagues. --Fresh mutterings; talebearings; controversies; and more bad feeling, 82

CHAPTER IX. 

Extracts from my Diary. --A strange preacher. --Horrible sermons. --Lightsof the world that give no light. --Theological mist andsmoke. --Narrow-mindedness. --Intolerance. --T. Allin, --Great preachinggreat folly. --A. Scott, --A good preacher. --Sanctification. --Keep toScripture. --R. Watson: theological madness. --Big Books on the way ofsalvation; puzzling folks. --Antinomian utterances about Christ's workand man's salvation. --Preachers taking the devil's side; and doing hiswork. --Scarcity of common sense in priesthoods, and of uncommonsense. --The great abundance of nonsense and bad sense. --Common religiousexpressions that are false. --Favorite Hymns that are notScriptural--Baxter's good sense, 98

CHAPTER X. 

Reforming tendencies. --Corruptions in the Church. --Bad trades. --Faultsin the ministry. --Toleration of vice. --Drinkinghabits. --Intemperance. --The Connexion. --Faulty rules. --Badcustoms. --Defective institutions. --All encouraged to suggest reforms andpunished for doing so. --Original principles of the Connexion set aside, and persecution substituted for freedom. --My simplicity. --Myreward. --The Ministry. --Drunkenness. --Teetotalism. --Advocacy ofTemperance. --Outcry of preachers. --My Evangelical Reformer. --Articles onthe prevailing vices of the Church; On Toleration and Human Creeds;--OnChanning's Works; On Anti-Christian trading, &c. , get me intotrouble. --Conference interference. --Conference trials. --The state ofthings critical. --No remedy. --Matters get worse and worse. --Excitingevents: too many to be named here. --Envy, jealousy, rage, strife, confusion, and many evil works. --Conspiracies: Fierceconflicts. --Expulsion, 117

CHAPTER XI. 

Explanations about the different Methodist Bodies. --Grounds of myreformatory proceedings. --About immoralities. --Christianity not to blamefor the faults of professors and preachers. --My own defects, 153

CHAPTER XII. 

Story of my life continued. --Results of my expulsion. --Fiercefighting. --Desperation of my persecutors. --Great excitement on mypart. --Rank crop of slanders. --Monstrous ones. --And silly ones. --Baddeeds as well as wicked words. --Hardwork. --Exhaustion. --Powerlessness. --Three days' rest. --Longsleep. --Wonderful, --delightful, --result. --Public debates. --Remarkableoccurrences; seemed Providential. --A lying opponent unexpectedlyconfronted and confounded. --New Body, --Christian Brethren. --My church atNewcastle. --Change in my views, and freshtroubles. --Losses. --Poverty. --Learn the Printing business. --Follow itunder difficulties. --Want of funds. --Generous friends. Family on theverge of want. --Pray. --An unlooked-for cart-load of provisions. --Trustin Providence. --False friends. --True ones. --A mad utterance. --A worsedeed. --Theological Conventions. --Free investigations and publicdiscussions. --Change of views, 103

CHAPTER XIII. 

Approach to Unitarianism. --Kindness of Unitarians. --Preaching andlecturing in their pulpits. --Ten nights' public discussion with Rev. W. Cooke. --Subjects. --Results. --Publications. --Now periodicals. --Unitarianinvitation to London. --Public reception. --Liberal contributions to SteamPress Fund. --Press presentation. --Dr. Bateman; Dr. -Sir-JohnBowring. --Pleasurable change from intolerance and persecution tofriendship and favor. --Discoveries. --Unitarianism has manyphases. --Channingism. --Anti-supernaturalism. --Deism. --Atheism. --Graduallyslid down to the lower, 191

CHAPTER XIV. 

The Bible. --My earliest views of its origin and authority. --Changed as Igrew up. --Further changes. --Important facts about the Bible. --Falsetheories of its Divine inspiration. --The true--the Bible'sown, --doctrine on the subject. --Needful to keep inside of this. --Nodefence outside either for the Bible or for Bible men. --Explanations:illustrations: testimonies of celebrated writers. --The PERFECTION of theBible--in what does it consist. --Foolish and impossible notions ofperfection. --No absolute perfection in any thing. --No need forit. --Foolish talk about infallibility. --Other important testimonies, 202

CHAPTER XV. 

Enters politics. --Advocates extreme politicalviews. --Republicanism. --Foretells the French Revolution of 1848. --Greatpolitical excitement in England. --Government alarmed. --Getarrested. --Lodged in prison. --Trial. --Triumph over Government. --Greatrejoicings. --Elected member of Parliament for Bolton, and TownCouncillor for Leeds. --Exhaustion from excess of labor. --Healthfails. --Terrible Pains. --Voyage to America and back. --Removes toAmerica. --Objects in doing so. --Settles on a farm. --Gets into freshexcitement. --The Abolitionists. --Women's Rights. --All kinds of wildrevolutionary theories. --Go farther into unbelief instead of gettingback to Christ. --A mad world, with strange unwritten histories, andawful, nameless mysteries, 241

CHAPTER XVI. 

Story of my descent from the faith of my childhood, to doubt andunbelief. --Bad theological teaching in my early days. --Dreadfulresults. --Perplexity. --Madness. --Survive all, and get over it. --Thefirst arguments I heard for the Bible. --True basis of religiousbelief. --Reading on the evidences. --Effects. --Unsoundarguments. --_Their_ effect. --_Internal_ evidences best. --Negativecriticism, long continued, ruinous both to faith and virtue. --Movingever downwards. --The devil as a theologian, a poet and aphilosopher. --Bible Conventions. --W. L. Garrison, A. J. Davis. --Publicdiscussions in Philadelphia with Dr. McCalla. --The Doctor's disgracefulfailure. --Great, --mad, --excitement. --Narrow escape from murder. --Eightnights' debate with Dr. Berg. --The good cause suffered through badmanagement. --The Doctor took an untenable position. --Undertook to provetoo much and failed. --Substantially right, but logically wrong. --Otherdebates in Ohio, Indiana, England and Scotland. --Mean and mischievousopponents. --Honorable and useful ones. --Bad advocates of a good cause, its worst enemies, 269

CHAPTER XVII. 

Continuation of my Story. --Lectures on the Bible inOhio. --Trouble. --Riot. --Rotten eggs. --Midnight mischief. --Had tomove. --Settlement among Liberals, Comeouters. --_Too_ fond ofliberty. --Would have my share as well as their own. --Freshtrouble. --Another forced move. --Settlement in the wilds of Nebraska, among Indians, wolves, and rattlesnakes. --Experience there. --A changefor the better. --How brought about. --Quiet ofmind. --Reflection. --Horrors of Atheism. --Destroys the value oflife. --Deceives you; mocks you; makes you intolerablymiserable. --Suggests suicide. --Prosperity not good for much withoutreligion: adversity, sickness, pain, loss, bereavementintolerable. --Strange adventures in the wilderness; terrible dangers;wonderful deliverances. --Solemn thoughts and feelings in the boundlessdesert. --Solitude and silence preach. --Religious feelingsrevive. --Recourse to old religious books. --Demoralizing tendency ofunbelief. --Lecture in Philadelphia. --Cases of infidel depravity. --Youcan't make people good, nor even decent, without religion. --Infidelitymeans utter debasement. --A good, a loving, and a faithful wife, whonever ceases to pray. --Return to England. --Experience there. --Unboundedlicentiousness of Secularism. --Total separation from the infidelparty. --My new Periodical. --Resolution to re-read the Bible, to dojustice to Christianity, &c. --A sight of Jesus. --Happy results. --Changeboth of head and heart. --Happy transformation of character. --A newlife. --New work. --New lot. --From darkness to light, --From death tolife, --from purgatory to paradise, --from hell to heaven, 310

CHAPTER XVIII. 

Parties whose Christian sympathy, and wise words, and generous deeds, helped me back to Christ, 345

CHAPTER XIX. 

The steps by which I gradually returned to Christ. --Lectures and sermonson the road. --Answers to objections against the Bible andChristianity. --Spiritualism. --Strange phenomena. --Answers to objectionsadvanced by myself in the Berg debate. --The position to be taken byadvocates of the Bible and Christianity. --Additional remarks on Divineinspiration. --What it implies, and what it does not imply. --Overdoing isundoing. --Genesis and Geology. --The Bible and Science. --Publicdiscussions, --explanation. --At Home in the Church. --Sorrowful, yetalways rejoicing. --Joy unspeakable, 355

CHAPTER XX. 

Lessons I have learned. --1. Men slow to learn wisdom by the experienceof others. --2. Danger of bad feeling. --3. Of a controversial spirit. --4. Old ministers should deal tenderly with their younger brethren. --5. Young thinkers should be prayerful, humble, watchful; yet faithful toconscience and to truth, trusting in God. --6. With Christian faith goesChristian virtue. --The tendency of unbelief is ever downwards. --7. Unbelievers are not irreclaimable. --We should not pass them by unpitiedor unhelped. --8. Converts from infidelity must look for trials. --Theymust not expect too much from churches and ministers. Paul's case. --9. They must risk all for Christ, and bear their losses and troublespatiently. --10. They should join the Church, right away. --Not look for aperfect Church. --Keep inside. --Bear unpleasantnesses meekly. --Stonesmade smooth and round in the stream, by the rubbing they get from otherstones. --Reformers should move gently, and have long patience. --The morehaste the worst speed. --Killing rats. --12. Unbelief, when not a sin, isa terrible calamity: a world of calamities in one, 406

CONCLUDING REMARKS, 437

PREFACE. 

The object of this Book is, First, to explain a portion of my ownhistory, and, Secondly, to check the spread of infidelity, and promotethe interests of Christianity. How far it is calculated to answer theseends I do not pretend to know. I have no very high opinion of the workmyself. I fear it has great defects. On some points I may have said toomuch, and on others too little. I cannot tell. I have however done mybest, and I would fain hope, that my labors will not prove to have beenaltogether in vain. 

I have spent considerable time with a view to bring my readers todistinguish between the doctrines of Christ, and the theologicalfictions which are so extensively propagated in His name. It isexceedingly desirable that nothing should pass for Christianity, butChristianity itself. And it is equally desirable that Christianityshould be seen in its true light, as presented in the teachings andcharacter, in the life and death of its great Author. A correctexposition of Christianity is its best defence. A true, a plain, afaithful and just exhibition of its spirit and teachings, and of itsadaptation to the wants of man, and of its tendency to promote hishighest welfare, is the best answer to all objections, and the mostconvincing proof of its truth and divinity. And the truth, thereasonableness, the consistency, the purifying and ennobling tendency, and the unequalled consoling power of Christianity, _can_ be proved, andproved with comparative ease; but to defend the nonsense, thecontradictions, the antinomianism and the blasphemies of theology isimpossible. 

I have taken special pains to explain my views on the DivineInspiration of the Scriptures. I am satisfied that no attempts to answerthe objections of infidels against the Bible will prove satisfactory, solong as men's views on this subject go beyond the teachings of theScriptures themselves. To the fanciful theories of a large number ofTheologians the sacred writings do not answer, and you must therefore, either set aside those theories, and put a more moderate one in theirplace, or give up the defence of the Bible in despair. I therefore leavethe extravagant theories to their fate, and content myself with what theScriptures themselves say; and I feel at rest and secure. 

The views I have given on the subject in this work, and in my pamphleton the Bible, are not new. You may find them in the works of quite anumber of Evangelical Authors. The only credit to which I am entitledis, that I state them with great plainness, and without reserve, andthat I do not, after having given them on one page, take them back againon the next. 

How far my friends will be able to receive or tolerate my views on thesepoints, I do not know. I hope they will ponder them with all the candorand charity they can. I have kept as near to orthodox standards as Icould, without doing violence to my conscience, and injustice to thetruth. I would never be singular, if I could honestly help it. It isnothing but a regard to God, and duty, and the interests of humanity, that prevents me going with the multitude. It would be gratifying in theextreme to see truth and the majority on one side, and to be permittedto take my place with them: but if the majority take sides with error, Imust take my place with the minority, and look for my comfort in a goodconscience, and in the sweet assurance of God's love and favor. 

_A Dream. _

In looking over some manuscripts some time ago, belonging to a relationof my wife's father-in-law, I found the following story of a dream. Somehave no regard for dreams, but I have. I have both read of dreams, andhad dreams myself, that answered marvellously to great realities; andthis may be one of that kind. In any case, as the Preface does not takeup all the space set apart for it, I am disposed to give it a few of thevacant pages. 

The dreamer's account of his dream is as follows. 

'After tiring my brain one day with reading a long debate between aCatholic and a Protestant about the Infallibility of the Church and theBible, I took a walk along a quiet field-path near the river, full ofthought on the subject on which I had been reading. The fresh air, thepleasant scene, and the ripple of the stream, had such a soothing effecton me, that I lost myself, and passed unconsciously from the World ofrealities, into the Land of dreams. I found myself in a large Hall, filled with an eager crowd, listening to a number of men who hadassembled, as I was told, to discuss the affairs of the Universe, andput an end to controversy. The subject under discussion just then wasthe Sun. I found that after the world had lived in its light forthousands of years, and been happy in the abundance of the fruit, andgrain, and numberless blessings produced by his wondrous influences, some one, who had looked at the Great Light through a powerfultelescope, had discovered that there were several dark spots on his diskor face, and that some of them were of a very considerable size. Henamed the matter to a number of his friends who, looking through thetelescope for themselves, saw that such was really the case. 

'Now there happened to be an order of persons in the Land of dreamswhose business it was to praise the Sun, and extol its Light. And theyhad a theory to the effect, that the Light of the Sun was unmixed, andthat the Sun itself was one uniform mass of brightness and brilliancy, without speck, or spot, or any such thing. They held that the Head oftheir order was the Maker of the Sun, --that He Himself was Light, andthat in Him was no darkness at all; and that the Sun was exactly likeHim, intense, unmingled, and unvarying Light. When these people heard ofthe alleged discovery of the spots, they raised a tremendous cry, andsome howled, and some shrieked, and all united in pronouncing thestatement a fiction, and in denouncing in severe terms, both its author, and all who took his part, as deceivers; as the enemies of the Sun, asblasphemers of its Author, and as the enemies of the human race. 

'This was one of the great controversies which this world-wideconvention had met to bring to an end. 

'As I took my place in the Hall, one of the Professors of the SolarUniversity was speaking. He said the story about the spots was a wickedcalumny; and he went into a lengthy and labored argument to show, thatthe thing was absurd and impossible. 'The Sun, ' said he, 'was made by anAll-perfect Artificer, --made on purpose to be a Light, the Great Lightof the world, and a Light it must be, and nothing else but a Light; apure unsullied Light all round, without either spot, or speck of anykind, or any varying shade of brilliancy in any part. ' He added, 'To saythe contrary, is to do the Sun injustice, to dishonor its All-gloriousAuthor, to alienate the minds of men from the Heavenly Luminary, todestroy their faith in his Light and warmth, to plunge the world intodarkness, and reduce it to a state of utter desolation. If the Sun isnot _all_ light, he is _no_ Light at all. If there be dark spots on onepart of his face, there may be dark spots on every part. _All_ may bedark, and what seems Light may be an illusion; a false Light, 'thatleads to bewilder, and dazzles to blind. ' He is not to be trusted. Everything is uncertain. ' And he called the man who said he had seen thespots, an impostor, a blasphemer, a _scavenger_, an ass, a foreigner, and a number of other strange names. 

'The man he was abusing so unmercifully, stepped forward, and in a meekand quiet spirit said, 'I saw the spots with my own eyes. I have seenthem scores of times. I can show them to you, if you will look throughthis glass. ' 'Your glass is a cheat, a lie, ' said the Professor. 'Butothers have seen them, ' said the man, 'as well as I, and seen themthrough a number of other glasses. '

''It is impossible, ' answered the Professor. 'A Sun made by anAll-perfect God, and made on purpose to be a Light, cannot possibly bedefaced with dark spots; and whoever says any thing to the contrary isa ----. '

'Here the Professor rested his case;--'A Sun without spots, or no Sun. Light without variation of shade, or no Light. Prove that the Sun hasspots, and you reduce him to a level with an old extinguished lamp, thatis fit for nothing but to be cast away as an unclean and worthlessthing. The honor of God, and the welfare of the universe all hang onthis one question, --Spots, or no spots!'

'His fellow professors took his part, and many spoke in the same strain. But the belief in the spots made its way, and spread further every day, and the consequence was, the obstinate Professors were confounded andput to shame. Facts were too strong for them, and their credit andinfluence were damaged beyond remedy. 

'After the Professors of the Sun were silenced, the Man in the Moonarose and spoke. He contended that both Sun and Moon were free fromspots, but said, that no one could see the Sun as it really was, unlesshe _lived_ in the Moon, and looked at it from his standpoint. 'TheMoon, ' said he, 'like the Sun, is the work of the All-perfect Creator;and its face is one unchanging blaze of absolute and unvariedbrightness. '

'Now all who had ever looked at the Moon, had noticed, that no part ofher face was as bright as the Sun, and that some portions were of ashade considerably darker than the rest. And I noticed that even theProfessors who had spoken extravagantly about the Sun, looked at eachother and smiled, when they heard the statements of the Man in the Moon. Indeed there was such a tittering and a giggling through the Hall, thatthe meeting was broken up. 

'I hastened out, and found there were a hundred discussions going on inthe street. Many of the disputants seemed greatly excited. I feltmelancholy. A quiet-looking man, with a very gentle expression ofcountenance, came up to me, and in tones of remarkable sweetness, said, 'You seem moved. ' 'I feel troubled, ' said I. 'I don't know what tothink; and I don't know what to do. ' He smiled, and said, 'None of thesethings move me. ' Then lifting up his eyes towards Heaven he said, --'TheSun still shines; and I feel his blessed warmth as sensibly as ever. Andthe millions of our race still live and rejoice in his beams. ' 'ThankGod, ' said I: 'Yes, I see, he still shines; and I will rest contentedwith his light and warmth. ' 'The spots are there, ' said he, 'past doubt;but experience, the strongest evidence of all, proves that they do notinterfere with the beneficent influences of the Great and Glorious Orb, or lessen his claims to our respect and veneration, or diminish one jotour obligations to his great Author. They have their use, no doubt. TheSun might be too brilliant without them, and destroy our eyes, insteadof giving us light. Too much light might prove as bad as too little. Allis well. I accept plain facts. To deny them is to fight against God. Toadmit them and trust in God is the true faith, and the germ of all truevirtue and piety. 

''I have no faith in the kind of absolute perfection those professorscontend for, either in Sun or Moon, Bible or Church; but I believe inthe SUFFICIENCY, or _practical_ perfection of all, and am ashappy, and only wish I were as good and useful, as ----'

'Just as he spoke those words, I awoke. He seemed as if he had much tosay, and I would fain have heard him talk his sweet talk till now; butperhaps I had heard enough, and ought now to set myself heartily towork, to get through with the business of my life. '

So ends the Dream-story. 

Some writers seem to think that their readers should understand andreceive their views, however new and strange they may be, the momentthey place them before their minds. They cannot understand how thatwhich is clear to them, should not be plain to everybody else. And thereare some readers who seem to think, that every thing they meet with inthe books they read, however much it may be out of the way of theirordinary thought, or however contrary to their long-cherished belief, should, if it be really intelligible and true, appear so to them atfirst glance. How can anything seem mysterious or untrue to them, thatis not mysterious or untrue in its very nature?

It so happened, that along with the dream-story, I found the followingfragment. It is not an interpretation of the dream, but it seems as ifit might teach a useful lesson, both to writers and readers. 

'Something more than light, and eyes, and surrounding objects, isnecessary to seeing. A new-born child may have light, and eyes, andsurrounding objects, and yet not see anything distinctly. And a man bornblind may have the film removed from his eyes, and be placed, atnoontide, in the midst of a world of interesting objects, and yet, instead of seeing things, as _we_ see them, have nothing but aconfounding and distressing sensation. Seeing, as _we_ see, is theresult of habit, acquired by long-continued use. The new-born babe musthave time to exercise its eyes, and exercise its little mind as well, before it can distinguish face from face, and form from form. The manwho has just received his sight must have time for similar exercise, before he can enjoy the rich pleasures and advantages of sight toperfection. Even we who have had our sight for fifty years do not see asmany things in a picture, a landscape, or a bed of flowers, when we seethem for the first time, as those who have been accustomed to inspectand examine such objects for years. 

'And so it is with mental and moral vision. Something more than a mind, and instruction, and mental objects are necessary to enable a man tounderstand religion and duty. Attention, study, comparison, continuedwith calmness, and candor, and patience, for days, for months, or foryears, may be necessary to enable a skeptic to understand, to believe, and to feel like those who have long been disciples of Christ. 

'And a change of habits, continued till it produces a change of tastesand desires, is necessary to prepare the sensualist to judge correctlywith regard to things moral and religious. We must not therefore expecta good lecture, or an able book, to cure a skeptic of his doubts atonce. It may produce an effect which, in time, if the party be faithfulto duty, will _end_ in his conversion at a future day. The seedcommitted to the soil does not produce rich harvests in a day. A changeof air and habits does not at once regenerate the invalid. Thehusbandman has to wait long for his crop: and the physician has to waitlong for the recovery of his patient. And the skeptic has to wait long, till the seed of truth, deposited in his soul, unfolds its germs, andproduces the rich ripe harvest of faith, and holiness, and joy. 

'And preachers and teachers must not think it strange, if their hearersand readers are slow to change. Nor must they despond even though nosigns of improvement appear for months or years. A change for the betterin a student may not be manifest till it has been in progress for years. It may not be perfected for many years. You cannot force a change ofmind, as you can force the growth of a plant in a hot-house. An attemptto do so might stop it altogether. Baxter said, two hundred years ago, 'Nothing so much hindereth the reception of the truth, as urging it onmen with too much importunity, and falling too heavily on their errors. '

'Have patience, then. Teach, as your pupil may be prepared to learn, butrespect the laws of the Eternal, which have fixed long intervals forslow and silent processes, between the seed-time and the harvest-home. '

While I am in doubt as to whether I have put into my book too much onsome subjects, I am thoroughly convinced that I have put into it toolittle on others. I have not said enough, nor half enough, on Atheism. Iought to have exposed its groundlessness, its folly, and its mischievousand miserable tendency at considerable length. 

This defect I shall try to remedy as soon as possible, and in the bestway I can. 

Some weeks ago I read a paper before the M. E. Preachers' Meeting ofPhiladelphia, on ATHEISM, --what can it say for itself? Thepaper was received with great favor, and many asked for its publication. It will form the first article in my next volume. 

I expect, in fact, to give the subject of Atheism a pretty thoroughexamination in that volume, and to show that it is irrational anddemoralizing from beginning to end, and to the last extreme. 

John Stuart Mill, the head and representative of English Literary andPhilosophical Atheists, has left us a history of his life, and of hisfather's life. In this work he presents us with full length portraits ofhimself and his father, and both gives us their reasons for beingAtheists, and reveals to us the influence of their Atheism on theirhearts and characters, as well as on their views on morality, politics, and other important subjects. 

And though the painter, as we might expect, flatters to some extent bothhimself and his father, yet he gives us the more important features ofboth so truthfully, that we have no difficulty in learning from them, what kind of creatures great Philosophical Atheists are, or in gatheringfrom their works a great amount of information about infidelity, of themost melancholy, but of the most interesting and important character. 

This Autobiography of Mr. Mill I propose to review. I meant to review itin this volume, but I had not room. I intend therefore to give it aplace in my next volume, which may be looked for in the course of theyear. 

Another work has just been published, called _The Old Faith and theNew_. It is the last and most important work of D. F. Strauss, thegreatest and ablest advocate of antichristian and atheistic views thatthe ages have produced, --the Colossus or Goliath of all the infidelhosts of Christendom. In this work, which he calls his CONFESSION, Strauss, like Mill, gives us a portrait of himself, exhibiting not onlyhis views, and the arguments by which he labors to sustain them, but theinfluence of those views on the hearts, the lives, the characters, andthe enjoyments of men. If this Book can be answered, --if the argumentsof Strauss can be fairly met, and his views effectually refuted, infidelity must suffer serious damage, and the cause of Christianity begreatly benefited. I have gone through the Book with great care. I havemeasured and weighed its arguments. And my conviction is, that the workadmits of a thorough and satisfactory refutation. If I had had space, Ishould have made some remarks on it in this volume: but I had not. Ipropose therefore to review it at considerable length in my next. 

Some time ago Robert Owen was a prominent man in the infidel world. Hewas extolled by his friends as a great Philanthropist. He too left us ahistory of his life, and his son, Robert Dale Owen, has just beenrepeating portions of that history in the Atlantic Monthly. It may beinteresting to my readers to know what Atheism can do in the way ofPhilanthropy. We propose therefore to add a review of the Life of RobertOwen to those of Strauss and Mill. 

Robert Dale Owen himself was an Atheist formerly, and a very zealous andable advocate of Atheistical views. He gives his articles in theAtlantic Monthly as an autobiography, and seeks to make the impressionthat he has revealed to his readers all the important facts of hishistory without reserve. And he has certainly revealed some strangethings. But there are certain facts which he has _not_ revealed, factsof great importance too, calculated to show the demoralizing tendency ofinfidelity. We propose to render the autobiography of Mr. Dale Owen morecomplete, more interesting, and more instructive, by the addition ofsome of those facts. 

Frances or Fanny Wright was a friend of Mr. Dale Owen's. She was thegreat representative female Atheist of her time. Like Mr. Dale Owen'sfather, she was rich, and like him, seemed desirous to do something inthe way of philanthropy. Mr. Dale Owen, who was her agent for some time, gives us some interesting facts with regard to her history, which mayprove of service to our readers. 

In Buckle we have an Atheistical Historian, who endeavors to prove thatwe are indebted for all the advantages of our superior civilization, notto Christianity, but to natural science and skepticism alone. Herepresents Christianity as the enemy of science, and as the greatimpediment to the advance of civilization. These views of Buckle weregard as false and foolish to the last extreme, and we expect to beable to show that Europe and America are indebted for their superiorcivilization, and even for their rich treasures of natural science, _not_ to infidelity, but to the influence of Christianity. 

Matthew Arnold has just published an interesting book entitledLITERATURE AND DOGMA. It is however a mixed work; and wepropose, while noticing a number of its beautiful utterances, to make afew remarks on some of its objectionable sentiments. 

There is a great multitude of important facts with regard toChristianity, --facts which can be understood and appreciated by personsof ordinary capacity, and which no man of intelligence and candor willbe disposed to call in question; yet facts of such a character as cannotfail, when duly considered, to leave the impression on men's minds, thatChristianity is the perfection of all wisdom and goodness, and worthy ofacceptance as a revelation from an all-perfect God, and as the mightiestand most beneficent friend of mankind. A number of those facts wepropose to give in our next volume. 

MODERN SKEPTICISM. 

CHAPTER I. 

INTRODUCTION. 

When a man has travelled far, and seen strange lands, and dwelt amongstrange peoples, and encountered unusual dangers, it is natural, on hisreturn home, that he should feel disposed to communicate to his familyand friends some of the incidents of his travels, and some of thediscoveries which he may have made on his way. 

So when a man has travelled far along the way of life, especially if hehas ventured on strange paths, and come in contact with strangecharacters, and had altogether a large and varied experience, it isnatural, as he draws near to the end of his journey, or when he reachesone of its more important stages, that he should feel disposed tocommunicate to his friends and kindred some of the incidents of hislife's pilgrimage, and some of the lessons which his experience may haveengraven on his heart. He will especially be anxious to guard those whohave life's journey yet before them, against the errors into which hemay have fallen, and so preserve them from the sorrows that he may havehad to endure. 

And so it is with me. I have travelled far along the way of life. I maynow be near its close. I have certainly of late passed one of its mostimportant stages. I have had a somewhat eventful journey. There are butfew perhaps who have had a larger or more varied experience. I havecommitted great errors, and I have in consequence passed throughgrievous sorrows; and I would fain do something towards saving those whocome after me from similar errors and from similar sorrows: and this isthe object of the work before you. 

At an early period, when I was little more than sixteen years of age, Ibecame a member of the Methodist society. Before I was twenty I became alocal preacher. Before I was twenty-three I became a travellingpreacher; and after I had got over the first great difficulties of mycalling, I was happy in my work; as happy as a mortal man need wish tobe. It was my delight to read good books, to study God's Word and works, and to store my mind with useful knowledge. To preach the Gospel, toturn men from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, andto promote the instruction and improvement of God's people were the joyand rejoicing of my soul. There were times, and those not a few, when Icould sing with Wesley--

 "In a rapture of joy my life I employ, The God of my life to proclaim: 'Tis worth living for this, to administer bliss And salvation in Jesus's name. "

And I was very successful in my work. I never travelled in a circuit inwhich there was not a considerable increase of members, and in one placewhere I was stationed, the numbers in church-fellowship were more thandoubled in less than eighteen months. 

In those days it never once entered my mind that I could ever beanything else but a Christian minister: yet in course of time I ceasedto be one; ceased to be even a Christian. I was severed first from theChurch, and then from Christ, and I wandered at length far away into theregions of doubt and unbelief, and came near to the outermost confinesof eternal night. And the question arises, How happened this? And how happened it that, after having wandered sofar away, I was permitted to return to my present happy position?

These two questions I shall endeavor, to the best of my ability, toanswer. 

CHAPTER II. 

CAUSES OF UNBELIEF. 

How came I to wander into doubt and unbelief?

1. There are several causes of skepticism and infidelity. One is vice. When a man is bent on forbidden pleasures, he finds it hard to believein the truth and divinity of a religion that condemns his viciousindulgences. And the longer he persists in his evil course, the darkerbecomes his understanding, the more corrupt his tastes, and the moreperverse his judgment; until at length he "puts darkness for light, andlight for darkness; calls evil good and good evil, and mistakes bitterfor sweet, and sweet for bitter. " He becomes an infidel. It is thedecree of Heaven that men who persist in seeking pleasure inunrighteousness, shall be given up to strong delusions of the devil tobelieve a lie. 

2. But there are other causes of skepticism and unbelief besides vice. Thomas was an unbeliever for a time, --a very resolute one, --yet theGospel gives no intimation that he was chargeable with any form of vice. And John the Baptist, one of the noblest characters in sacred history, after having proclaimed Jesus as the Messiah to others, came himself todoubt, whether He was really "the one that should come, or they shouldlook for another. " Like the early disciples of the Saviour, and theJewish people generally, John expected the Messiah to take the throne ofDavid by force, and to rule as a temporal prince; and when Jesus took acourse so very different, his confidence in his Messiahship was shaken. And one of the sweetest Psalmists tells us that, as for him, his feetwere almost gone; his steps had well-nigh slipped: and that, not becausehe was eager for sinful pleasures, but because he saw darkness andclouds around the Providence of God: he could not understand or "justifythe ways of God to man. "

And there are thoughtful and good men still who fall into doubt andunbelief from similar causes. The kind of people who, like Thomas, areconstitutionally inclined to doubt, are not all dead. Baxter mentions aclass of men who lived in his day, that were always craving for sensibledemonstrations. Like Thomas, they wanted to _see_ and _feel_ before theybelieved. In other words, they were not content with faith; they wanted_knowledge_. And there are men of that kind still in the world. 

And the darkness and clouds which the Psalmist saw around the providenceof God are not all gone. There are many things in connection with thegovernment of the world that are hard to be understood, --hard to bereconciled by many with their ideas of what is right. There aremysteries both in nature and in history, which baffle the minds and trythe faith of the best and wisest of our race. 

3. And there are matters in connection with Christianity to try thefaith of men. Like its great Author, when it first made its appearance, it had "neither form nor comeliness" in the eyes of many. It neither metthe expectations of the selfish, proud, ambitious Jew, nor of thedisputatious, philosophic Greek. To the one "it was a stumbling-block, "and to the other "foolishness. " And there have been men in every age, who have been unable to find in Christianity all that their preconceivednotions had led them to expect in a religion from Heaven. There are menstill, even among the sincerest and devoutest friends of Christianity, who are puzzled and staggered at times by the mysterious aspects of someof its doctrines, or by some of the facts connected with its history. They cannot understand, for instance, how it is that it has not spreadmore rapidly, and become, before this, the religion of the whole world. You tell them the fault is in its disciples and ministers, and not inChristianity itself. But they cannot understand why God should allow thesuccess of a system so important to depend on faithless or fallible men. Nor can they understand how it is that in the nations in which theGospel has been received, it has not worked a greater transformation ofcharacter, and produced a happier change in their condition. How is it, they ask, that it has not extinguished the spirit of war, destroyed thesordid lust for gain, developed more fully the spirit ofself-sacrificing generosity, and converted society into one greatbrotherhood of love? How is it that the Church is not more holy, moreunited, and more prosperous, --that professors and teachers ofChristianity do not exhibit more of the Christian character, and followmore closely the example of the meek and lowly, the loving andlaborious, the condescending and self-sacrificing Saviour whose namethey bear? They are amazed that so little is done by professingChristians to save the perishing classes; that so many of the churches, instead of grappling with the vice and wretchedness of our large towns, turn their backs on them, build their churches in aristocraticneighborhoods mostly, and compete with one another for the favor of therich and powerful. They cannot understand how it is, that churches andministers do not exert themselves more for the extinction ofdrunkenness, gambling, and licentiousness, and for the suppression ofall trades and customs that minister to sin. It startles them to see towhat a fearful extent the churches have allowed the power of the press, which once was all their own, to pass out of their hands, into the handsof selfish, worldly, and godless adventurers. These matters admit ofexplanation, but there are many to whose minds the explanation is neverpresented, and there are some whom nothing will relieve from perplexityand doubt but a grander display of Christian zeal and philanthropiceffort, on the part of the churches, for the regeneration of society. 

4. Then the religion of Christ is not, as a rule, presented to men inits loveliest and most winning, or in its grandest and most overpoweringform. As presented in the teachings and character of Christ, Christianity is the perfection of wisdom and goodness, the most gloriousrevelation of God and duty the mind of man can conceive: but aspresented in the creeds, and characters, and writings of many of itsteachers and advocates, it has neither beauty, nor worth, norcredibility. Some teach only a very small portion of Christianity, andthe portion they teach they often teach amiss. Some doctrines theyexaggerate, and others they maim. Some they caricature, distort, orpervert. And many add to the Gospel inventions of their own, or foolishtraditions received from their fathers; and the truth is hid under amass of error. Many conceal and disfigure the truth by putting it in anantiquated and outlandish dress. The language of many theologians, likethe Latin of the Romish Church, is, to vast numbers, a deadlanguage, --an unknown tongue. There are hundreds of words and phrasesused by preachers and religious writers which neither they nor theirhearers or readers understand. In some of them there is nothing to beunderstood. They are mere words; meaningless sounds. Some of them havemeanings, but they are hard to come at, and when you have got at themyou find them to be worse than none. They are falsehoods that lurkwithin the dark and antiquated words. I have heard and even read wholesermons in which nine sentences out of ten had no more meaning in themthan the chatter of an ape. Perhaps not so much. I have gone throughlarge volumes and found hardly a respectable, plain-meaning sentencefrom beginning to end. And wagon loads of so-called religious books maystill be found, in which, as in the talk of one of Shakespeare'scharacters, the ideas are to the words as three grains of wheat to abushel of chaff; you may search for them all day before you find them;and when you find them they are good for nothing. When I first cameacross such books I supposed it was my ignorance or want of capacitythat made it impossible for me to understand them; but I found, atlength, that there was nothing in them to understand. There are otherbooks which have a meaning, a good meaning, but it is wrapped up in suchout-of-the-way words and phrases, that it is difficult to get at it. Menof science have not only discarded the foolish fictions of darker ages, but have begun to simplify their language; to cast aside the unspeakableand unintelligible jargon of the past, and to use plain, good, commonEnglish, thus rendering the study of nature pleasant even to children;while many divines, by clinging to the unmeaning and mischievousphraseology of ancient dreamers, render the study of religion repulsive, and the attainment of sound Christian knowledge almost impossible to themasses of mankind. And all these things become occasions of unbelief. "So long as Christian preachers and writers are limited so much to humancreeds and systems, or to stereotyped phrases of any kind, and availthemselves so little of the popular diction of literature and of commonlife, so long must they repel many whom they might convince and win. "Dr. Porter, _President of Yale College_. 

5. Then again: the divisions of the Church, and the uncharitable spiritin which points of difference between contending sects are discussed, and the disposition sometimes shown by religious disputants to impugneach other's motives, to call each other offensive names, and to consigneach other to perdition, are occasions of stumbling to some. 

6. And again: many advocates of Christianity, more zealous than wise, say more about the Bible and Christianity than is true, and attempt toprove points which do not admit of proof; and by their unguardedassertions, and their failures in argument, bring the truth itself intodiscredit. Others use unsound arguments in support of the truth, andwhen men discover the unsoundness of the arguments, they are ledsometimes to suspect the soundness of the doctrine in behalf of whichthey are employed. The pious frauds of ancient and modern fanatics haveproved a stumbling-block to thousands. 

Albert Barnes says, "There is no class of men that are so liable to relyon weak and inconclusive reasonings as preachers of the Gospel. Many ayoung man in a Theological Seminary is on the verge of infidelity fromthe nature of the reasoning employed by his instructor in defence ofthat which is true, and which might be well defended: and many a youthin our congregations is almost or quite a skeptic, not because he wishesto be so, but because that which is true is supported by such worthlessarguments. "

7. Again; theological students sometimes adopt erroneous principles orunwise methods of reasoning in their search after truth, and do notdiscover their mistake till they are landed in doubt and unbelief. Theyfind certain principles laid down by men in high repute for science, andadopt them without hesitation, not considering that men of science aresometimes mad, fanatical infidels, and that they manufacture principleswithout regard to truth, for the simple purpose of undermining men'sfaith in God and religion. Writers on science of one school tell you, that in your study of nature, you must be careful never to admit thedoctrine of final causes; or, in other words, that you must neverentertain the idea that anything in nature was meant to answer anyparticular purpose. You must, say they, if you would be a truephilosopher, shut out from your mind all idea of design or contrivancein the works of nature. You must just look at what is, and not ask whatit is for. You may find wonderful adaptations of things to each other, all tending to happy results; but you must never suppose that any oneever _designed_ or _planned_ those adaptations, with a _view_ to thosehappy results. You must confine yourself entirely to what you see, andnever admit the thought of a Maker whom you do not see. You must limityour observations to what is done, and not dream of a Doer. You may seethings tending to the diffusion of happiness, but must not suppose thatthere is a great unseen Benefactor, who gives them this blessedtendency. And if you feel in yourself a disposition to gratitude, youmust treat it as a foolish, childish fancy, and suppress it asirrational. 

A sillier or a more contemptible notion--a notion more opposed to truephilosophy and common sense, --can hardly be conceived. How any one couldever have the ignorance or the impudence to propound such an unnaturaland monstrous absurdity as a great philosophical principle, would be amystery, if we did not know how infidelity perverts men'sunderstandings, and, while puffing them up with infinite conceit oftheir own wisdom, transforms them into the most arrant and outrageousfools. 

Yet this monstrous folly has found its way into books, and papers, andreviews, and, through them, into the minds of some Christian students;and when the madness of the notion is not detected, it destroys theirfaith, and makes them miserable infidels. 

Some adopt the principle that reason is man's only guide, --that reasonalone is judge of what is true and good, and that to reason every thingmust be submitted, and received or rejected, done or left undone, asreason may decide. This sounds very plausible to many, and there is asense in which it may be true; but there is a sense in which it isfearfully false; and the youth that adopts it, and acts upon it, will belikely to land himself in utter doubt, both with regard to religion andmorals. There are numbers of cases in which reason is no guide atall, --in which instinct, natural affection, and consciousness are ouronly guides. You can never prove by what is generally called reasonalone, that man is not a machine, governed entirely by forces overwhich he has no control. You cannot therefore prove by what certainphilosophers call reason, that any man is worthy of reward orpunishment, of praise or blame, of gratitude or of resentment; or thatthere is any such thing in men as virtue or vice, according to theordinary sense of the words. The ablest logicians on earth, when theytake reason alone as their guide, come to the conclusion that there isno such thing as liberty or moral responsibility, in the ordinaryacceptation of the terms, but that all is fixed, that all is fate, frometernity to eternity. They accordingly come to the further conclusion, that there is no free, voluntary Ruler of the universe, --that there isno Almighty Judge and Rewarder, --that there is neither reward norpunishment, properly speaking, either in this world or in the world tocome. They become atheists. 

You can never prove by reason that a woman ought to love her own childbetter than the child of another woman. You cannot prove by reason thatshe ought to love it at all. You may say no children would be reared ifmothers did not love their children, and even love them better than thechildren of other mothers. But how will you prove that children _ought_to be reared? Can you show that the mother will confer any advantage onher child, or secure any advantage to herself, or any one else, byrearing it? Can you prove that it will not be a torment to her, --that itwill not bring her to want, and shame, and an untimely death? The factis, a mother's love, a mother's partiality for her own child, is not amatter of reason. The hen loves her chickens, the she bear loves itscubs, the mother dog loves its whelps, and the ewe loves her lambs, without any regard to reason. Their affections and preferences aregoverned by something infinitely wiser than reason; infinitely higher, at least, than any reason that _man_ can boast. And men love women, andwomen love men, and men and women marry and form new families, not atthe bidding of reason, but under the influence of instincts or impulsesthat come from a wisdom infinitely higher than the wisdom of the wisestman on earth. And so it is with many of our beliefs. They areinstinctive; and reason, when it becomes reasonable enough to deservethe name, will advise you to cherish those instinctive beliefs as yourlife, in spite of all the infidel philosophy and reasoning on earth. 

But even honest and well-disposed men of science sometimes form bad, defective, or one-sided habits of thought and judgment unconsciously, which render it impossible for them to do justice either to Nature orChristianity as revelations of the character and government of God. Andthese faulty habits of thought and judgment, and the anti-Christianconclusions to which they lead, pass on from men of science to literarymen; and literature is vitiated, and books and periodicals which shouldlead men to truth, cause them to err. Thus skeptical principles pervadesociety. They find advocates at times even among men who call themselvesministers of Christ. The consequence is, that well-disposed, and evenpious young men, are perplexed, bewildered, and some who, like John theBaptist, were "burning and shining lights, " become "wandering stars, "and lose themselves, for a time at least, amidst the "blackness anddarkness" of doubt and despair. 

CHAPTER III. 

ANOTHER CAUSE OF UNBELIEF--BAD FEELING. THE AUTHOR'S CASE. 

There are several other causes of doubt and unbelief which we mightname, if we had time; but we have not. There is one however which wemust notice, because it had considerable influence in our own case; werefer to the bad feeling which sometimes takes possession of the mindsof Christians towards each other, or of the minds of ministers towardstheir brother ministers. 

You are aware, perhaps, that if you scratch the skin, and introduce alittle diseased animal matter to the blood, it will gradually spreaditself through the system, and in time poison the whole body. And if youdo not know this, you know, that if you take a little leaven, and placeit in a mass of meal, and leave it there to work unchecked, it will intime leaven the whole lump. And as it is with things natural, so it iswith things spiritual. If you allow a little leaven of bad feeling toget into your minds towards your fellow Christians or your brotherministers, and permit it to remain there, it will in time infect yourwhole soul, impair the action of all its faculties, and after alienatingyou from individuals, separate you first from the Church, and then fromChrist and Christianity. 

There is a passage in the Bible which says that judges are not to takegifts; and the reason assigned is, not that if a judge accepts a presenthe will, with his eyes open, wilfully condemn the innocent or acquit theguilty; but that "a gift _blindeth the eyes_, " even "of the wise, " sothat he is no longer able to see clearly which is the guilty and whichthe guiltless party. And there is another passage in the Bible whichsays that "oppression driveth a wise man mad. " The feeling a man hasthat he has been wickedly, cruelly treated, excites his mind sopainfully and violently, that it is impossible for him to think well ofthe character or views of his oppressor, or of any party, institution, or system with which he may be connected. 

As some friends of mine were canvassing for votes one day, previous toan election, they came upon a man who could not, for a time, say forwhich candidate he would vote. At length a thought struck him, and hesaid, "Who is John Myers going to vote for?" "Oh, " said my friends, "he's going to vote for _our_ man. " "Then I'll vote for the other man, "said he, "for I'm sure Myers will vote wrong. " Myers had swindled him ina business transaction; and his feelings towards him were so strong, andof so unpleasant a kind, that he could not think anything right thatMyers did, nor could he think anything wrong that he himself did, solong as he took care to go contrary to Myers. 

It is very natural to smile at such weakness when we see it in others, and yet exhibit unconsciously the same weakness ourselves under anotherform. There are some Christians who, when their minister pleases themwell, are quite delighted with his discourses. They are "marrow andfatness" to their souls. And every sermon he preaches seems better thanthe one that went before; and they feel as if they could sit under thatdear good man for ever. But a change comes over their feelings withregard to him. While going his round of pastoral visits some day, hepasses their door, but calls at the house of a richer neighbor a littlelower down: or on visiting the Sunday-school, he pats someone's littleboy on the head, and speaks to him kind and pleasant words, while hepasses their little son unnoticed. He has no improper design in what hedoes; but it happens so; that is all. The idea of partiality neverenters his mind. But they fancy he has got something wrong in his mindtowards them; and it is certain now that they have got something wrongin their minds towards him. And now his sermons are quite changed. The"marrow and fatness" are all gone, and there is nothing left but "thehusks which the swine should eat. " And every sermon he preaches seemsworse than the one which went before, until at length they get quiteweary, and their only comfort is, if they be Methodists, that Conferencewill come some day, and they will have a change. And all this time thepreacher is just the same good man he ever was, and his sermons are thesame; only _they_ are changed. They have misjudged him, and become thesubjects of unhappy feeling, and are no longer capable of doing eitherhim or his sermons justice. 

And the longer the unhappy feeling is allowed to remain in their minds, the stronger it will become, and the more mischievous will it prove. After disabling or perverting their judgments with regard to theirpastor, it will be in danger of separating them from the Church; andwhen once they get out of the Church into the outside world, no wonderif they make shipwreck both of faith, and of a good conscience. 

And so it is continually. Our views of men's characters, talents, sentiments, are always more or less influenced by our feelings andaffections. If we like a man very much, we look on his views in the mostfavorable light, and are glad to see anything like a reason for adoptingthem ourselves. We give his words and deeds the most favorableinterpretation, and we rate his gifts and graces above their real value. On the other hand, if we dislike a man, --if we are led to regard him asan enemy, and to harbor feelings of resentment towards him, we look onwhat he says and does with distrust; we suspect his motives; weunder-rate his talents, and are pleased to have an excuse for differingfrom him in opinion. 

We see proofs of this power of feeling and affection over the judgmenton every hand. The mother of that ordinary-looking and troublesome childthinks it the most beautiful and engaging little creature under heaven;while she wonders how people can have patience with her neighbor'schild, which, in truth, is quite a cherub or an angel compared withher's. You know how it is with natural light. You sit inside an ancientcathedral, and the light from the bright shining sun streams in throughthe painted windows. Outside the cathedral the light is all pure white;but inside, as it falls upon the pulpit, the pillars, the pews and thepeople, it is purple, orange, violet, blue, red, or green, according tothe color of the glass through which it passes. It is the same withmoral or spiritual light; it takes the tint or hue of the paintedwindows of our passions and prejudices, our likes and dislikes, throughwhich it enters our minds. The light that finds its way into men'sminds, says Bacon, is never pure, white light; but light colored by themedium through which it passes. Look where we will, whether into booksor into the living world, we see differences of opinion on men andthings that can be accounted for on no other principle than that thejudgments of people are influenced by their passions and feelings, theirprejudices and interests. The Royalists looked on Cromwell throughspectacles of hate and vengeance, and saw a monster of hypocrisy andblood. The Puritans looked at him through spectacles of revolutionaryfanaticism, and saw a glorious saint and hero. The clergy looked onNonconformists through conservative glasses, and saw a rabble offanatics and rebels. The Nonconformists looked on the clergy throughrevolutionary glasses, and saw a host of superstitious formalists, andblind, persecuting Pharisees. The man who looks through the unstainedglasses of impartiality, sees much that is good, and something that isnot good, in all. 

Who, that knows much of human nature, expects Catholics to judgerighteously of Protestants, or Protestants to judge righteously ofCatholics? Who, that knows anything of the world, expects revolutionaryRadicals to do justice to the characters and motives of Conservatives, or ejected Irishmen to see anything in Englishmen but robbers andtyrants? I know that all this is great weakness, but where is the manthat is not weak? The man who thinks himself free from this weakness, has probably a double share of it. The man who is really strong is someone who is keenly sensible of his weakness, and who feels that hissufficiency is of God. Weakness and humanity are one. 

I dwell the longer on this point because, as I have already intimated, aright understanding of it will go far towards explaining the disastrouschange which took place in my own mind with regard to Christianity. Onegreat cause of my separation from the Church, and then of myestrangement from Christ, was the influence of bad feeling which tookpossession of my mind towards a number of my brother ministers. 

CHAPTER IV. 

ORIGIN OF THE UNHAPPY FEELING--CHARACTERISTICS OF THE AUTHOR'SMIND--RATIONALIZING TENDENCY. 

How came I to be the subject of this bad feeling? I will tell you. 

As a young minister I had two or three marked tendencies. One may becalled a rationalizing tendency. I was anxious, in the first place, clearly to understand all my professed beliefs, and to be able, in thesecond place, to make them plain to others. I never liked to travel in afog, wrapped round as with a blinding cloud, unable either to see myway, or to get a view of the things with which I was surrounded. I likeda clear, bright sky, with the sun shining full upon my path, andgladdening my eyes with a view of a thousand interesting objects. And sowith regard to spiritual matters. I never liked to travel in theologicalfogs. They pressed on me at the outset of my religious life, on everyside, hiding from my view the wonders and the glories of God's word andworks; but I never rested in the darkness. I longed and prayed for lightwith all my soul, and sought for it with all my powers. Regarding theBible as God's Book, given to man for his instruction and salvation, Iresolved, by God's help, to find out both what it said and what itmeant, on every important point of truth and duty. 

1. I became sensible, very early in life, that the doctrines I hadreceived from my teachers were, in some cases, inconsistent with eachother, and that they could not therefore all be true; and I was anxiousto get rid of this inconsistency, and to bring the whole of my beliefsinto harmony with each other. 

2. I was also anxious to bring my views into agreement with theteachings of Christ and His Apostles. I wished every article of mybelief to rest, not on the word of man, but on the word of God. Ibelieved it to be my duty to come as near to Christ as possible, both inmy views and character. And I wished my style of preaching and teachingto be, like His, the perfection of plainness and simplicity. I felt thatmy chief mission was to the masses, --that I was called especially topreach and teach the Gospel to the poor; and it was my wish to be ableto make it plain to people of the most defective education, and of thehumblest capacity. 

3. I was further wishful to see an agreement between the doctrines whichI gathered from the Sacred Scriptures, and the oracles which came to mefrom the works of God in nature. If nature and Christianity were fromthe same All-perfect God, as I believed, their voices must be one. Theirlessons of truth and duty must agree. They must have the same end andtendency. Christian precepts must be in harmony with man's mental andbodily constitution. They must be conducive to the development of allman's powers; to the perfection and happiness of his whole being. Theymust be friendly to the improvement of his condition. They must favorevery thing that is conducive to his personal and domestic happiness, and to the social and national welfare of the whole human race. And thedoctrines of Christianity must be in harmony with the constitution, andlaws, and phenomena of the visible universe. If there be one Great, All-perfect Creator and Governor of the world and of man, then man andthe universe, the universe and religion, science and revelation, philosophy and Christianity, the laws of nature and the laws of Christ, must all be one. I wanted to see this oneness, and to feel the sweetsense of it in my soul. 

4. I wanted further to see the foundations on which my belief in God andChrist and in the Sacred Scriptures rested, that I might be able tojustify my belief both to myself and to others. I wished to have thefullest evidence and assurance of the truth of Christianity I could get, that I might both feel at rest and happy myself, and be able to giverest and comfort to the souls of others. 

5. With these objects in view I set to work. I prayed to God, the GreatFather of lights, and the Giver of every good and perfect gift, to leadme into all truth, and to furnish me to every good work. I read theBible with the greatest care. I searched it through and through. Istudied it daily, desirous to learn the whole scope and substance of itsteachings, on every point both of truth and duty. I marked on the marginof the pages all those passages that struck me by their peculiarclearness, and their fulness of important meaning. These passages I readover again and again, till I got great numbers of them off by heart. Igave each passage a particular mark according to the subject on which ittreated. I then copied the whole of these passages into large NoteBooks, placing all that spake on any particular subject together. I alsoarranged the passages so far as I was able, in their natural order, thatthey might throw light on one another, and present the subject on whichthey treated, in as full and intelligible a light as possible. I dividedthe pages of my Note Books into two columns, placing the passages whichfavored one view of a subject in the first column, and those whichseemed to favor a different view in the second. I placed in those NoteBooks passages on matters of duty, as well as on matters of truth. Inthis way I got nearly all the plainer and more important portions of theBible arranged in something like systematic order. Having done this, Iwent through my Books, and put down in writing all that the passagesplainly taught, and marked the bearing of their teachings on the variousarticles of my creed, with a view to bringing my creed, and theteachings of Scripture, into agreement with each other. 

6. To help me in these my labors, and to secure myself as far aspossible from serious error, I read a multitude of other books, onalmost every subject of importance, by authors of almost all varietiesof creeds. I read commentaries, sermons, bodies of divinity, and a hostof treatises on various points. To the best of my ability I examined theScriptures in the original languages, as well as in a number oftranslations, both ancient and modern, including several Latin andFrench versions, four German ones, and all the English ones that came inmy way. I had a number of Lexicons, and of Theological and BibleDictionaries of which I made free use. I went through the Commentariesof Baxter, Wesley and Adam Clarke with the greatest care, as well asthrough a huge and somewhat heterodox, but able and excellent work, published by Goadby, entitled, _Illustrations of the Sacred Scriptures_. I do not think I missed a single sentence in these commentaries, orpassed unweighed a single word. 

I read and studied the writings of Wesley generally, and the works ofFletcher, Benson and Watson. I read Hooker and Taylor also, and Wilkins, and Barrow, and Tillotson, and Butler, and Burnet, and Pearson, andHoadley. I read the writings of Baxter almost continually. I wentthrough, not only the whole of his voluminous practical works, but manyof his doctrinal and controversial ones, including his CatholicTheology, his Aphorisms on Justification, his Confessions, and his mostelaborate, comprehensive and wonderful work of all, his _MethodusTheologiæ_, in Latin. In Baxter alone I had a world of materials forthought, on almost every religious and moral subject that can engage themind of man. And on almost every subject of importance his thoughtsseemed rich and wholesome, scriptural and rational in the highestdegree. His Christian spirit held me captive, and I never got tired ofhis earnest, eloquent, and godly talk. Even the old and endlesscontroversies on which he spent so much time and strength, were oftenrendered interesting by the honesty of his heart, by the abundance ofhis charity, by the moderation of his views, and by the never-failinggood sound sense of his remarks. None of the works I read had such acharm for me as those of Baxter, and no other religious writer exertedso powerful and lasting an influence either on my head or heart. Taylorwas too flowery, and Barrow too wordy, and Tillotson was rather cold andformal; yet I read them all with profit, and with a great amount ofpleasure. Hooker I found a wonder, both for excellency of style andrichness of sentiment; and his piety and wisdom, his candor and hischarity, have never been surpassed since the days of Christ and HisApostles. And Hoadley too I liked, and Butler, and Thomas a Kempis, andWilliam Law. And then came Bolton and Howe, and Doddridge and Watts. Then Penn, and Barclay, and Clarkson, and Sewell, and Hales, and Dellcaught my attention, giving me interesting revelations of Quaker thoughtand feeling. 

And I was edified by Lactantius and Chrysostom, the most eloquent, rational and practical of the Christian Fathers. By and by camePriestley and Price, and Dr. John Taylor, and W. E. Channing, and a hostof others of the modern school of heterodox writers. I also read anumber of celebrated French authors, including Bossuet and Bourdaloue, Flechier and Massillon, Pascal and Fenelon, and the eloquent, Protestantpreacher and author, M. Saurin. I read the principal works both ofCatholics and Protestants, of the Fathers and Reformers, of Churchmenand Dissenters, of Quakers and Mystics, of Methodists and Calvinists, ofUnitarians and Infidels. 

I read several works on Law and Government, including Puffendorf's Lawof Nature, Grotius on the Laws of Peace and War, Bodin on Government, Montesquieu's Spirit of Laws, Blackstone's Commentaries, and JeremyTaylor's Ductor Dubitantium. I had read works on Anatomy, Physiology andMedicine, when I could get hold of them, from the time when I was onlytwelve years old. I never went far into any other sciences, yet Istudied, to some extent, Astronomy, Geology, Physical Geography, Botany, Natural History, and Anthropology. I read Wesley's publication onNatural Philosophy, and I gave more or less attention to every work onscience and natural philosophy that came in my way. Works on naturalreligion and natural theology, in which science was taught and used insubservience to Christian truth and duty, I read whenever I could gethold of them. They interested me exceedingly. For works on Painting, Sculpture, Architecture, I had not the least regard. They seemed tohave no tendency to help me in the work in which I was engaged, and Ihad no desire to talk respectable nonsense on such subjects. I was fondof Ecclesiastical and Civil History, and read most greedily such worksas threw light on the progress of society in learning, science, anduseful arts; in freedom, morals, religion and government. I read many ofthe works of the ancient Greeks and Romans, and the history of thewonderful periods in which they flourished. I was especially fond ofCicero, Seneca, and Epictetus. All subjects bearing on the greatinterests of mankind, and all works revealing the workings of the humanmind and the laws of human nature, seemed to me to bear importantrelations to religion and the Bible; and the writings of the greatphilosophers, lawyers, and historians, appeared to be almost as much inmy line as Baxter's Christian Directory, or Wesley's Notes on the NewTestament. 

Tales of wars and intrigues, and of royal and aristocratic vices andfollies I hated. Yet I was interested in accounts of religiouscontroversies, and read with eagerness, though with pain and horror, thetragic and soul-harrowing stories of the deadly conflicts betweenChristian piety and anti-Christian intolerance. Above all I lovedwell-written books on the beneficial influence of Christianity on thetemporal interests and the general happiness of mankind. I liked goodbiographies, especially of celebrated students, great philosophers, andremarkable Christian philanthropists. Of works of fiction I read veryfew, and evermore still fewer as I got older, until at length I came toview them generally as a great nuisance. There are few, I suppose, thatcan say they read the whole, not only of Wesley's works, but of hisChristian Library, in fifty volumes; yet I went through the whole, though one of the books was so profound, or else so silly, that I couldnot find one sentence in it that I could properly understand. I read thegreater part of the books of my friends. I went through nearly the wholelibrary of a village about two miles distant from my native place. Mynative place itself could not boast a library in those days. I readscores, if not hundreds of books that taught me nothing but theignorance and self-conceit of the writers, and the various forms ofliterary and religious insanity to which poor weak humanity is liable. 

There was a large old Free Library at Newcastle-on-Tyne, left to thecity by a celebrated clergyman, which contained all the Fathers, all theGreek and Roman Classics, all the more celebrated of the old Infidels, all the old leading skeptical and lawless writers of Italy, and France, and Holland, all the great old Church of England writers, and all theleading writers of the Nonconformists, Dissenters, and Heretics of allkinds. To this library I used to go, day after day, and stay frommorning to night, reading some of the great authors through, andexamining almost all of them sufficiently to enable me to see what therewas _in_ each, that I had not met with in the rest. Here I read Hobbesand Machiavel, Bolingbroke and Shaftesbury, Tindal and Chubb. Here Ifirst saw the works of Cudworth and Chillingworth, and here too I firstfound the entire works of Bacon and Newton, of Locke and Boyle. Herealso I read the works of some of the older defenders of the faith. Grotius on the truth of the Christian religion I had read much earlier. I had used it as a school book, translating it both out of Latin intoEnglish, and out of English back into Latin, imprinting it therebyalmost word for word upon my memory. I had also read the work of hiscommentator on the causes of incredulity. Leland on the deisticalwriters, and Paley's Evidences, and others, I read after. But in thisgreat old library I met with numbers of interesting and important worksthat I have never met with since. And here, in the dimly lightedantiquated rooms, I used to fill my mind with a world of facts, andthoughts, and fancies, and then go away to meditate upon them whiletravelling on my way, or sitting in my room, or lying on my bed. Day andnight, alone and in company, these were the things which filled my mindand exercised my thoughts. 

And having a rather retentive memory, and considerable powers ofimagination, I was able at times to bring almost all the things ofimportance which I had met with in my reading, before my mind, andcompare them both with each other, and with all that was already in mymemory. And whatever appeared to me most rational, most scriptural, Itreasured for future use, allowing the rest to drift away intoforgetfulness. 

No one can imagine the happiness I found in this my search after truth, except those who have experienced the like. I seemed at times to live ina region of the highest and divinest bliss. Every fresh discovery oftruth, every detection of old error, every enlargement of my views, brought unspeakable rapture; and had it not been for thenarrow-mindedness of some of my friends, the restraints of establishedcreeds, and the thought of the trials which my mental revels might someday bring on me and my family, my life would have been a heaven onearth. 

Perhaps I read too much, or too greedily and variously. Would it not inany case have been better for me to have refrained from reading thewritings of such a host of heretics, infidels, and mere naturalphilosophers? It is certain that what I attempted was too much for mypowers, and too vast for one man's life. But I was not sufficientlyconscious of the infinitude of truth, or of the narrow limits of mypowers, or of the infinite mysteries of which humanity and the universeare full. And my desire for knowledge was infinite, and my appetite wasvery keen, and I was so desirous to be right on every subject bearing onthe religion of Christ, and on the great interests of mankind, thatnothing that I could do seemed too much if it seemed likely to help mein the attainment of my object. 

Then I had no considerate and enlightened guide; no friend, nocolleague, with a father's heart, to direct me in my studies or mychoice of books. There was one minister in the Body to which I belongedthat might have given me good counsel, if he had been at hand, but heand I were never stationed in the same neighborhood. And he had sufferedso much on account of his superior intelligence and liberal tendencies, that he might have felt unwilling to advise me freely. The preachersgenerally could not understand me, and they had no sympathy with myeager longings for religious knowledge. They could not comprehend whatin the world I could want beyond their own old stereotyped notions andphrases, and the comfortable provision made for the supply of mytemporal wants. Why could I not check my thinking, enjoy my popularity, and rejoice in the success of my labors? And when I could not take theirflippant counsels, they had nothing left but hints at unpleasantconsequences. There was nothing for me therefore, but to follow thepromptings of my own insatiate soul, and travel on alone in the fear ofGod, hoping that things would get better, and my prospects grow brighterby and by. 

So I moved on in my own track, still digging for truth as for silver, and searching for it as for hidden treasure. And I worked unceasingly, and with all my might. I lost no time. I hated pleasure parties, and allkinds of amusements. My work was my amusement. I hated company, unlessthe subject of conversation could be religion, or something pertainingto it. When obliged to go out and take dinner, or tea, or supper, Ialways took a book or two with me, and if the company were not inclinedto spend the time in useful conversation, I would slip away into somequiet room, or take a walk, and spend my time in reading. I always readon my walks and on my journeys, if the weather was fair, and on someoccasions when it was not fair. My mind was always on the stretch. I hadno idea that I needed rest or recreation. It never entered into my mindthat I could get to the end of my mental strength, and when I wasactually exhausted, --when I had wearied both body and mind to theutmost, so that writing and even reading became irksome to me, I stillaccused myself of idleness, instead of suspecting myself of weariness. Iwonder that I lived. If my constitution had not been sound and elasticto the last degree, I should have worn myself out, and been silent inthe dust, more than thirty years ago. 

7. All the time that I was laboring to correct and enlarge my views ofChristian truth and duty, I was endeavoring to improve my way ofspeaking and writing. I wished, of course, to be able to speak and writecorrectly and forcibly, but what I longed for most of all, was to beable to speak with the greatest possible plainness and simplicity to thepoorer and less favored classes. If there were things in Christianitythat were inexplicable mysteries, I had no wish to meddle with them atall; if there was nothing but what was explicable, I wished to be ableto speak in such a manner as to make the whole subject of religion plainto them. My belief was that there were _not_ any inexplicable mysteriesin Christianity; that though there were doctrines in Christianity whichhad been mysteries in earlier times, they were mysteries now no longer, but revelations; that the things which were inexplicable mysteries, belonged to God, and that none but things that were revealed belonged tous. My impression was, that all things spiritual could be made as plainto people of common sense and honest hearts, as things natural; that allthat was necessary to this end, was first to separate from Christianityall that was _not_ Christianity, and secondly, to translate Christianityout of Latin and Greek, Hebrew and Gibberish, into the language of thecommon people. 

To qualify myself for this work of translation was the next great objectof all my studies. Paul regarded the unnecessary use of unknown tonguesin the assemblies of the Church, as a great nuisance. He demanded thateverything said in those assemblies, should be spoken in a language thatall could understand. Whether men prayed, or sang, or preached, heinsisted that they should do it in such a manner as to make themselvesintelligible. His remarks on this subject are the perfection of wisdom, and deserve more attention from religious teachers than they areaccustomed to receive. Paul's wish was, that Christians should not onlyall speak the same things, but that they should speak them in the sameway, so that they might all be able to understand each other, and thatoutsiders might be able to understand them all. "Above all gifts, " sayshe, "covet the gift of plain and intelligible speaking. Never use anunknown tongue so long as you can use a known one. He that speaketh inan unknown tongue speaketh not unto men but unto God: for no manunderstandeth him. He may talk about very good things, but no one is thebetter for his talk. But he that speaketh in a known tongue can beunderstood by all; and all are instructed, and comforted, andstrengthened. And even God can understand a known tongue as well as anunknown one. He that speaketh in an unknown tongue may edify himselfperhaps; but he that speaketh in a known one, edifieth the Church. I donot grudge you your unknown tongues, but I had a great deal rather youwould use a known one; for greater is he that speaketh in a known one, than he that speaketh in an unknown one. True greatness does not consistin saying or doing things wonderful; but in saying and doing thingsuseful, --in talking and acting in a loving, condescending, self-sacrificing spirit, with a view to the comfort and welfare of ourbrethren. Suppose I were to come to you speaking in tongues that you didnot understand, what good should I do you, unless I should translatewhat I said into a tongue you could understand? And why should I say athing twice over when saying it once would do as well, and even better?Everything should be made as plain as possible from the first. When youhave made things as plain as you can, there will be some that will findit as much as they can do to catch your meaning. If you talk in anunknown tongue they cannot get at your meaning at all, but only sit, andstare, and sigh. Some poor silly souls may admire and applaud you; forthere are always some who, when they hear a man that they cannotunderstand, will cry out, What a great preacher! But what good orsensible man would wish for the praise of such creatures as those? Talkintelligibly. Talk so that folks can tell what you are talking about. Ifyou have nothing worth saying, hold your tongues. If you _have_something worth saying, say it so that people can understand it. Makeeverything as clear as possible. We might as well be without tongues astalk unintelligibly. Even things without life, giving sound, whetherpipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall itbe known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet give an uncertainsound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise ye, exceptye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it beknown what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the air. There are, no oneknows how many voices in the world; and none of them withoutsignification. The voices of birds and the voices of beasts are endlessin variety; yet each has its own distinct intelligible meaning. Allcreatures, though destitute of language like that of man, makethemselves properly understood by their mates, their kindred, and theirassociates. They even make themselves intelligible to men. Talk of greatpreachers;--why the man that cannot or will not preach so as to makehimself understood, is smaller, lower, less in the esteem of God, andof good, sensible, Christian men and women, than the lowest animal, orthe smallest insect, on the face of the earth. Every sheep that bleats, every ox that lows, every ass that brays, every bird that sings, andevery goose that gabbles, is more of a sage, if not more of a saint, than the great preachers! The things so-called by a certain class ofsimpletons, are about the most pitiable, if not the most blameablecreatures, in all God's universe. What then is the upshot of what I amsaying? It is this. Whether I sing, or pray, or talk, I will make myselfunderstood. I thank my God, I can speak with tongues more than you all;and I _do_ speak with them when it is necessary to do so in order tomake myself understood: but in the Church, I had rather speak five wordsin a tongue and a style that my hearers can understand, that by my voiceI may teach others, than ten thousand in an unknown tongue. "

And so the great, good, common-sense Apostle goes on. 

My wish and purpose were to carry out his principles to the farthestpossible extent. If I had tried hard, I could have preached in Latin. With a little more effort I could have preached in Greek. I could havepreached in the ordinary, high-sounding, Frenchified, Latinized, mongrelstyle, without an effort. It required an effort to keep clear of theabomination. And I made the effort. I wanted to feel when speaking, thatI had not only myself a proper understanding of what I was talkingabout, but that I was conveying correct and clear ideas of it to theminds of my hearers. To utter words which I did not understand, or wordswhich I could not make my hearers understand, was a thing I could notendure; and to this day, the very idea of such a thing excites in me akind of horror. I had no ambition to preach what were called greatsermons, or to be what was called a great preacher. My great desire wasnot to astonish or confound people, but to do them good; to conveyreligious truth to their minds in such a way, and so to impress it ontheir hearts, that they might be converted, edified, and saved. 

When I first began to preach I had a cousin who was commencing hiscareer as a minister at the same time. _He_ was ambitious to shine, andto astonish his hearers by a show of learning. He knew nothing of Latinand Greek, but he was fond of great high-sounding words of Greek andLatin origin. He carried about with him a pocket dictionary, which heused for the purpose of turning little words into big ones, and commonones into strange ones. My taste was just the contrary. My desire was tobe as simple as possible. Like my companion, I often carried about withme a pocket dictionary, but the end for which _I_ used it was, to helpme to turn big words into little ones, and strange and hard ones intocommon and easy ones. And whenever I had to consult a dictionary intranslating Latin, or Greek, or any other language, into English, Ialways took the simplest and best known words I could find to give themeaning of the original. My cousin's desire to shine betrayed him attimes into very ridiculous blunders. I once heard him say, after havingspent some time in explaining his text, "But that I may _devil-hope_ thesubject a little more fully, I would observe, that the words are_mephitical_. " He, of course, meant to say, _metaphorical_, figurative, not _mephitical_ which means of a _bad smell_. My plan secured meagainst such mistakes. 

To assist me in gaining a knowledge of the true meaning, and of theright use of words, and to correct and simplify my style as much aspossible, I read whatever came in my way on grammar and philology, onrhetoric and logic. I also collected a number of the best Englishdictionaries, including a beautiful copy of Johnson's great work in twothick quarto volumes. I read and studied the works of nearly all ourgreat poets, from Spenser and Shakespeare, down to Cowper and Burns. Iread two or three later ones. I had already committed to memory thewhole, or nearly the whole, of the moral songs of Dr. Watts; and many ofthem keep their places in my memory to the present day. And though itmay seem incredible to some, I actually committed to memory every hymnin the Wesleyan Hymn Book. I never knew them all off at one time, but Igot them all off in succession. And I never forgot the better, truer, simpler, sweeter ones. I can repeat hundreds of them still, with theexception of here and there a stanza or two. And I committed to memoryall the better portion of the new hymns introduced into the hymn bookby the Methodist New Connection. And I committed to memory choice piecesof poetry without number. I read Shakespeare till I could quote many ofhis best passages, including nearly all his soliloquies, and a number oflong conversations, as readily as I could quote the sacred writings. 

I read all Bunyan's works. I could tell the story of his Pilgrim frombeginning to end. I read Robinson Crusoe, and some of the other works ofDefoe. I read Addison and Johnson, Goldsmith and Swift. To get at theorigin and at the primitive meaning of words, I studied French andGerman, as well as Latin and Greek. When I met with passages in Englishauthors that expressed great truths in a style that was not to my taste, I used to translate them into my own style, just as I did fine passagesfrom Latin, Greek, or French authors. I also translated poeticalpassages into prose. I tried sometimes to translate things into thelanguage of children, and in some cases I succeeded. I did my best tokeep in mind how I felt, and what I could understand, when I was a childand a boy, and endeavored to keep my style as near as I could to thelevel of my boyish understanding. My first superintendent did notapprove of my plan. "The proper way, " said he, "is, not to go down tothe people; but to compel the people to come up to you. " He was fond ofa swelling, high-sounding, long-winded style. How far he succeeded inbringing people up to himself, I cannot say, but I recollect oncehearing a pupil of his talk a whole hour without uttering either athought or a feeling that was worth a straw. An old woman, with whom hehad once lived, and with whom he was a great favorite, said to me afterthe service, 'Well, how did you like our young man?' 'He talked away, 'said I. 'I think he did, ' she answered, 'he grows better and better. _I_couldn't understand him. ' His teacher, my superintendent, published avolume of sermons; but I never met with anybody that had read them. Iread one or two of them myself, and was astonished;--perhaps not so muchastonished as something else, --to find, that at the end of one of histall-worded, long-winded, round-about sentences, he contradicted what hehad said at the beginning. 

CHAPTER V. 

CHANGES IN THE AUTHOR'S VIEWS. 

My studies led me to make considerable changes both in my views and wayof speaking. 

1. With regard to my views. I found that some of the doctrines which Ihad been taught as Christian doctrines, were not so much as hinted at byChrist and His Apostles, --that some doctrines which Christ and HisApostles taught with great plainness, I never had been taught at all;and that some of the doctrines of Christ and His Apostles which I hadbeen taught, I had been taught in very different forms from those inwhich they were presented in the New Testament. 

I found that some doctrines which I had been taught as doctrines of thegreatest importance, were never so much as alluded to in the wholeBible, while in numbers of places quite contrary doctrines were taught. While unscriptural doctrines were inculcated as fundamental doctrines ofthe Gospel, some of the fundamental doctrines themselves were not onlyneglected, but denounced as grievous heresies. 

Many passages of Scripture which were perfectly plain when left to speakout their own meaning, had been used so badly by theologians, that theyhad become unintelligible to ordinary Christians. While professing togive the passages needful explanations, they had heaped upon themimpenetrable obscurations. Words that, as they came from Jesus, werespirit and life, had been so grievously perverted, that they had becomemeaningless or mischievous. 

I met with passages which had been used as proofs of doctrines to whichthey had not the slightest reference. There were the words of Jeremiahfor instance: "Can the Ethiopian change his skin, or the leopard hisspots?" The prophet is speaking of the impossibility of men, after longcontinuance in wilful sin, breaking off their bad habits; as the closingwords of the passage show; "Then may ye who are _accustomed_ to do evil, do well. " But the theologians took the words and used them in support ofthe doctrine that no man in his unconverted state can do anythingtowards his salvation, --a doctrine which is neither Scriptural norrational. Again; Isaiah, referring to the calamitous condition of theJewish nation, in consequence of God's judgments, says: "The whole headis sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot to thehead, there is no soundness; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefyingsores, " &c. This, which the prophet said with regard to the _state_ ofthe _Jews_, the theologians applied to the _character_, not of the Jewsonly, but of _all mankind_. What Paul said about the law of Moses, andthe works or deeds required by that law, the theologians applied to thelaw of Christ. And so with regard to multitudes of passages. I wasconstantly coming across passages that the theologians systematicallyperverted, taking them from their proper use and meaning, and forcingthem into the support of notions to which they had not the slightestreference. The liberties taken with the words of Paul went far towardsturning the writings of that great advocate and example of holiness intolessons of licentiousness. 

It was plain that, on many points, theology was one thing, andChristianity another; and that many and important changes would have tobe made in the creeds and confessions of Christendom, before they couldbe brought into harmony with the truth as taught by Jesus. 

Some theological doctrines I found rested on the authority of Milton'sParadise Lost, or of the Church of England Prayer Book, or on theauthority of earlier works from which Milton or the authors of thePrayer Book had borrowed. 

One day, about forty-two years ago, I was travelling homewards fromShields to Blyth on foot, when a man with a cart overtook me, and askedme to get in and ride. I did so. The man and I were soon busy discussingtheology. We talked on saving faith, imputed righteousness, predestination, divine foreknowledge, election, reprobation andredemption. We differed on every point, and the man got very warm. Hethen spake of a covenant made between God the Father and His Son beforethe creation of the world, giving me all the particulars of theengagement. I told him I had read something about a covenant of thatkind in Milton's Paradise Lost, but that I had never met with anythingon the subject in the sacred writings, and added that I doubted whetherany such transaction ever took place. He got more excited than ever, andexpressed some uneasiness at having such a blasphemous heretic in hiscart. Just then one of the cart wheels came off and down went thevehicle on one side, spilling me and the driver on the road. I wasquickly on my feet, but he lay on his back sprawling in the sand. "That's a judgment, " said he, "on your blasphemies. " "You seem to havegot the worst part of the judgment, " said I. I asked him if I could helphim. He seemed to hint that I ought to pay for the damage done to thecart; but as that was not in the covenant, I did not take the hint; andas he was in a somewhat unamiable temper, I left him to himself, andtrudged on homeward. The carter and I had no more discussions oncovenants. But many a bit of theology has been built on Milton sincethen. 

Other doctrines I found to be new versions of old pagan imaginations. 

Some seemed to have originated in the selfish and sensual principles ofhuman nature, which make men wishful to avoid self-denial and a life ofbeneficence, and to find some easy way to heaven. 

In some cases Protestants had run into extremes through a hatred andhorror of Popery, while in others orthodox teachers had run intoextremes through hatred and dread of Socinianism. 

In other cases doctrines seemed to have been rested on no authority butthe facts, or supposed facts, of individual experiences. 

Some great doctrines were rendered incomprehensible, repulsive, orincredible, in consequence of not being accompanied with otherdoctrines, which were necessary to explain their use, and make manifesttheir reasonableness and worth. There was no lack of attention amongtheologians to the doctrine that Christ was an incarnation of the Deity;but little or no regard was paid to the kindred doctrine, its necessaryaccompaniment, that Jesus was the 'image, ' the 'likeness, ' of God, therevelation or manifestation of His character. Yet this is essential to aright understanding and a due appreciation of the other. The revelationor manifestation of God, and especially of His eternal and infinitelove, was the great design and end of the incarnation. Taken apart fromthis doctrine the incarnation becomes a dry hard fact, without use ormeaning. It is when viewed as a means of revealing God, --of makingmanifest His infinite goodness, and by that means melting and purifyingman's heart, and transforming his character, that it is seen to be fullof interest and power and glory. 

The doctrine that Jesus is God's image, God manifest in the flesh, isthe one great doctrine of Christianity, --the sum, the substance of thewhole Gospel, --the Gospel itself, --the power of God to the salvation ofevery one that truly believes and contemplates it. It is a world oftruth in one, --a whole encyclopædia of divine philosophy; the perfectionof all wisdom and of all power; the one great revelation needful to thesalvation of the world. 

Yet I never met with this doctrine for the first thirty years of mylife, in any theological work. I have no recollection that I ever heardit mentioned in a sermon. I certainly never heard it explained andapplied to the great purposes for which it was designed. I never wastold that to know the character of God, I had only to look at thecharacter of Christ, --that what Christ was during His life on earth inthe circle in which He moved, that God was throughout all worlds, andtowards all the creatures of His hands, --that the love which led Jesusto suffer and die for the salvation of the world, lived and moved in theheart of the infinite, invisible God, prompting Him to plan and laborthroughout immensity to promote the happiness of the whole creation. Inshort, the Gospel was never preached to me in its simplicity and beauty, in its glory and power, nor was it ever properly explained to me incatechism, creed, confession, or body of divinity. 

And generally, no sufficient stress was ever laid by theologians on thevalue and necessity of personal virtue, --of religious and moralgoodness. It was believed that Christians would _have_ goodness of somekind, in some degree, --that they would be, on the whole, in somerespects, better than the ungodly world; and there was a feeling thatthey _ought_ to be so: but it was rare to meet with a preacher or abook that put the subject in any thing like a Scriptural Christianlight. No one contended that goodness was everything, that it was theone great all-glorious object for which the world was made, for whichthe universe was upheld, for which prophets spake, for which theScriptures were written, for which God became incarnate, for which Jesuslived and labored, for which He suffered and died, for which He foundedHis Church and appointed and endowed its ministers, for which Providenceplanned, and for which all things continued to exist. No one taught thatgoodness was the only thing for which God cared, the only thing which Heesteemed and loved, and the only thing He would reward and bless. Booksand preachers did not use to tell us, that faith, and knowledge, andfeeling, --that repentance, conversion, and sanctification, --that readingthe Scriptures, and hearing sermons, and singing hymns, and offeringprayers, --that church fellowship, and religious ordinances, were allnothing except so far as they tended to make people good, and then tomake them better, and at last to perfect them in all divine and humanexcellence. No one taught us that goodness was beauty, that goodness wasgreatness, that goodness was glory, that goodness was happiness, thatgoodness was heaven. The truth was never pressed on us that the want ofgoodness was deformity, dishonor and shame, --that it was pain, andwretchedness, and torment, and death, --that goodness in full measurewould make earth heaven--that its decline and disappearance would makeearth hell. Yet a careful and long-continued perusal of the Scripturesleft the impression on my mind, that this was really the case. When Icompared the eternal talk about all our goodness being of no account inthe sight of God, --of all our righteousness being but as filthyrags, --with the teachings of Scripture, I felt as if theologians wereanti-christ, and their theology the gospel of the wicked one. I have nowish to do injustice to theology, or to theologians either; but the moreI knew of them, the less I thought of them. And even when the Christianand theologian got blended, as they did, to some extent, in such men asBaxter and Wesley, I pitied the theologian while I esteemed and lovedthe Christian. Theological works are poor contemptible things. It wouldhave been no great loss to the world if nineteen-twentieths of them hadbeen burnt in the Chicago fire. 

I was often grievously harassed with prevailing theories of Scriptureinspiration. All those theories seemed inconsistent withfacts, --inconsistent with what every man of any information, knew to betrue in reference to the Scriptures. They all lay open to infidelobjections, --unanswerable objections. They made it impossible for a manto argue with the abler and better informed class of infidel assailantswith the success and satisfaction desirable. The theories did not_admit_ of a successful defence. And when the theories were refuted, theBible and Christianity suffered. On searching the Scriptures I foundthey gave no countenance to those theories. They taught the _doctrine_of Scripture inspiration, but not the prevailing _theories_ of thedoctrine. The doctrine I could defend with ease: the defence of thetheories was impossible. I accordingly laid aside the theories. 

Again; I heard and read continually about the influence and work of theHoly Spirit; but I seldom heard and read of the influence of the truth. Yet in Scripture we read as much and as often of the latter as of theformer. 

I had been led, in some way, to believe that Adam was the federal headof all mankind, --that God made a covenant with him that was binding onall his posterity, --that the destinies of the whole human race wereplaced in his hands, --that it was so arranged that if Adam did right, his posterity were to be born in a state of perfection and blessedness, incapable of sin and misery, --that if he did wrong they were to be borndepraved and miserable, under the curse of God, and liable to death anddamnation--that as Adam did do wrong, we all came into the world sodepraved that we were incapable of thinking a good thought, of feeling agood desire, of speaking a right word, or of doing a right thing, --thatJesus came into the world to redeem us from the guilt of Adam's sin, andfrom the punishment due to us for that sin, and to put us on such afooting with regard to God as to render possible our salvation. I hadbeen led to believe a hundred other things connected with these aboutthe plan of redemption, the way of salvation, imputed righteousness, saving faith, &c. When I came to look for those doctrines in the Bible, I could not find one of them from the beginning of the Book to the end. I was in consequence led to regard them as the imaginations ofunthinking, trifling, or dreamy theologians. 

There are few doctrines more generally received than the doctrine oftypes, --the doctrine that persons and things under the olderdispensations were intended to direct the minds of those who saw them tothings corresponding to them under the Christian dispensation. InMcEwen's work on Types, which appears to have had an immensecirculation, is this sentence, --'That the grand doctrines ofChristianity concerning the mediation of Christ, &c. , were typically_manifested_ to the church by a variety of ceremonies, persons andevents, under the Old Testament dispensation, is past doubt. ' And it isvery plainly intimated, that those who affect to call this notion inquestion, and yet pretend to be friends of a divine revelation, arehypocrites. It is added: 'The sacrifices were ordained to pre-figureChrist, --and were professions of faith in His propitiation. '

There are but few preachers or religious books which do not go on thesupposition that this doctrine is taught in Scripture. And you may hearsermon after sermon from some preachers, the chief object of which is topoint out correspondences between the paschal lamb, the scape-goat, andother sacrifices under the Law, and Jesus and the sacrifice which Heoffered. Some preachers and religious writers take almost all thingsunder the law to be types of Christ, or types of things pertaining toHim. They make Noah, and Isaac, and Melchisedec, and Joseph, and Moses, and Joshua, and David, and Samson, and Solomon, and the brazen serpent, and the rod of Aaron, and the manna, types of Christ, and almost all thesacrifices they make types of His great sacrifice of Himself. 

I could see no warrant for this doctrine. I could find no proof that anyof the sacrifices under the law were intended to direct the minds ofthose who offered them to the sacrifice of Jesus. There is nothing inthe law, and there is nothing in the prophets to that effect. There isno passage of Scripture which says that any one ever _did_ look throughthe old Levitical sacrifices to Christ. There is no passage which saysit was men's duty to do so; none which commends any one for doing so, or which blames any one for not doing so. The prophets often rebuke theIsraelites for their injustice, intemperance, deceit and cruelty, butthey never rebuke them for not looking through their sacrifices to thesacrifice of Jesus. They often exhort people to 'cease to do evil andlearn to do well;' but they never urge them to regard their sacrificesas types or manifestations of the sacrifice of Christ. Christ nowhereteaches the ordinary doctrine of types. He never refers to anything as atype of His sacrifice, or of anything else connected with His work. Nordo the Apostles say anything to countenance the prevailing notion. Foranything the Scriptures say to the contrary, the whole doctrine oftypes, as set forth in such books as that of McEwen, is a human fiction. Indeed, I see no hint in Scripture that any one had the least idea thatthe Messiah would offer Himself a sacrifice for sin till after thesacrifice had taken place. Isaiah and Daniel spake on the subject, and'They inquired and searched diligently, ' says Peter, 'what, or whatmanner of time the spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, whenit testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory thatshould follow; unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, butunto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you bythem that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sentdown from Heaven. ' And we know that Christ's own disciples did notbelieve that Christ would die at all. So far were they from having anythought of such a thing, that when Jesus told them, in the plainestwords imaginable, they did not understand Him. The fact had to revealitself. And even now the nature and end of Christ's sacrifice are butvery imperfectly understood. 

And if the doctrine of types falls to the ground, some other doctrines, which rest upon it, must go down. Certain notions about the faith of theancient saints must give way, and the views of saving faith presented inthe eleventh chapter of the Epistle to the Hebrews must take theirplace. 

Great numbers of religious teachers and writers attribute to Adam andEve, in their first state, an amount of knowledge, and a perfection ofrighteousness, which the Scriptures nowhere ascribe to them, and which, if they had possessed them, would have rendered it impossible, onewould think, that they should have yielded so readily to temptation. 

They represent the first sin as having effects which are neverattributed to it in the Bible. 

They give an unwarrantable meaning to the word death contained in thefirst threatening. 

They attribute to man's first sin inconveniences of the seasons, and ofthe different climates of the globe, as well as a thousand things on theearth's surface, and in the dispositions and habits of the loweranimals, which are not attributed _to_ that cause by the sacred writers. 

They spend a vast amount of time and words in trying to prove that thereason why Abel's sacrifice was more excellent than that of Cain, andwas accepted by God, was that Abel offered animals, and had an eye tothe sacrifice of Christ, while Cain offered only the fruits of theground, that did not typify or symbolize that sacrifice; a notion forwhich there is no authority in Scripture. The story in Genesis seems tointimate that the sacrifice of Cain was rejected because he was abad-living man, and that the sacrifice of Abel was accepted because hewas a good-living man. Hence the words of God in His address to Cain, 'Why art thou wroth? And why is thy countenance fallen? If thou doestwell shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin liethat the door. ' And hence too the statement of John, that Cain slew hisbrother because his own works were evil and his brother's righteous. Andthe faith attributed to Abel, as well as to Enoch, Moses and others, inthe Epistle to the Hebrews, is not faith in the sacrifice of Christ, butsimply a belief in God; a belief that 'He _is_, and that He is arewarder of them that diligently seek Him, or lovingly serve Him. '

There were many definitions and descriptions of saving faith common inreligious books for which I could find no authority in Scripture. 

I also met with a multitude of cold hard things about the Trinity andthe Atonement in works on Theology which I never was unhappy enough tofind in the Bible. All seemed pleasant and natural and of heavenlytendency there. I read books which seemed to require me to believe inthree Gods; but I met with nothing of the kind in Scripture. I heardprayers and forms of benediction worded in a way altogether differentfrom the prayers and benedictions found in the Bible. The Scripturesallowed me to think of God, in the first place, as one, as I myself wasone. They did not tell me He was three in the same way as I was three;but they left the doctrine of the Trinity in such a state or shape thatI found no more difficulty in receiving it, than I found in receivingthe fact of a Trinity in myself. I left accordingly the hard repulsiverepresentations of the theologians to their fate, and accepted andcontented myself with the living, rational and practical representationsof Scripture in their stead. 

The work of Christ was generally represented by theologians as exertingits influence directly on God. His death was generally spoken of as asatisfaction to divine justice, or as an expedient for harmonizing thedivine attributes, or maintaining the principles of the divinegovernment. God was represented as being placed in a difficulty, --asbeing unable to gratify His love in forgiving men on their repenting andturning to Him, without violating His justice and His truth, and puttingin peril the principles of His government. There were several othertheological theories of the design or object of the death of Christ. Allthese theories may be true in a certain sense. They may, perhaps, be soexplained as to make them harmonize with the teachings of Scripture. ButI found none of them in the Bible. I found multitudes of passages whichrepresented the death and sufferings of Christ as intended to influencemen, but not one that taught any of the theological theories, --hardlyone that even seemed to do so. Here again I took the Scripturerepresentations, and allowed the theological ones to slide. 

There was a hymn which said of Christ, 'Our debt He has paid, and ourwork He has done. ' I could find nothing in Scripture about the Saviourpaying our debt, or doing our work. I could find passages which taughtthat our debts or sins might be _forgiven_, on our return to God. So farwere the Scriptures from teaching that Christ had done our work, thatthey represented Him as coming into the world to fit us to do itourselves, --as redeeming us and creating us anew that we might bezealous of good works. 

I could find nothing in Scripture to countenance the common notion aboutthe efficacy of the death-bed repentances of old, wilful, hardenedsinners. The Bible left on my mind the impression that 'whatsoever a mansoweth, that shall he also reap. '

Some preachers and writers spoke as if God the Father was sterner, lesstender and loving, than the Son. But as we have seen, the Bible taughtthat Jesus was God's image, His likeness, the incarnation and revelationof God, --God manifest in the flesh. 

I read in books, and heard it said in sermons, that God did not answermen's prayers, or grant them any blessing, or receive them at last toheaven, on account of anything good in themselves, or of anything goodthey did. Yet on looking through the Scriptures I found such passages asthese: 'Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, _then_ have we confidencetoward God. And whatsoever we ask, we receive of Him, because we keepHis commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in His sight. 'In the parable of the talents I found God represented as saying, 'Welldone, thou good and faithful servant, because thou hast been faithful ina very little, have thou authority over ten cities. ' And in the ProphetI read, 'Again, when the wicked man turneth away from his wickednessthat he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, heshall save his soul alive. Because he considereth and turneth away fromall his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, heshall not die. ' I found the whole Bible going on the same principle. Godloves what is good for its own sake. It would be strange if He did not. And how any one can think He is honoring God by teaching the contrary wecannot understand. 

CHAPTER VI. 

JOHN WESLEY AND HIS VIEWS ON CERTAIN POINTS. 

How easy it is for men to mix up their own fancies, or the vain conceitsof others, with divine truth, --or rather, how hard it is to _avoid_doing so, --we may see by the case of John Wesley. Wesley was one of themost devout, and conscientious, and, on the whole, one of the mostrational, Scriptural, practical and common-sense men the ChristianChurch ever had. Compared with theologians generally, he was worthy ofthe highest praise. He had the greatest reverence for the Scriptures. Heearly in life declared it to be his determination to be _a man of oneBook_, and that one book the BIBLE; and he acted in accordancewith this determination to the best of his knowledge and ability. TheBible was his sole authority. Its testimony decided all questions, settled all controversies. Yet such was the influence of prevailingcustom in the theological world, operating on his mind unconsciouslyfrom his earliest days, that he unintentionally acted inconsistentlywith this good resolution in cases without number. Shakespeare makes oneof his characters say, "If to do, were as easy as to know what isfittest to be done, beggars would ride on horses, and poor men'scottages would be princes' palaces. I could more easily tell twenty menwhat it was best to do, than be one of the twenty to carry out my owninstructions. " And we need no better proof or illustration of the truthof this wise saying, than the case of the good and great John Wesley. 

We have seen what his resolution was. Look now at one or two of hissermons. Take first the sermon on God's Approbation of His Works. Inthat discourse, referring to the primeval earth, he speaks as follows:"The _whole surface_ of it was beautiful in a high degree. The_universal face_ was clothed with living green. And every part was_fertile_ as well as beautiful. It was no where deformed by rough orragged rocks: it did not shock the view with horrid precipices, hugechasms, or dreary caverns: with deep, impassable morasses, or desertsof barren sands. We have not any authority to say, with some learned andingenious authors, that there were no _mountains_ on the original earth, no unevennesses on its surface, yet it is highly probable that they roseand fell, by almost insensible degrees. 

"There were no agitations within the bowels of the globe: no violentconvulsions: no concussions of the earth: no earthquakes: but all wasunmoved as the pillars of heaven. There were then no such things aseruptions of fire: there were no volcanoes, or burning mountains. Neither Vesuvius, Etna, nor Hecla, if they had any being, then pouredout smoke and flame, but were covered with a verdant mantle, from thetop to the bottom. 

"It is probable there was no external sea in the paradisiacal earth:none, until the great deep burst the barriers which were originallyappointed for it; indeed there was not then that need of the ocean for_navigation_ which there is now. For either every country producedwhatever was requisite either for the necessity or comfort of itsinhabitants; or man being then (as he will be again at the resurrection)equal to the angels, was able to convey himself, at his pleasure, to anygiven distance. 

"There were no putrid lakes, no turbid or stagnating waters. The elementof _air_ was then always serene, and always friendly to man. Itcontained no frightful meteors, no unwholesome vapors, no poisonousexhalations. There were no tempests, but only cool and gentle breezes, fanning both man and beast, and wafting the fragrant odors on theirsilent wings. 

"The sun, the fountain of _fire_, 'Of this great world both eye andsoul, ' was situated at the most exact distance from the earth, so as toyield a sufficient quantity of heat, (neither too little nor too much)to _every part of it_. God had not yet 'Bid his angels turn askance thisoblique globe. ' There was, therefore, then no country that groaned under'The rage of Arctos, and eternal frost. ' There was no violent winter, orsultry summer; no extreme either of heat or cold. No soil was burned upby the solar heat: none uninhabitable through the want of it. 

"There were then no impetuous currents of air, no tempestuous winds, nofurious hail, no torrents of rain, no rolling thunders or forkylightnings. _One perennial spring was perpetually smiling over the wholesurface of the earth. _"

Speaking of vegetable productions, he says, "There were no weeds, no plants that encumbered the ground. Much lesswere there any _poisonous_ ones, tending to hurt any one creature. "

Referring to the living creatures of the sea, he says, "None of these then attempted to devour, or in any wise hurt oneanother. All were peaceful and quiet, as were the watery fields whereinthey ranged at pleasure. "

Referring to insects, he adds, "The spider was then as harmless as the fly, and did not then lie inwait for blood. The weakest of them crept securely over the earth, orspread their gilded wings in the air, that wavered in the breeze andglittered in the sun, without any to make them afraid. Meantime, thereptiles of every kind were equally harmless, and more intelligent thanthey. "

Referring to birds and beasts, he says, "Among all these there were no birds or beasts of prey: none thatdestroyed or molested another. "

All this may be very beautiful poetry, such as one might expect from the"fine frenzy" of a loving, lawless genius, but it is not Scripture, noris it science or philosophy. We have not a doubt but that God made allthings _right_, --that all His works were very _good_; the Scripturestell us that very plainly: but they do _not_ tell us that the thingsnamed by Wesley constituted their goodness. _He_ thinks that the earthcould not be good if it had on its surface rough or rugged rocks, horridprecipices, huge chasms, or dreary caverns, with impassable morasses, ordeserts of barren sands. _We_ think _otherwise_. _We_ think the earth isall the _better_, and even all the more _beautiful_ for rough and ruggedrocks, for horrid precipices, huge chasms, and dreary caverns. So farfrom regarding the rough and rugged rocks as deformities, we look onthem as ornaments. So far from appearing to us as an evil, they appear agood. Even the impassable morasses, and the deserts of barren sands mayhave their use. If man had met with nothing in the state of the earththat stood in the way of his will or pleasure; if he had met withnothing in the shape of difficulty or inconvenience, it would have beena terrible calamity. All man's powers are developed and perfected byexertion; and without exertion, --without vigorous exertion--he wouldnot, as at present constituted, be capable of enjoying life. Man cannotbe happy without work. We therefore believe that it was wise and kind inGod, independent of Adam's sin, to make impassable morasses, and barrendeserts, &c. , to exercise man's powers of mind and body in _draining_the morasses, and _fertilizing_ the deserts. We believe that the earthwas very good; but we believe that the rough and rugged rocks, thehorrid precipices, huge chasms, dreary caverns, with the deep impassablemorasses, and the deserts of barren sands, were _parts_ of the earth'sgoodness, --were manifestations both of the wisdom and goodness of God. 

Wesley thinks there _were_ mountains on the earth before sin wascommitted, but that their sides were not _abrupt_ or _difficult ofascent_; that they rose and fell by almost _insensible degrees_. Thispassage also goes on the false supposition, that whatever things wouldbe likely to render great exertion necessary on the part of man, wouldbe an evil; whereas such things are among man's greatest blessings. 

Wesley farther tells us, that there were no agitations within the bowelsof the earth, no violent convulsions, no concussions of the earth, noearthquakes, no eruptions of fire, no volcanoes, or burning mountains. There is proof however, that there were _all_ these things, not only_before sin was committed_, but _before man himself was created_. 

Nor do we regard earthquakes and volcanoes as evils. They are calculatedeven at the present to answer good ends. They tend to make men feeltheir absolute dependence upon God, and thus lead them to obey His law. They are sinking revelations of God's power, and perpetual lessons ofpiety. And they have other uses. 

He says, "If Vesuvius, Etna, or Hecla, existed before sin was committed, they were covered with a verdant mantle from the top to the bottom. " Butis a mountain either better or more beautiful for being covered with averdant mantle from the top to the bottom? Is it either better or morebeautiful for having no abrupt sides, difficult of ascent, --for risingand falling by almost insensible degrees? We think the contrary. Thevariety of scenery presented by mountains in their present state, ismost beautiful. The abruptness of the sides of mountains contributesinfinitely both to the beauty of the mountain, and to the beauty of theearth in general; and the toil of climbing up the steep ascent of amountain is one of the blessings and pleasures of life. We should besorry if there were no hills so steep as to be difficult of ascent. Weshould be sorry if the earth had no mountains with abrupt sides, andblack, and brown, and rugged faces. We should be very sorry if the faceof the earth were covered with one unvaried mantle of green. Green isvery pleasant, and it is well that the greater part of the earth iscovered with green; but variety also is pleasant; and green itself wouldcease to be pleasant if there were nothing else but green. 

Wesley adds, that there was probably no sea on the surface of the earthin its paradisiacal state, none until the great deep burst the barrierswhich were originally appointed for it; and he adds, that there was notthen that need of the ocean for navigation which there is now, as everyplace yielded all that was necessary to man's welfare and pleasure. Weanswer. The idea that the ocean was given to facilitate communicationbetween different nations, makes us smile. Suppose there had been noocean, should we have had a long way to go to get into the next country, the country nearest to us? Just the contrary. If there had been noocean, there would have been land in its place, and we should neitherhave had to cross water nor land to get to it. It would have come upclose to our own country. We have all the same travelling in order tohave communication with the inhabitants of other countries when we havecrossed the ocean, that we should have had, to obtain communication withneighboring countries, if there had been no ocean at all. The ocean wasintended for _other_ purposes. The use of the ocean, one of its_principal_ uses at least, is to temper the climates and seasons of theearth. If the earth were one unbroken continent, the summers would beintolerably hot, and the winters would be intolerably cold, and thechanges from winter to summer would be so violent, and work such fearfulhavoc, as to render the earth uninhabitable. By means of the _ocean_, those intolerable inconveniences are avoided. The sea, which is neverso cold in winter as the land, tempers the air as it blows over it, andthus moderates the cold of the land. The sea also, which is never sowarm in summer as the land, tempers the air again, and breathes coolnessand freshness over the heated land. Neither heat nor cold affects thesea so suddenly or so violently as it affects the land. A few days ofsummer heat are sufficient to make the solid earth quite hot, --so hot, in many cases, that you cannot bear your naked hand upon it long. Yetthis same amount of summer heat will make scarcely any perceptibledifference in the waters of the ocean. Then again, in winter, a few dayssevere frost will make the solid earth, and especially the stones andmetals, so cold, that they would blister a delicate skin, if pressedagainst them; while they make scarcely any perceptible difference uponthe waters of the ocean. The ocean sits on its low throne like themonarch of this lower world, controlling the elements, tempering theheat and the cold, and thus preserving the earth and its livinginhabitants from harm. 

Wesley tells us farther, that before the sin of Adam, "The air wasalways serene and always friendly to man. " Now the air is still always_friendly to man_. Even when it comes in the form of hurricanes andtempests, it is so. It is doing work, even then, _good work_, whichgentle breezes are _unable_ to do. It is carrying away dangers whichgentler currents of air would not have the power to carry away. And evenwhen they cause destruction in their course, they are still performingfriendly offices to man. They are inspiring him with a livelierconsciousness of his absolute dependence upon God, and of the folly ofresisting His will. They are exercising his intellectual powers, byleading him to devise means for his protection from their fury, andobliging him also to exert his bodily powers in carrying out the devicesof his intellect. They are, in fact, contributing to make him a wiser, astronger, a better, a happier, and in all respects, a completer, and adiviner being than he otherwise would be. We agree therefore with Wesleythat the air before Adam sinned was always _friendly to man_; but we donot agree with him in his notions as to what _constituted_ itsfriendliness; nor do we agree with him in the notion, that since thesin of Adam the air has _ceased_ to be friendly, or even proved to be_less_ friendly, to man. We believe that the air is as friendly to mannow as it ever was, --that it does him as little mischief, that itcontributes as much to his well-being and comfort, as it ever did. 

Wesley further says, the sun was situated at the most exact distancefrom the earth, so as to yield a sufficient quantity of heat, neithertoo little nor too much, to every part of it. Ho further intimates thatthere was at first no inclination of the earth's axis, and that theseasons and the degree of heat and cold were, in consequence, the sameall the world over, and all the year round. All these statements seemerroneous in the extreme. The supply of heat to the different parts ofthe earth does not depend altogether on the distance of the sun from theearth, as Wesley intimates, but on the motions of the earth around thesun and upon its own axis. Wesley seems to imagine that if the axis ofthe earth were not inclined, or elevated at one end, the earth wouldreceive from the sun the same quantity of heat through every part;whereas nothing could be farther from the truth. If, as Wesley expressesit, "This oblique globe had not been turned askance, " some parts of theearth would have received from the sun scarcely any heat at all; theywould have received neither light nor heat, except in such slightmeasures as to be altogether useless. The arctic regions and theantarctic regions must have been alike uninhabitable. That turning ofthe oblique globe askance, which Wesley represents as the cause ofextreme heat and cold, was the very thing to _prevent_ those extremes, or to reduce them to the lowest possible point, and to secure to everypart of the globe, as _far as possible_, an _equal_ amount of light andwarmth. I say _as far as possible_; for to secure to every part of theearth exactly the same amount of light and heat from one sun, isimpossible. Place a little globe in what position you will with respectto a neighboring candle, and fix the axis of that globe as you please, and move that globe; give the globe a motion upon its own axis, andanother motion round the light near which it is placed, and you willfind it impossible to secure to every part of that globe exactly thesame amount of light and heat. By inclining the axis of the globe, or asWesley expresses it, turning it askance, as the axis of the earth isinclined or turned askance, you may secure the _greatest possibleequality_ of light and heat to every part; but still that greatestpossible equality will be a considerable _inequality_. So far, therefore, from the polar regions being made colder or darker by theglobe being turned askance, they are indebted to that very obliquenessof the earth's axis, and that apparent irregularity of its motions, forthe chief portion of that light and heat which they receive. How Wesleycame to speak so erroneously on this subject, I am at a loss to know, ashe must, one would think, have understood the first elements ofgeography and astronomy. Yet his words are at variance with the firstelements of those popular sciences. 

But it would take up too much room to notice all the unauthorizedstatements of Mr. Wesley on this subject. We have said enough to showhow the most conscientious and best-intentioned man may err ontheological subjects, and what need young Christians have to be somewhatcritical and careful in adopting and testing their religious opinions. There are other sermons of Wesley which are as much at variance withScripture as the one we have had under notice. I have not his sermons athand just now, but if I remember right, his remarks on the righteousnessof the Scribes and Pharisees, in his sermon on that subject, are quiteat variance with the statements of Christ. 

And Wesley was one of the best, one of the most honest andconscientious, one of the most single-minded men on the face of theearth. No man, I imagine, was ever more anxious to be right, --no one wasever more desirous to know and teach God's truth in all its purity, andin everything to do God's will and bless mankind. And he knew and chosethe right standard of truth and goodness, and honestly endeavored toconform to it both in thought and deed and word. Yet he could err inthis strange and wholesale way. What then may we expect from othertheological writers? Many of the theologians whose writings influencethe Church were _not_ very good men; they were selfish, ambitious, proudand worldly. Some were idle, dreamy, careless, godless. And others, whowere piously disposed, never deliberately adopted the Bible as theirrule of faith and practice. They never set themselves to conform to it, as the standard of truth and goodness. They adopted or inherited thefaiths or traditions of their predecessors, never suspecting them oferror, and never inquiring whether they were true or not. The idea oftesting or correcting either their way of thinking or their way oftalking on religious subjects, by the teachings of Christ, never enteredtheir minds. They lived at ease, dreaming rather than thinking, andtalking in their sleep, and filling great folios with their idleutterances. What kind of thoughts, and what kind of words were we likelyto find in the writings of men like these? Robert Hall is reported tohave described the works of the celebrated John Owen as "A CONTINENT OFMUD. " There are others whose writings might be justly described asvolumes of smoke. Mere wind they are not, but foul, black, blindingsmoke. And writings of this description are published or republished ingreat quantities to the present day. And people read them, and fillthemselves with wind and filthy fumes, and wrap themselves in smoky, pitchy clouds, and go through the world in a spiritual darkness thickenough to be felt. 

This smoke, this blackness and darkness, I could not endure. I wasanxious beyond measure to free myself from its bewildering and blindingpower, and to get into the clear fresh air, and the bright and cheerfullight, of simple Christian truth. And hence the freedom and eagerness ofmy investigations, and the liberty I took in modifying my belief. 

It may be said that many of the doctrines which I have set down asunscriptural, are of little importance; and that is really the case. Weought, therefore, to be the more ready to give them up. Why contend fordoctrines of no moment? But some of them _are_ important. They arerevolting and mischievous errors, and when they are regarded as parts ofChristianity, they tend to make men infidels. And in many cases theystagger the faith, and lessen the comfort, and injure the souls ofChristians. And even the less important ones do harm when taken to beparts of the religion of Christ. You cannot make thoughtful, sharp-visioned men believe that Jesus came into the world, and lived anddied to propagate trifles. Trifles therefore are no longer trifles whenset forth as Christian doctrines. And we have enough to believe andthink about without occupying our minds with childish fancies. And wehave things enough of high importance to preach and write about, withoutspending our time and strength on idle dreams. 

And the apparently harmless fictions prop up the hurtful ones. And theylessen the influence of great truths. And they make religion appearsuspicious or contemptible to men of sense. They disgust some. They giveoccasion to the adversaries to speak reproachfully. 

And if you tolerate fictions at all in Christianity, where will youstop? And if you do not stop somewhere, Christianity will disappear, anda mass of worthless and disgusting follies will take its place. The newcreation will vanish, and chaos come again. 

And again. A large proportion of the controversies of the Church areabout men's inventions. Christ's own doctrines do not so often provokeopposition as the traditions of the elders; nor do they, when assailed, require so much defending. They defend themselves. "The devil's way ofundoing, " says Baxter, "is by overdoing. To bring religious zeal intodisrepute, he makes some zealous to madness, to persecution, to blood. To discredit freedom he urges its advocates into lawlessness. Todiscredit Christian morality, he induces some to carry it to the extremeof asceticism. To discredit needful authority, he makes rulers of theState into despots, and persuades the rulers of the Church to claiminfallibility. To discredit Christianity, he adds to it humaninventions. " Wesley has a similar sentiment. "If you place Christianperfection too high, you drive it out of the world. " And it is certain, that an infinite amount of hostility to Christianity is owing to thefolly of divines in supplementing its simple and practical doctrines, byspeculative and unintelligible theories. "The one great evidence of thedivinity of Christianity, " says one, "the master-evidence, the evidencewith which all other evidences will stand or fall, is Christ Himselfspeaking by His own word. " But if you add to His words foolish fancies, or revolting absurdities, or immoral speculations of your own, youdestroy that evidence. You make men infidels. 

There are multitudes at the present day to whom you must presentreligion in an intelligible and rational, and in a grave and commandinglight, if you would induce them to give it their serious attention. Youcan no more interest them in mysteries and nonsense, in speculative andunpractical fictions, than you can change the course of nature. The timefor theological trifling is gone by. The time has gone by for any formof religion to make its way which does not consist in solid goodness, orwhich teaches doctrines, or uses forms, that do not tend to promotesolid goodness. If religion is to secure the attention of the world, --ifit is to command their respect, their reverence and their love, --if itis to conquer their hearts, and govern their lives, and satisfy theirsouls, --if it is to become the great absorbing subject of man's thought, and the governing power of our race, it must be so presented, as toprove itself in harmony with all that is highest and best in man'snature, with all that is most beautiful and useful in life, and with allthat is beneficent and glorious in the universe. 

In a word, old dreamy theologies with their barbarous dialects and sillynotions, must be dropped and left to die, and the Church and theministry must live, and act, and talk as men who are dealing with thegrandest and most interesting and important realities. 

CHAPTER VII. 

FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS AND THEIR RESULTS. 

As my readers will have seen before this, the changes in my views wererather numerous, if not always of great importance. And the cases I havegiven are but samples of many other changes. The fact is, I pared awayfrom my creed everything that was not plainly Scriptural. I threw asideall human theories, all mere guesses about religious matters. I alsodismissed all forced or fanciful interpretations of Scripture passages. I endeavored to free Christian doctrines from all corruptions, perversions, or exaggerations, retaining only the pure and simpleteachings of Christ and the sacred writings. I accepted only thoseinterpretations of Scripture, which were in accordance with the objectand drift of the writer, with common sense, and with the general tenorof the sacred volume. I paid special regard to the plainest and mostpractical portions of Scripture. I paid no regard to doctrines groundedon solitary passages, or on texts of doubtful meaning, while numeroustexts, with their meaning on their very faces, taught oppositedoctrines. I would accept nothing that seemed irrational from anyquarter, unless required to do so by the plain unquestionable oracles ofGod. I could see no propriety in Christians encumbering their minds andclogging religion with notions bearing plain and palpable marks ofinconsistency or absurdity. And if a doctrine presented itself indifferent religious writers in a variety of forms, I always took theform which seemed most in harmony with reason and the plainest teachingsof Scripture. Some writers seemed to take pleasure in presenting suchdoctrines as the Trinity, the Atonement, Salvation by Faith, EternalPunishment, &c. , in the most incredible and repulsive forms, strainingand wresting the Scriptures to justify their mischievous extravagances. Other writers would say no more on those subjects than the Scripturessaid, and would put what the Scriptures said in such a light as torender it "worthy of all acceptation. " As a matter of course, the latterkind of writers became my favorites. Indeed the Scriptures seemed alwaysto favor what appeared most rational in the various creeds. TheScriptures and common sense seemed always in remarkable harmony. Thedoctrines which clashed with reason seemed also to clash with Scripture:and I felt that in rejecting such doctrines I was promoting the honor ofGod and of Christ, and rendering a service to the Church andChristianity. 

I was sometimes rather tried by the unwarranted and inconsideratestatements of my brother ministers. Take an instance. A preacher onenight, in a sermon to which I was listening, said, "How great is thelove of God to fallen man! Angels sinned, and were doomed at once toeverlasting damnation. No Saviour interposed to bring them back toholiness and heaven. No ambassador was sent with offers of pardon tobeseech them to be reconciled to God. Man sins, and the Deity Himselfbecomes incarnate. All the machinery of nature and all the resources ofHeaven are employed to save him from destruction. One sin shuts up ineverlasting despair millions of spiritual beings, while a thousandtransgressions are forgiven to man. "

Now this doctrine, instead of reflecting peculiar glory on God, seemedto me to savor of blasphemy. It is no honor to be partial or capricious;it is a reproach. A father that should be tenderly indulgent to one ofhis children, and rigidly severe to the rest, would be regarded withindignation. The doctrine of Divine partiality shocks both our reasonand our moral feelings. And it is not scriptural. The Bible says nothingabout God dooming the rebellious angels to perdition for one sin, without any attempt to bring them back to obedience; but it does saythat God is good to all, and that His tender mercies are over all Hisworks. I accordingly rejected the doctrine. There was quite a multitudeof _doctrines_ which entered into the sermons of many of my brotherministers, which never found their way into mine. And there weredoctrines which entered into my discourses, which never found their wayinto theirs. And the doctrines which we held and preached in common, weoften presented in very different forms, and put into very differentwords. They could say a multitude of things which I could not say;things which I could find no kind of warrant for saying. When we mettogether after hearing each other preach, we had at times long talksabout our different views and ways of preaching. I was free inexpressing my thoughts and feelings, especially in the earlier years ofmy ministry, and our conversations were often very animated. 

In some circuits, I induced my colleagues to join me in establishingweekly meetings for mutual improvement in religious knowledge. At eachmeeting an essay was read, on some subject agreed upon at a formermeeting, and after the essay had been read we discussed the merits bothof the sentiments it embodied, and of the style in which it waswritten. When it was my turn to prepare an essay, I generally introducedone or more of the points on which I and my colleagues differed, for thepurpose of having them discussed. I stated my views with the utmostfreedom, and gave every encouragement to my colleagues to state theirswith equal freedom in return. When my colleagues read their productions, I pointed out what I thought erroneous or defective with great plainnessand fidelity. I was anxious both to learn and to teach, and it was mydelight, as it was my duty and business, to endeavor to do both. I wasnot, however, so anxious to change the views of my friends as I was toexcite in them a thirst for knowledge. And indeed I did not consider itof so much importance that a man should accept a certain number oftruths, or particular doctrines, as that he should have a sinceredesire, and make suitable endeavors to understand all truth. It wasidleness, indifference, a state of mental stagnation, a readinesscarelessly to accept whatever might come in the way without once tryingto test it by Scripture or reason, that I particularly disliked; and tocure or abate this evil, I exerted myself to the utmost. 

When I was stationed in Newcastle in 1831, I met with Foster's Essays, which I read with a great deal of eagerness and pleasure. One of theseEssays is "On some of the Causes by which Evangelical Religion has beenRendered Unacceptable to Persons of Cultivated Taste?" Among his remarkson this subject, he has some to the following effect:--

1. Christianity is the religion of many weak, uncultivated andlittle-minded people, and they, by their unwise ways of talking aboutit, and by their various defects of character, make religion look weak, and poor, and unreasonable. And many receive their impression or ideasof the character of Christianity more from the exhibitions given of itby the religious people with whom they come in contact, than from theexhibition given of it in the life and teachings of its great Author, orfrom the characters and writings of His Apostles. An intelligent andcultivated man, for instance, falls into the company of Christianswho know little either of the teachings of Christ, or of thewonderful facts which go to prove their truth and their infiniteexcellency--Christians who never trouble themselves about such matters, and who look on it as no good sign when people show a disposition toinquire seriously into such subjects. He hears those Christians talkabout religion, but can find nothing in their conversation but strangeand, to him, unintelligible expressions. The speakers give proof enoughof excited feelings, but show no sign of mental enlightenment. If heasks them for information on the great principles and bearings ofChristianity, they tell him they have nothing to do with vainphilosophy. 

2. The man of taste and culture hears other Christians harping eternallyon two or three points, adopted perhaps from some dreamy author, anddenouncing all who question the correctness of their version of theGospel, as heretics or infidels, while all the time their notions havelittle or no resemblance either to the Gospel or to common sense; butare at best, only perversions or distortions of Christian doctrines, which have no more likeness to the religion of Christ than a few brokenbricks have to a beautiful and magnificent palace. 

3. In many cases the Christians with whom he meets have not only nogeneral knowledge of religious subjects, but no desire for suchknowledge. The Bible is their book, they say, and they want no other. And they make but a pitiful use of that. They do not go to the Bible asto a fountain of infinite knowledge, whose streams of truth blendnaturally with all the truths in the universe, but merely to refreshtheir minds with a few misinterpreted passages, which ignorance andbigotry are accustomed to use to support their misconceptions ofChristian doctrine. They use the book not to make them wise, but to keepthem ignorant. They dwell for ever on the same irrational fancies, andrepeat them for ever in the same outlandish jargon. 

4. He meets with other Christians who read a little in other booksbesides the Bible; but it is just those books that help to keep themfrom understanding the meaning of the Bible. And the portions of thebooks which they admire most and quote oftenest, are the silliest andmost erroneous portions. They put darkness for light, and light fordarkness. The man of culture speaks to them, but they cannot understandhim. His thoughts and style are alike out of their line, or beyond theircapacity. If at any time they catch a glimpse of his meaning, they arefrightened on perceiving that his thoughts are not an exact repetitionof their own. 

5. Another cause which has tended to render Christianity less acceptableto men of taste and culture, is the peculiar language adopted in thediscourses and writings of its _Teachers_. The style of some religiousteachers is low, vulgar. The style of a still greater number isbarbarous. Men soon feel the language of the _Law_ to be barbarous. Theywould feel the language of theology to be as barbarous, if they were notaccustomed to hear it or read it so constantly. The way in which thegreater number of evangelical divines express themselves is quitedifferent from that in which men generally express themselves. Theirwhole cast of phraseology is peculiar. You cannot hear five sentenceswithout feeling that you are listening to a dead or foreign language. Toput it into good current English you have to translate it, and the taskof translation is as hard, and requires as much study and practice, asthat of translating Greek or Hebrew. The language of the pulpit and ofreligious books is a dialect to itself, and cannot be used in commonlife or common affairs. If you try to apply it to anything but religion, it becomes ridiculous, and a common kind of wit consists in speaking ofcommon things in pulpit phraseology. A foreign heathen might master ourlanguage in its common and classical forms, and be able to understandboth our ordinary talk and our ablest authors, yet find himself quite ata loss to understand an evangelical preacher or writer. 

Even if our heathen understood religion in its simpler and more naturalforms, he would still be unable to understand the common run ofreligious talkers and writers. If he had religion to learn from suchteachers and writers, he would have a double task, first, to get theideas, and then to learn the uncouth and unnatural language. Thispeculiar dialect is quite unnecessary. The style of a preacher or areligious writer might be, and, allowing for a few terms, _ought_ to be, the same as that of a man talking about ordinary affairs, and matters ofcommon interest and duty. The want of this is one great cause of thelittle success, both of our preachers at home, and of our missionariesabroad. They hide beneath an unseemly veil, a beauty that should strikeall eyes, and win all hearts. Their style is just the opposite ofeverything that can instruct, attract, command. And it is vain to expectmuch improvement in the present generation of religious teachers. Theycould not get a good style without a long and careful study of goodauthors, and for this many of them have neither the taste nor theneedful industry. They would have to begin life anew, to be convertedand become as little children, before they could master the task. Theycannot _think_ of religion but in common words. They cannot think therecan be divine truth but in the old phrases. To discontinue them, therefore, and use others, would in their view, be to become heretics orinfidels. In truth, many of them seem to have no ideas. Their phrasesare not vehicles of ideas, but substitutes for them. If they hear theideas which their phrases did once signify, expressed ever so plainly inother language, they do not recognise them, and instantly suspect theman who utters them of unsoundness in the faith, and apply to him allthe abusive terms of ecclesiastical reproach. For such the common pulpitjargon is the convenient refuge of ignorance, idleness and prejudice. 

6. Speaking of certain kinds of religious books, Mr. Foster calls theman accumulation of bad writing, under which the evangelical theology hasbeen buried, and which has contributed to bring its principles intodisfavor. He adds: A large proportion of religious books may besentenced as bad on more accounts than their peculiarity of dialect. Onehas to regret that their authors did not revere the dignity of theirreligion too much to surround it and choke it with their works. There isquite a multitude of books which form the perfect vulgar of religiousauthorship, --a vast exhibition of the most inferior materials that canbe called thought, in language too grovelling to be called style. Inthese books you are mortified to see how low religious thought andexpression _can_ sink; and you almost wonder how the grand ideas of Godand Providence, of redemption and eternity, the noblest ideas known, canshine on a human mind, without imparting some small occasional degree ofdignity to its train of thought. You can make allowances for the greatdefects of private Christians, but when men obtrude their infinitelittleness and folly on the public in books, you can hardly helpregarding them as inexcusable. True, many of those worthless andmischievous books are evermore disappearing, but others as bad, or butlittle better, take their places. Look where you will you will meet withthem. What estimate can a man have of Christianity who receives hisfirst impressions of it from such books?

7. There are other religious books that are tolerable as to style, butwhich display no power or prominence of thought, no living vigor ofexpression; they are flat and dry as a plain of sand. They tease youwith the thousandth repetition of common-places, causing a feeling ofunspeakable weariness. Though the author is surrounded with richimmeasurable fields of truth and beauty, he treads for ever the samenarrow track already trodden into dust. 

8. There is a smaller class of religious writers that may be calledmock-eloquent writers. They try at a superior style, but forget thattrue eloquence resides essentially in the thought, the feeling, thecharacter, and that no words can make genuine eloquence out of thatwhich is of no worth or interest. They mistake a gaudy verbosity foreloquence. 

9. The moral and theological _materials_ of many religious books are asfaulty as their style, and the injury they do the Gospel isincalculable. Here is a systematic writer in whose hands all the richesand magnificence of revelation shrink into a meagre list of doctrinalpoints, and not a single verse in the Bible is allowed to tell itsmeaning, or even allowed to have one, till it has been forced undertorture to maintain one of his points. You are next confronted with aprater about the invisible world, that makes you shrink away intodarkness; and then you are met with a grim zealot for such a revoltingtheory of the Divine attributes and government, that he seems to delightin representing the Deity as a dreadful king of furies, whose dominionis overshadowed with vengeance, whose music is the cries of victims, andwhose glory requires to be illustrated by the ruin of His creation. Onecannot help deploring that the great mass of religious books were notconsigned to the flames before they were permitted to reach the eyes ofthe public. Books which exhibit Christianity and its claims withinsipid feebleness, or which cramp its majesty into an artificial format once distorted and mean, must grievously injure its influence. Anintelligent Christian cannot look into such works without feelingthankful that they were not the books from which he got his conceptionsof the Gospel. Nothing would induce him to put them into the hands of aninquiring youth, and he would be sorry to see them on the table of aninfidel, or in the library of his children, or of a student for theministry. --_Foster's Essays. _

These sentiments answered so astonishingly to my own thoughts, that Iread them with the greatest delight. I laid them, in substance, beforemy brethren. I explained them. I illustrated them by quotations frombooks and sermons. I gave them instances of the various faults pointedout by Foster, taken from their favorite authors, and in some cases fromthe discourses of living preachers. I wrote several essays on the causesof the slow progress made by Christianity, in which I embodied andillustrated many of Foster's views. I wrote essays on "_PreachingChrist_, " in which I embodied and illustrated Wesley's views on thesubject, including his condemnation of what, in his days, was falselycalled "_Gospel Preaching_. " I wrote quite a large volume on thesesubjects, and read the contents, so far as opportunity offered, to mycolleagues at our weekly meetings. I was badly requited for my pains. Insome cases my colleagues listened to me and stared at me with amazement. They thought I "brought strange things to their ears. " One, who is nowdead, said I should be really an excellent fellow, he believed, if Icould only get the cobwebs swept out of my upper stories. Everythingbeyond his own poor standing common-places was cobwebs to him, poorfellow. The remarks on this subject in the LIFE of the preacherreferred to, show that my ideas and plans at that time are not yetunderstood by all his brethren. 

Travel, they say, frees men from their prejudices. The more they see ofthe wonders of other countries, and of the manners of other nations, themore moderate becomes their estimate of the marvels, and of some of theviews and customs of their native land. And it is certain that the morea man travels through good books by men of different Churches from hisown, the less important will some of the peculiarities of his owndenomination appear. As ignorance of the world is favorable to blindpatriotism and home idolatry, so ignorance of Churches, and systems, andliteratures different from our own, is favorable to bigotry andsectarianism. And as free and extended intercourse with foreign nationstends to enlarge and liberalize the mind; so the more extensive aChristian's acquaintance is with different branches of the Church, andwith their customs, and writings, and manners, the more likely will hissectarian bigotry and intolerance be to give place to liberal views andto Christian moderation and charity. 

But just in proportion as he becomes the subject of this blessedtransformation, will he be regarded with suspicion and dread by thosewho still remain the slaves of ignorance and bigotry. 

It was so in my case. I travelled through extensive regions of religiousliterature different from that of my own Church, and I did so with anearnest desire to learn what was true and good in all. The consequencewas the loss of many prejudices, and the modification of many more. Ilost my prejudices against all kinds of Christians. I could believe inthe salvation both of Quakers and Catholics, and of all between, if theywere well disposed, God-fearing, good-living men. I could believe in thesalvation of all, not excepting Jews, Turks, and Pagans, who livedaccording to the light they had, and honestly and faithfully sought forfurther light. I believed that in every nation he that feared God andworked righteousness was accepted of Him. I believed that honest, faithful souls among the pagans of old would be found at last among thesaved. I regarded the moral and spiritual light of the ancient pagans aslight from heaven, as divine revelation. I looked on all mankind asequally objects of God's care and love, as His children, under Histuition, though placed for a time in different schools, with differentteachers, and with different lesson-books. I came to believe that Godwas as good as a good man, as good as the kindest and best of fathers, and even better, and I felt assured that He would not permit anywell-disposed soul on earth to perish. I believed that some who werefirst in privileges, would be among the last in blessedness; and thatsome that were last in privileges would be among the first inblessedness. 

Yet I believed in missions. I believed that it was the duty of all toshare their blessings with others; to give to others the light that Godhad bestowed on them, --that though _pagans_ might be saved withoutChristian light, if they lived according to the light they had, _Christians_ could not be saved if they did not, as they hadopportunity, _impart_ their superior light to the pagans. 

I respected the good moral principles, and the portions of religioustruth that I found in the ancient Greek and Roman authors, just as Ilamented and condemned the moral and religious errors that I found inChristian books. 

 "I seized on truth where'er 'twas found, On Christian or on Heathen ground, "

and made it part of my creed: and I warred with error though entrenchedin the strong-holds of the Church. I respected what was true and good inall denominations of Christians; and even in all denominations that_called_ themselves Christians, whether they came near enough to Christto entitle them to that name or not. If I saw anything good in thecreeds or the characters of other denominations I accepted it, and triedto embody it in my own creed and character. 

And I did, as I thought, see good in every one that I did not see inothers. I could see things in some Protestants, which I thoughtCatholics would do well to imitate; and I could see things amongCatholics, which I thought Protestants would do well to imitate. I couldsee things in Quakerism, which it would have been to the honor andadvantage of other Christians to imitate; and I could see good things inother Churches which Quakers would have done well to copy. I could seeeven among Unitarians of the older and better class, an attention tomatters practical, a naturalness of style, and a freedom from certainanti-christian expressions and notions, which it would have been wellfor orthodox Churches to have made their own; and I could see whereUnitarians had both gone too far through their dislike of orthodoxerror, and fallen short of truth and duty through dread of orthodoxweaknesses or imperfections. And I had an idea, that it would be wellin all Churches, instead of avoiding, or scolding, or abusing oneanother, to study each other lovingly, with a view to find how much oftruth and goodness they could find in each other, that they could notfind in themselves, and how much of error and imperfection they couldfind in themselves, that they did not find in others. I saw that noChurch had got all the truth, or all the goodness, and that no Churchwas free from anti-christian errors and defects. I saw that to make aperfect Christian creed, we should have to take something out of everycreed, and leave other things in every creed behind; and that to securea perfect exhibition of Christian virtue, and a perfect system ofChristian operations, we should have to borrow from each other habits, customs, rules and machinery in the same way, and leave parts of our ownto fall into disuse. 

And I was willing to act on this principle. I saw that Christ andChristianity were more and better than all the Churches and all thecreeds on earth put together, and that all the Churches had errors andfaults or failings which Christ and Christianity had not; and I had anidea that one of the grandest sights conceivable would be to set all thedisciples of Christ to work striving to get rid of everythinganti-christian, and to come as near to Christ, and to each other, aspossible, both in truth and virtue. 

But to proceed with my story. 

I frequently spoke on religious subjects with my colleagues when we met, along with the leading laymen, at the houses of our friends. Some newbook, some particular sermon, or some article in the magazine, orperhaps the fulness of one's own mind with the subjects of one'sstudies, would turn the conversation on the state of the Church and theministry, and the need of improvement in the theological systems anddialects of the day, and the manner of handling religious subjectsgenerally, both in the pulpit and through the press. Whatever thesubject under consideration might be, I expressed myself with the utmostfreedom. I stated my beliefs and disbeliefs, my doubts and myconvictions, without the least reserve. And I as readily gave my reasonsfor my views. I was generally prepared with the passages of Scripturebearing on the subjects introduced, and gave them, with my impressionsof their meaning. And I did my best to draw my colleagues and friendsinto a thorough investigation of every point, in hopes that we might allcome as near as possible in our views to a full conformity to theteachings of Christ. The results of these conversations, and of my otherlabors, were in some cases, very satisfactory. Some were led to exercisetheir minds on religious subjects who had never troubled themselvesabout such matters before. Some that had been accustomed to think andread a little were led to think and read more, and to better purpose. Some that had been helplessly and miserably perplexed had their mindsput right, and were delivered from their distresses. Some had theirminds directed more seriously to the practical requirements ofChristianity, and labored more, and made more sacrifices, for theprosperity of the Church and the salvation of their fellow-men. Inconsiderable numbers the standard of Christian knowledge and piety wasraised, and the general tone of the churches improved. 

In other cases the results were of a very different character. Duringthe early years of my religious life I supposed that all professingChristians, and especially all ministers of the Gospel, were anxious tobe as wise and good as possible, and that they would be delighted, as Iwas myself, to get any new, or larger, or clearer views of truth andduty. I judged of others by myself, and gave them credit for the samedesires and longings that swelled my own soul. I gave them credit toofor unlimited capacities to take in and appreciate the truth, and forany amount of ability to use it, when received, in doing good to others. I had seldom any difficulty in understanding _them_; and it neverentered my mind that they would have much difficulty in understandingme. And I never felt myself even tempted, much less disposed, tomisrepresent the words or sentiments of my friends, or to take advantageof the freedom with which they spoke, to injure them in the estimationof their friends. I had no intolerance myself, so far as I canrecollect, and I had no disposition to cause intolerance in otherstowards my brethren. How it was with my brethren I will not undertake tosay, but, as a person with any knowledge of human nature would haveanticipated, I was greatly misunderstood and misrepresented. Some of mycolleagues and friends were in a maze with regard to my views andintentions. Shut up within the narrow confines of some old stereotypedform of faith or fancy into which they had been born, or into which theyhad been brought they knew not how, and afraid to change or modify one_iota_ of their blind belief, investigation, search after truth, enlargement of thought, or change of sentiment, was with them out of thequestion. The very idea of anything differing from their owntraditionary or haphazard belief was, in the estimation of some of them, no less than heresy, treason, or infidelity. Others, who were not somuch benighted, were afraid to venture on a free examination ofreligious matters, or a careful comparison of their views with theteachings of Scripture. Some trusted in their elders, and feared noerror so long as they kept in the track of their predecessors. I am notcertain that I should go too far if I were to say, that some were underthe influence of worldly and selfish motives, and were resolved to takethe course which promised to be most conducive to a quiet, easy, self-indulgent life. There were some whose conversations left thisimpression on my mind. One young minister, when I was pointing out tohim some inconsistency between a statement he had made and the teachingsof Christ, put an end to the conversation by saying, "I don't want tohear anything about such matters; I know what is expected of a ministerof the Methodist New Connexion, and I am resolved to be one; and I shalljust hold the doctrines necessary to keep me in the office, and nothingelse. " And I suppose he did not stand alone. 

Some lacked the power to think. They were all but mindless. Whateverthey might be able to do in reference to worldly matters, they wereunable to think, to compare doctrine with doctrine, or to reason in anyrespect whatever on religious matters. One young man, a candidate forthe ministry, told me that he never had thought matters over in his ownmind, but taken what came in his way in books or sermons, nevertroubling himself, or finding himself able, to do more than to rememberand to repeat what he heard or read. He had not the faculty to comparethe sayings of men with the sayings of God; or the sayings of one manwith the sayings of another. He was a mere dealer in words and phrases, and he aspired to nothing higher than to live by the ignoble occupation. How many of those with whom I came in contact, and in whose society Ipoured forth so freely the thoughts of my mind, were of the same stamp, I do not know. I never tested any other person so thoroughly as I testedhim. There _were_ others, however, that had been fashioned in a similarmould. 

Others with whom I conversed _had thought_, and had embraced certainviews believing them to be true; but they had fallen under the influenceof teachers and books of a different cast from those by which my ownmind had been chiefly influenced. And they had been led to fix theirthoughts almost exclusively on one particular class of Scripturepassages, and to neglect or overlook other portions of the sacredvolume, though much more numerous, and much more clear in their meaning. They had also been led to adopt certain interpretations of the passageson which their attention had been specially fixed, which a considerationof other passages of Scripture had led me to reject. Thus our minds hadrun into different moulds, and taken different forms. We differed notonly on certain points of doctrine, but in our tastes, and in our rulesof judging. The consequence was, that we could never talk long onreligious subjects without getting into a dispute, or coming to a deadstand. To make matters worse, this class of people had been led tobelieve that their peculiar notions were the essential doctrines of theGospel, and that those who did not believe them could not be Christians. When therefore they found that I looked upon their theories as erroneousand unscriptural, they pronounced me at once an erratic and dangerousman. I imagined, at first, that I could bring these people to see thingsin a different light. I had such faith in the power of plain Scripturepassages, and in the force of common sense, and was so ignorant of thepower of prejudice, and of peculiarities of mental constitution, that Iconversed and reasoned with them with the greatest freedom and theutmost confidence. But I found at length that my expectations were vain. I was conversing once with a colleague who belonged to this class, onman's natural proneness to evil. He was one of the best and mostenlightened of that school of theologians, and he regarded me at thetime with very kindly feelings. And we were agreed as to the _fact_ ofman's natural tendency to evil, but he had been led to rest his beliefin the doctrine on somewhat different grounds from those on which mybelief rested. And this was enough. He quoted the passage from Isaiah, "The whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint: from the crown ofthe head, to the sole of the foot, there is no soundness, but wounds andbruises and putrefying sores. " "Do you think that the Prophet refers inthat passage to man's natural proneness to evil?" said I. "What can herefer to else?" said he. "I have been accustomed to regard the words asa figurative description of the miserable state of the Israelites underthe terrible judgments of God, " I replied. He instantly became red inthe face, and said, "Do you mean to deny the natural depravity of man?"I said, "The question is not about the doctrine, but only about themeaning of that particular passage. " But all was in vain. I had rousedhis suspicions and his anger, and the conversation came at once to anend, and he never afterwards regarded me with the same degree ofconfidence and friendliness as before. 

On another occasion a brother minister quoted, as proof that men intheir unregenerate state cannot do anything towards their own salvation, the words of Jeremiah, already once referred to, "Can the Ethiopianchange his skin, or the leopard his spots?" "Do you really think, " saidI, "that the Prophet is speaking, in those words, of men generally?""What else is he speaking of?" was the answer. "He seems to me to bespeaking of a particular class of men, who have been so long accustomedto do wrong, that they have lost the power to do right--having madethemselves the helpless slaves of their evil habits. He is not, I think, speaking of the state into which they were _born_; but of the state towhich they had _reduced_ themselves by long persistence in sin. Hence hesays at the conclusion of the passage, 'Then may ye, who are accustomedto do evil, do well. '" "Oh! I suppose you deny the doctrine of naturaldepravity. " "No, I do not, " said I. "It is no use saying that, " hereplied, "when you explain away the passages of Scripture in which thedoctrine is taught. "

Such encounters between me and my brethren were at one time by no meansuncommon. They took place at almost every meeting. The result was oftenunpleasant. My brethren generally did not like to be disturbed in theirnotions, or in their way of talking. But few, if any of them, wereprepared or disposed to enter on the investigations necessary to enablethem to ascertain what was the truth on the points on which we wereaccustomed to converse. Some had not the power to revise their creedsand their way of talking and preaching, and bring them into harmony withScripture and common sense. And people of this class were sure to lookon all who did not see things in the same light as themselves, asdangerous or damnable heretics. They, of course, concluded that I wasnot sound in the faith. They felt that I was a troublesome, and fearedthat I was a lost and ruined man. The remarks which I made to them, theyrepeated to their friends; and as they seldom succeeded in understandingme properly, their reports were generally incorrect. In some cases mystatements were reported with important additions, and in others withserious alterations, and in some cases their meaning was entirelychanged. And the change was seldom to my advantage. A difference ofexpression between me and my brethren was mistaken for a difference ofbelief; and the disuse of an unscriptural word, was mistaken for arenunciation of a Christian doctrine. A dispute about the "eternalsonship" was mistaken for a dispute about the divinity of Christ, and adifference of opinion about the meaning of a passage of Scripture, cameto be reported as the denial of Christ's authority. In one case I gaveit as my judgment that there were really righteous people on earth whenChrist came into the world, and that it was to such that Christreferred, when He said, He "came not to call the righteous, but sinnersto repentance. " This was made into an assertion that the coming ofChrist was unnecessary. Inability to accept unauthorized definitions andunscriptural theories of Scriptural doctrines, was construed into adenial of those doctrines. My endeavor to strip religious subjects ofneedless mystery, was represented as an attempt to substitute a vainphilosophy for the Gospel of Christ. An expression of dissatisfactionwith a grandiloquent but foolish and mischievous sermon on the "Crossof Christ, " was set down as a proof that my views on the sacrifice ofChrist were not evangelical. My endeavors to show that Christianity wasin harmony with reason, were mistaken for an attempt to substitutereason for faith, and became the occasion of a rumor that I was runninginto Pelagianism or Socinianism. My own conviction was, that I wascoming nearer to the simplicity, the purity, and the fulness of theGospel; and that is my conviction still. And those of my brethren in theministry who were in advance of the rest in point of intelligence andpiety, and who were least infected with foolish fear and jealousy, expressed to me their satisfaction with my views and proceedings. Andthe people listened to my discourses with the greatest delight. Theyflocked to hear me in crowds; and the crowds continually increased. Andmany were benefited under my ministry. Sinners were converted, andbelievers were comforted, and stimulated to greater efforts in the causeof God. 

To those, however, who had come to believe that I was drifting towardsheresy, all this was the occasion of greater alarm, and my great successand growing popularity led them to make increasing efforts to lessen myinfluence, or silence me altogether. Their conduct caused me greatuneasiness, and it was this that first awakened in me unhappy feelingtowards them. 

CHAPTER VIII. 

A SECOND TENDENCY. PRACTICAL PREACHING. 

I had a second powerful tendency which helped to get me into trouble, and so became an occasion of unhappy feeling, namely, a _practical_tendency. This was bred in me. It was a family peculiarity; it ran inthe blood. My father had it. Religion with him was goodness of heart andgoodness of life; fearing God and working righteousness; loving God andkeeping His commandments. And his belief and life were one. I never knewa more conscientious or godly man. And I never knew a man who could moretruly have uttered the words of the Psalmist: "Lord, my heart is nothaughty, nor mine eyes lofty; neither do I exercise myself in greatmatters, or in things too high for me. Surely I have behaved and quietedmyself as a child that is weaned of its mother; my soul is even as aweaned child. " What God had left mysterious, he was willing shouldremain so; he found sufficient to meet his wants and to occupy histhoughts in what He had clearly revealed. He never troubled eitherhimself or his children with those incomprehensible subjects on whichmany people are so prone to speculate and dogmatize. He read but fewbooks, and those which he read he carefully compared with the sacredScriptures. The Bible was his only authority, and by it he tested bothbooks and preachers, receiving nothing but what he saw and felt to be inharmony with its spirit and teachings. He liked Bunyan, especially his_Pilgrim's Progress_; and he liked Wesley; but he liked the Bible best. There were no bounds to his love and reverence for the Scriptures. Heregarded them as the perfection of all wisdom, the true and perfectunfolding of the mind and will of God. He read them every morning on hisknees, before the rest of the family were up. Whatever might be thecalls of business, he spent a full hour in this exercise. He read themevery noon to his family. He read them at night before retiring to rest. He read them with a sincere desire to learn God's will, and with earnestprayer for Divine help to enable him to do it. He read them till all theplainer and more practical portions were safely lodged in his memory, and deeply engraven on his heart. He read them till their teachingsbecame a part of his very nature, and shone forth in his character inall the beauty of holiness. He was a thorough Christian. The oracles ofGod were the rule both of his faith and conduct. They leavened his wholesoul. They mingled with all his conversation. They were his onlycounsellors and his chief comforters. They were his law, his politics, his philosophy, his morals. They were his treasure and his song. And hereceived their teachings in their simple, obvious, common-sense meaning. He had quite a distaste for commentaries, because they would not allowthe Scriptures to speak forth their own solemn meaning in their ownplain, artless way. He hated the notes to Bunyan's _Pilgrim's Progress_for the same reason. He could understand the Bible, but he could notunderstand the explanations of it given by theologians. He would notstudy theology. He would study the Bible and Christ; he would studyprecepts and promises, exhortations and warnings, examples andhistorics; but not theology. And he never bothered us with theology. There was no theology in his conversation. There was none in hisprayers. He never used theological terms. In all he said on religiousmatters, whether to God or man, he used the simplest Bible terms. Heseldom talked much to his children about religion; he taught us more byhis deeds and spirit than by words; but when he did say anything to uson the subject, it was the pure, unadulterated Word of God. The idea ofmaking us theologians, in the ordinary sense of the word, never enteredinto his head. He wished us to think and feel and act like Christians, and that was all; and the end of all his counsels and labors was tofurnish us unto every good word and work. If he had written a system ofdivinity, he would have left out most of the things which many put intosuch books, and put in many which most leave out. It would have been abook to help people to live right and feel right, and not to dream, orspeculate, or wrangle. If he had been a preacher, he would have filledhis sermons with the living words of Moses and the Prophets, of Christand His Apostles, and pressed them on the consciences of his hearerswith all his might. He would often have "reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and a judgment to come, " but never troubled his hearers withhuman theories of Christian doctrines. The drift and scope of hissermons to the ungodly would have been, "Cease to do evil; learn to dowell. " "Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man histhoughts, and let him return unto the Lord, and He will have mercy uponhim; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon. " "Repeat and beconverted, every one of you, that your sins may he blotted out. " Thesubstance of his sermons to believers would have been, "I beseech youtherefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodiesa living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonableservice. " "Ye are not your own; ye are bought with a price; thereforeglorify God with your bodies and your spirits, which are His. " "For yewere not redeemed with corruptible things, such as silver and gold, fromyour evil way of life received by tradition from your fathers; but withthe precious blood of Christ; who gave Himself for you, that He mightredeem you from all iniquity, and purify you unto Himself a peculiarpeople, zealous of good works. " "Be not deceived; God is not mocked; forwhatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap. For he that soweth tothe flesh, shall of the flesh, reap corruption; but he that soweth tothe Spirit, shall of the Spirit reap life everlasting. And let us not beweary in well-doing; for in due season we shall reap, if we faint not. As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially to those who are of the household of faith. " He would havespoken of the love of God, and of the death of Christ, and of all thegreat moving facts and doctrines of the Gospel; but, like the sacredwriters, he would have turned them all to practical account. His aim ineverything would have been to bring men into subjection to God's will, and into full conformity with the teachings and character of Christ. 

My eldest brother was a minister, and this was the character of hispreaching. His favorite books were Baxter's works and the Bible. Hisfavorite minister was William Dawson, one of the most practical, earnest, and common-sense preachers that ever occupied a pulpit. Likehis father, he kept scrupulously to the simple teachings of theScriptures, and he was once charged with unsoundness in the faith, because he would not be wise above what was revealed, nor preach morethan the Gospel committed to him by Christ. 

It was the same with myself. I looked on Christianity, from the first, as a means of enlightening and regenerating mankind, and changing theminto the likeness of Christ and of God. In other words, I regarded it asa grand instrument appointed by God, for making bad men into good men, and good men always better, thus fitting them for all the duties oflife, and all the blessedness they were created to enjoy. And Iconsidered that the great business of a Christian minister was to use itfor those great ends. And I think so still. 

The Bible is the most practical book under heaven, and I cannot conceivehow any one can read it carefully, with a mind unbiased by prejudice orevil feeling, without perceiving that its great object is to bring mento fear and love God, and to make them perfect in every good work to doHis will. How any one can study Christianity without perceiving that itsdesign is to bring men into harmony with God, both in heart and action, and to make them steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work ofthe Lord, is a mystery to me. Antinomianism is Antichrist. The preachingwhich tends to lessen men's sense of duty, or to reconcile people to aselfish, idle, or useless life, is contrary both to Christianity andcommon sense. And all interpretations of Scripture which favor thedoctrine that men have nothing to do but to believe and trust in Christ, are madness or impiety. The impression which God seeks to make on ourminds from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Revelation is, that ifwe would have His favor and blessing, we must do His will. The wholeBible is one great lesson of piety and virtue, of love and beneficence. Christ is "the Author of eternal salvation to those" only "who obeyHim. " Those who obey Him not He will punish with everlastingdestruction. Christ and His Apostles agree that, if we would see God andhave eternal life, we must be "holy as God is holy, " "merciful as ourFather in heaven is merciful, " "righteous as Christ wasrighteous;"--that God, who is love, and Christ, who is God, must dwellin us, live in us, work in us;--that carnal, sinful self must die, and"grace reign in us through righteousness unto eternal life. "

I know what can be said about doctrines; but there are no doctrines inthe Scriptures at variance with the principle that "God will render toevery man according to his deeds, --that to them who by patientcontinuance in well-doing seek for glory, honor, and immortality, Hewill give eternal life; and that to them who are contentious, and do notobey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, He will recompense indignationand wrath, tribulation and anguish. " Nay, the doctrines of Scripture areemployed throughout as motives and inducements to righteousness. This istheir use. The truth is taught us that it may make us free from sin, andsanctify both our hearts and lives to God. The Word of God, thedoctrine of Christ, is sown in our hearts as seed in the ground, that itmay bring forth in our lives "the fruits of righteousness. " The officeof faith in Christ and His doctrine is, to "work by love, " to make us"new creatures, " and so bring us to keep God's commandments. Theblindest man on earth is not more blind than the man who can read theScriptures without perceiving that their object is to make men "perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. "

As I had never been placed for instruction under any Antinomiantheologian, and had never been taught at home, either by word or deed, to wrest the Scriptures from their plain and simple meaning, I naturallybecame a thoroughly practical preacher. I took practical texts: Ipreached practical sermons. The first text from which I preached was, "Say ye to the righteous, it shall be well with them, for they shall eatthe fruit of their doings. Wo unto the wicked, it shall be ill with him;for the reward of his hands shall be given him. " The second was, "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. " The third was, "Ye are not your own; ye are bought with a price; therefore glorify Godwith your bodies and spirits, which are God's. " And the fourth was, "These shall go away into everlasting punishment; but the righteous intolife eternal. " The following were among my principal texts and subjectsfor many years: "Occupy till I come. " "Let your light so shine beforemen, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which isin heaven. " "Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit. ""He that showeth mercy with cheerfulness. " "Be ye therefore merciful, asyour Father which is in heaven is merciful. " "He that winneth souls iswise. " "Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old hewill not depart from it. " The Good Samaritan. The Prodigal Son. TheBarren Fig-tree. The Hatefulness and Wickedness of Lukewarmness. TheWoman that did what she could. The Christian's Race. The Good Steward. The duty of Christians to strive with one heart and one mind for thefaith of the Gospel. The example of Christ. "Give no occasion to theadversary to preach reproachfully. " "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity. ""Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, alwaysabounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your laboris not in vain in the Lord. " "For I am not ashamed of the gospel ofChrist: for it is the power of God unto salvation: to every one thatbelieveth: to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. " "I must work theworks of Him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when noman can work. " "For ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, though He was rich, yet for your sakes He became poor, that ye throughHis poverty might be rich. " "As we have therefore opportunity, let us dogood unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household offaith. " "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweththat shall he also reap. For he that soweth to his flesh shall of theflesh reap corruption; but he that soweth to the Spirit shall of theSpirit reap life everlasting. " "Brethren, if a man be overtaken in afault, ye which are spiritual restore such an one, in the spirit ofmeekness; considering thyself lest thou also be tempted. " "And let usnot be weary in well doing: for in due season we shall reap, if we faintnot. " "Feed My sheep. " "Feed My lambs. " "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. " "Remember the poor. " "Freely ye havereceived; freely give. " "It is more blessed to give than to receive. " Ihad quite a multitude of such subjects. 

I did not however confine myself to these. I did my best to declare thewhole counsel of God. I kept back nothing that seemed likely to beuseful to my hearers. I spoke on the love of God, --on the condescensionof Christ, --of His unparalleled love in giving Himself a sacrifice forour salvation. I spoke of His sufferings and death, --of His resurrectionand mediation, --of His sympathy with our sorrows, --of His coming tojudgment. I spoke of the miseries of sin, --of the pleasures ofreligion, --of the joys of heaven, --of the pains of hell, --of providence, and of trust in God. In short, I preached on every great doctrine ofrevelation as I had opportunity. I revered all God's truth, and Ipreached on every part of it with fidelity. But I treated everything ina practical way. I used every subject as a means or motive to holinessand usefulness. And this, I believe, was right. The Apostles didso, --Christ did so, --and they are the Christian minister's examples. 

I had a partiality for practical books. As I have already said, among myfavorite English authors were Hooker, and Baxter, and Barrow, and Howe, and Jeremy Taylor, and Penn, and Tillotson, and Law. Baxter stood first, and my favorite books were his _Christian Directory_, his _Life ofFaith_, his _Crucifixion of the World by the Cross of Christ_, and his_Directions for Settled Peace of Conscience_. But, in truth, it is hardto say which of his works I did not regard as favorites. I liked his_Catholic Theology_, his _Aphorisms on Justification_, his_Confessions_, and even his Latin _Methodus Theologiæ_. I read himeverlastingly. I read Law and Barrow too, till I almost knew many oftheir works by heart. I studied Penn from beginning to end. And I nevergot tired of reading Hooker. I regarded his _Ecclesiastical Polity_ asone of the richest, sweetest, wisest, saintliest books under heaven. 

My favorite French authors were Massillon, Fenelon, Flechier, Bourdaloueand Saurin, all practical preachers. Massillon moved me most. I haveread him now at intervals for more than forty years, and I read himstill with undiminished profit and delight. He is the greatest of allpreachers; the most eloquent, the most powerful; and his works aboundwith the grandest, the profoundest, the most impressive and overpoweringviews of truth and duty. 

Among the Fathers I liked Lactantius and Chrysostom best, not only forthe superiority of their style, but for the common sense and practicalcharacter of their sentiments. 

My favorite Methodist author, when I first began my Christian career, was Benson. His sermons were full of fervor and power. I felt lessinterest in Wesley at first. I was incapable of duly appreciating hisworks. As I grew older, and got more sense, my estimate both of hischaracter and writings rose, and now I like him better, and esteem himmore highly, than at any former period of my life. And I like his latestwritings best. 

I liked Fletcher very much, partly on account of the good, kindChristian feeling that pervaded his writings, and partly on account ofhis able and unanswerable defence of the enlightened and scripturalviews of Wesley, as set forth in the Minutes of 1771. 

Among the later Dissenting writers, Robert Hall was my favorite. I likedmany things in the writings of John Angell James; but there were otherthings, especially in his _Anxious Inquirer_, that appeared to savormore of mysticism than of Christianity, and that seemed bettercalculated to perplex and embarrass young disciples of Christ, than toafford them guidance and comfort. 

There were many other good authors whom I read and prized, but most ofthe above I read till their thoughts and feelings became, to a greatextent, my own; and the effect of all was to strengthen the alreadystrong practical tendency of my mind. 

But no book did so much to make me a practical preacher as the Bible. Itis practical throughout--intensely practical, and nothing else butpractical. The moment it introduces man to our notice, it presents himas subject to God's law, and represents his life and blessedness asdepending entirely on his obedience. God is presented from the first asan avenger of sin, and as a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him. In His address to Cain He sets forth the whole principle of Hisgovernment: 'If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? But if thoudoest not well, sin lieth at the door. ' Enoch is translated because hewalked with God. The world is destroyed because of its wickedness, andNoah is saved because of his righteousness. Abraham is blessed becausehe observes the statutes and judgments of God, and because he is readyto make the greatest sacrifices out of respect to His commands. The sumof the whole revelation given to the Jews is, "Behold I set before youlife and death, a blessing and a curse. Obey, and all conceivableblessings shall be your portion: disobey, and all imaginable cursesshall fall on you. " The history of the Jews is an everlasting story ofobedience and prosperity, of disobedience and adversity. The history ofindividuals is the same. The just live; the wicked die. The good arehonored; the bad are put to shame. The Psalms, the Proverbs, and theProphets are all lessons of righteousness. Righteousness exaltethnations; sin brings them down to destruction. And Jesus and Paul, andPeter and James, and Jude and John, have all one aim, to bless men byturning them away from their iniquities, and by urging them to perpetualadvancement in holiness. All the histories, all the biographies, all theprophecies, all the parables, all the preaching, all the praying, allthe writing, all the reasoning, all the things the Book contains, havejust one object, to make men good, and urge them to grow continuallybetter. All the doctrines are practical, and are used as motives topurity, love and beneficence. All the promises are given to support andcheer people in the faithful discharge of their duty. All the warningsare to keep men from idleness, selfishness and sin. The Church and allits ministries; the Scriptures and all their revelations; Providence andall its dispensations; nature and all her operations, are all presentedas means and motives to a life of holy love and usefulness. The Biblehas nothing, is nothing, but laws and lessons, aiming at theillumination, the sanctification, the moral and spiritual perfection ofmankind. 

Idleness and selfishness are the greatest of all heresies, and love andbeneficence the perfection of all religion. No doctrine can be falser ormore anti-christian than the doctrine that a man may sow one thing andreap another; that he may sow tares and reap wheat; or sow cockle andreap barley--that he can grow thistles and reap figs, or plant thornsand gather grapes. 'He that doeth good is of God;' 'he that committethsin is of the devil. ' 'By this we know that we have passed from deathunto life, because we love the brethren. ' 'By this shall all men knowthat ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. ' 'Ye know thatevery one that doeth righteousness, or lives to do good, is born ofGod. ' 'By their fruits ye shall know them. ' Good trees will bring forthgood fruit, bad trees will bring forth bad fruit. 'Every tree thatbringeth not forth good fruit shall be hewn down and cast into thefire. '

But to give all the practical passages the Bible contains you must quotethe substance, the soul, the bulk of the whole Book. It is all of apiece. It has one aim and one tendency from beginning to end, to killsin and foster righteousness, to crush selfishness and developphilanthropy. It consists of a multitude of parts, written in differentages, by a great variety of authors, in a great variety of styles, butit has one spirit, the spirit of truth and righteousness. And the lastoracles it contains are like the first: 'Blessed are the dead that diein the Lord; they rest from their labors, and their works follow them. ''Blessed are they that do His commandments, that they may have a rightto the tree of life, and enter in through the gates into the city. '

Under the influence of this most rational, common-sense, practical Book, what could I do but become a thoroughly practical preacher? What could Ido but drink in its blessed, god-like lessons, and make it the greatbusiness of my life to teach them and preach them to my hearers, andurge them on their consciences as the governing principles of theirhearts and lives?

The book of nature preaches the same practical Gospel as the Bible. There is not a creature on earth that is not required to work. Birds, beasts and insects must all labor, or die. The birds must build theirnests, and gather supplies of food for themselves and their young, orthey would all perish. The cattle must graze, or browse, or burrow, ordive, or lack their needed supplies of food. The beaver must build itsdam, and the wolf must dig its hole, and both must labor for their dailyfood. The bee must gather her wax, and build her cell, and fetch homeher honey, or starve. The ant must build her palace and look out forfood both for herself and her family. The spider must spin her thread, and weave her web, and watch all day for her prey. All seek their foodfrom God, and obtain it at his hands as the reward of their industry. 

Every organ in man's body has to work, or the body, with all its organs, would die. The lungs must be continually breathing, and the heartincessantly beating, and the blood perpetually running its mysteriousround, or the whole frame would perish. And the hands must work, and thefeet must walk, and the eyes must look, and the ears must listen, andthe tongue must talk. And the jaws must grind our food, and the stomachdigest it, and the liver and the spleen, and the brain and the bowels, and the nerves and the glands must all co-operate, or we hasten to thedust. 

And so it is through every department of nature. All things are full oflabor. The vegetable world serves the animal world, and the animal worldserves the vegetable world, and the mineral and meteorological worldsserve them both. And the branches of the tree shed their leaves to feedthe roots, and the roots collect moisture and nutriment from the soil tofeed the branches and the leaves. And the clouds let fall their showers, and the sun sheds down his warmth and light, and the more mysteriouspowers of nature exert their secret influences, and all things are thuskept right. And the winds keep ever in motion, bearing away the surpluscold of one region to temper the excessive heat of another, and carryingback the surplus heat of the warmer climes, to soften the rigors of thecolder ones. And so throughout the universe. There is not an idle orb inthe whole heavens, nor is there an idle atom on earth. The sun the moonand the stars are in eternal motion, and are evermore exerting theirwondrous influences for the good of the whole universe. And the streamsare ever flowing, and the sea is ever toiling. The great things and thesmall, the seen and the unseen, the conscious and the unconscious, areall at work, helping themselves, and serving each other, andcontributing with one consent to the welfare of the great mysteriouswhole. Nature's laws are so framed that idleness is everywhere punished, and honest industry everywhere rewarded. Everywhere obedience is life, and disobedience death. Salvation by works is the principle of theDivine Government throughout the universe, among all the creatures ofGod. 

My favorite preachers were William Dawson, David Stoner and JamesParsons, all eloquent and earnest men, and all decidedly practical. Inever missed an opportunity of hearing them if they came within five orsix miles of the place where I lived. And many of their sermons which Iheard more than forty years ago are still fresh in my memory, andcontinue to exert a happy influence on my heart. 

William Dawson was a local preacher, a farmer. He was a large, broad-chested, big-headed, strong built man, --one of the finestspecimens of a well-made, thoroughly developed Englishman I ever saw. And he was full of life. There was not a sluggish atom in his wholebody, nor a slow-going faculty in his whole soul. He had eyes like fire;and his face was the most expressive I ever looked upon. And his voicewas loud as the fall of mighty waters. And it was wonderfully flexible, and full of music. And he always spoke in natural tones. There wasnothing like cant or monotony in his utterance. Yet he would raise hisvoice to such a pitch at times that you could hear him half a mile away. He was the most perfect actor I ever saw, because he was not an actor atall, but awful, absolute reality. And he was a man of wonderfulintelligence and good sense. And he was well read. His mind was full tooverflowing of the soundest religious knowledge. And his good soundsense had no perceptible admixture of nonsense. Every sentence answeredto your best ideas of the right, the true, the holy, the divine. Hisgrammar, his logic, and his rhetoric were perfect, and all nature seemedto stand by to supply him with apt, and striking, and touchingillustrations. And his soul was full of feeling. He seemed to sympathizewith every form of humanity, from the helpless babe to tottering age, and to be one with them in all their joys and sorrows, and in all theirhopes and fears. And now he would cry with the crying child, and then hewould wail with the afflicted mother. All that is great, all that istender, all that is terrible, --all nature, with all that is human, andmuch that was divine, seemed incarnated in him. He was the mostwonderful embodiment of all that goes to make a great, a mighty, acomplete man, and a good, an able, and an all-powerful preacher, it everwas my privilege to see. As a matter of course, his prayers, hissermons, and his public speeches were irresistible. Sinners trembled, and fell on their knees praying and howling. Saints shouted, and lostthemselves in transports. His congregations were always crowded, and thedense, mixed masses of men and women, good and evil, old and young, allwere moved by him like the sea by a strong wind. All understood him: allfelt him; and all were awed and bowed as by the power of God. Hissermons were always practical. Whether he spake to the saint or thesinner, he went directly to the conscience. And all that he said yousaw. Sin stared you full in the face and looked unspeakably sinful; itrose and stood before you a monster group of all imaginable horrors andabominations. The sinner shook, he shrank, he writhed at the sight, inmortal agony. God, as Dawson pictured Him, was terrible in majesty andinfinite in glory. Jesus was the perfection of tenderness, of love, andpower, and almighty to save. Thousands were converted under him. Hisinfluence pervaded the whole country, and was everywhere a check onevil, and a power for good. The effect of his ministry on me, on myimagination, my mind and my heart, was living and powerful to the lastdegree, and I remember his sermons, and feel his power, to the presentday, and he will dwell in my memory, to be loved and honored, as long asI live. 

David Stoner was a travelling preacher. He lived in the same village asWilliam Dawson, and was a member of his class. He was a disciple ofDawson in every respect, but in no respect a servile imitator. He was aman and not a slave. And he had much of Dawson's sense, and much ofDawson's power, though little or nothing of Dawson's natural dramaticmanner. He was a fountain pouring forth a perpetual stream of truth andholy influence. The two were one in love, and light, and power, but inmanner they differed as much as any two powerful preachers I ever knew. Both live in my soul, and speak with my voice, and write with my pen. Both had an influence in determining both the method of my preaching andthe manner of my life in my early days. 

James Parsons was a Congregationalist. His character, and the characterof his preaching, may be learned from his published sermons. But, strange to say, the sermons published by himself, are not near so good, nor do they convey half so good an idea of his power, as those reportedby short-hand writers and published by others. He was more, and better, and mightier in the pulpit, before a large and living congregation, thanin his closet alone. My remembrance of these three great and godly men, and powerful Christian ministers, is a rich and eternal treasure. I cannever come near them, but I may follow them, as I did in the days of myyouth, "Afar off. "

Whether the strong practical tendency of my mind did not carry me toofar sometimes, and make my preaching somewhat one-sided, I cannot say. Imay not be considered qualified to judge. I have, however, an opinion onthe subject. My impression is, that my method of preaching wasthoroughly scriptural and evangelical. And it was, I believe, the kindof preaching which the Church and the world particularly needed. It was, too, the kind of preaching to which I believe I was specially called, and for which I was specially fitted. It was the only kind in which Ifelt myself perfectly at home. And the effects were good. Sinners wereconverted. Unbelievers were convinced. And believers were improved andcomforted. They were led to read and study the Scriptures more, and toread and study them with greater pleasure, and to greater profit. Theybecame more enamoured of Christianity, more zealous for its spread, andmore able in its defence. 

And the societies among which I labored always prospered, and thoseamong which I labored most prospered most abundantly. My labors provedespecially useful to the young. My classes were crowded with thoughtful, earnest, inquiring youths. And those who fell under my influence became, as a rule, intelligent, devoted, and useful characters. Not a few ofthem continue laborious and exemplary Christians, and able andsuccessful ministers, to the present day. I meet with good and usefulpeople almost everywhere, many of whom are in the ministry, whoacknowledge me as their spiritual father, and consider themselvesindebted to my former ministry, and to my early writings, both for theirstanding and usefulness in the Church, and for their success andhappiness in life. 

One would suppose that a method of preaching which was followed by suchhappy results, should have been encouraged. And so it was by the greatmass of the people. They heard me gladly. They came in crowds wherever Iwas announced to preach, and filled the largest chapels to their utmostcapacity. They drank in my words with eagerness, and made no secret ofthe place I occupied in their affection and esteem. But many of mybrethren in the ministry regarded me with great disquietude. Theythought my preaching grievously defective. "It failed, " they said, "togive due prominence to the distinctive features of the gospel economy. ""It is good, " they would say, "as far as it goes; but it does not go farenough. It is too vague, too general. His sermons are beautiful and goodin their way, but they are not the Gospel. They are true; but they arenot the whole truth. There is not enough of Christ in them. We findfault with them, not for what they _contain_, but for what they do _not_contain. True, they make mention of the great facts and doctrines ofChristianity, but they do not make enough of them; they do not dwell onthem as their constant theme. " They made many such complaints. Theycharged me with winning from my hearers, for a partial and defectiveview of the Gospel, the love and reverence which were due only to a verydifferent view. They called me a legalist, a work-monger, and otheroffensive names. They charged me too with spoiling the people, withgiving them a distaste for ordinary kinds of preaching, and making ithard for other preachers to follow me. The complaints they whispered inthe ears of their friends soon found their way to mine. I endeavored tojustify myself by appeals to Scripture, to Wesley, and to otherauthorities. It would have been better perhaps if I had kept silent andgone quietly on with my work. But some of my friends thought otherwise. They wished to be furnished with answers to my traducers, and soconstrained me to speak. My defence only led to renewed and more violentattacks. My opponents could not think well of my style of preaching, without thinking ill of their own. They could not acknowledge my methodto be evangelical, without confessing their own to be grievouslydefective, and to have expected them to do that would have been theextreme of folly. They could do no other therefore than regard me as adangerous man, and do what they could to bring my preaching andsentiments into suspicion, and prepare the way for my exclusion from theministry. This was the second cause of the unhappy feeling which tookpossession of my mind. 

A few quotations from a Journal written about this time may be of useand interest here. 

CHAPTER IX. 

EXTRACTS FROM MY DIARY. 

I heard T. Batty yesterday. His text was, "Come unto Me all ye thatlabor, and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest. " He urged peopleto come to Christ, but he never told them what it was to come to Him. Wecannot come to Him literally now, as people did when He was on earth;but we can leave all other teachers and guides, and renounce thedominion of our appetites and passions, and put ourselves under Histeaching and government. In other words, we can become Christians; wecan learn Christ's doctrine and obey it, and, thus obeying, trust in Himfor salvation. But Mr. Batty said not a word about this. He talked as ifall that people had to do, was to roll themselves on Christ, or castthemselves on Him just as they were. He made all the passages aboutbringing forth fruits meet for repentance, --hearing Christ's words anddoing them, --denying ourselves and taking up our cross, --using ourtalents, working in His cause, &c. , of no effect. He said, "Come just asyou are. If you tarry till you are better, you will never come at all;"which seems to me, neither Scripture nor common sense. To come toChrist, in the proper sense of the words, is to become better;--it is tocease to live to ourselves and sin, and to live to God. Hence Christ, inconnection with Mr. Batty's text says, "Take my yoke upon you, and learnof Me, for I am meek, and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest untoyour souls. " The meaning of this is, give up the service of self andsin, and serve me. Take me for your pattern, and be as I am, and live asI live. But he never noticed the latter part of the passage. 

--What a blessed thing it is to have so many good books! They are aworld of comfort to me, as well as a means of ever-increasing spiritualgood. And they are evermore startling and delighting me with strikingoracles of Christian truth. Here is one from Baxter. "Every truth of Godis appointed to be His instrument, to do some holy work upon yourheart! _Charity_ is the end of _truth_. " Here is another: "The Gospel isa seal, on which is engraven the portrait, the likeness of Christ. Ourhearts are the wax, on which the seal should be impressed, and to whichthe likeness should be transferred. The duty of ministers and of allreligious teachers is to apply the seal to men's hearts, that all may bebrought to bear the image, the likeness of Christ. "

--I always placed the moral element of religion above the doctrinal;charity above faith; good living above any kind of opinions. 

--This afternoon Mr. Burrows preached on Mary's choice, but he left thematter in a mist. He talked about sitting at Christ's feet, but did notsay what it meant. We cannot do that literally now; but we can do whatamounts to the same thing. We can _read_ Christ's words in the_Gospels_, as Mary _heard_ them from His _lips_; and we can do as Hebids us, and look to Him for all we need. And this, in truth, is the"one thing needful. " But he did not put the matter in this light. Heprobably did not see it in this light. He would have been afraid perhapsto receive or to give so simple an explanation of the matter. 

I had a talk with Mr. Woodhouse last night, about man's natural state. He preached on the subject on Tuesday night, and said things which, tome, seemed unwarranted. He said men can do nothing good, till they areregenerated. 

Is that your idea? said I. 

Of course. Are they not _dead_? And what can dead men do?

I suppose they can do as God bids them, "Arise from the dead. " You spokeof the result of Adam's sin, but you said nothing of the effect of thesecond Adam's doings. Now I believe that we are put in as good aposition by Christ, for serving God and obtaining heaven, as we shouldhave been if Adam had not sinned. I believe men have good thoughts, goodfeelings, and do good things, before they are regenerated; and that theyare regenerated in consequence of their good thoughts, good purposes, and good deeds. "They consider their ways, " and turn to God. They ceaseto do evil, and learn to do well, and so get washed. They purify theirhearts in obeying the truth. They cleanse their hands and purify theirhearts. They come out from the ungodly, and leave their ungodly ways, and then God receives them. They hear God's word or read it; and faithcomes by hearing and reading; and faith works by love, and makes themnew creatures. 

Besides, you know we could not help what Adam did, and you talked as ifAdam's sin made it impossible for us to do anything else but sin, thusthrowing the blame of the sins of all the unregenerate on Adam; and thatis neither Scriptural nor wise. There are two tendencies in unregeneratepeople, one to good, and one to evil, and it is their duty to resist theone and obey the other, and thus to seek for regeneration. That is as Iunderstand the Bible. And I always try to make people believe and feel, that if they do not get regenerated, and keep God's commandments, it istheir own fault, and neither Adam's nor God's. 

We talked nearly an hour, but I fancy Mr. W. Did not seem to understandeither me or the Bible. It is strange that people can't take God's wordas it stands, and content themselves with speaking as the oracles of Godspeak. If we can't do anything but sin till we are regenerated, who isto blame for our sin, but He who neglects to regenerate us? Whathorrible notions are mistaken by some for Gospel? "Send out, O God, thylight and truth; let them lead me and guide me. "

--Poor Mr. Woodhouse is full of trouble. He thinks me wrong, but doesnot see how to put me right. 

--What a curious creature Mr. Batty is. How in the world did he come tobe a preacher? A stranger, sillier talker I think I never heard. Icannot say he is childish exactly. Children talk nonsense plentysometimes, but no child could talk the kind of nonsense Mr. Batty talks. Last night his text was, "He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost andwith fire. " But he forgot the Holy Ghost, and talked only about fire. His object seemed to be to prove that fire would _burn_. He mentionedseveral fires spoken of in the Bible that _did_ burn, such as the firethat consumed Sodom and Gomorrah; the fire that formed one of theplagues of Egypt; &c. , but he came at length on the fire in the bushthat Moses saw, and, poor man, he was obliged to acknowledge that thatwould not burn. The bush was unconsumed. He got away from that fire assoon as he could, and found a number of other fires that _did_ burn. Byand by however he came upon the burning fiery furnace of Nebuchadnezzar. This would burn _some_ that were thrown into it, but it would not burnothers. Then he talked about the fire of Moscow, and said, that _that_fire gave as much light to the moon, as the moon gives to the earth, andhe added, that the flames of the burning city made such a blaze, that wemight have seen it in England, if it had not been for the hills. Andthis is the talk that sensible people are expected to go and hear. 

--Mr. W. Preached one of Mr. Melville's sermons last night. It was agood one though, and I had rather a man preached another man's goodsense, than his own nonsense. And I had rather hear a good sermon read, than a bad one spoken. Let us have good sound sense, real Christiandoctrine, and fervent Christian love, in the first place, and then asmany other good things as we can get. But do let the children of Godhave good wholesome bread, the bread of heaven, and pure living waterfrom the wells of salvation. Don't try to feed men's souls with chaff orchopped straw, and don't give them mud or muddy water to drink. 

--Heard Mr. Hulme last night on "The Cross of Christ. " The sermon was anattempt at fine preaching. It was not to my taste. The preacher did notseem to understand his subject. What he said had nothing to do with theconscience or the heart. It was talk, --tumid talk--high-swelling words, nothing more. 

--Heard Mr. Allen preach on the Flood. He talked a deal aboutgranite--labored hard to prove something; but whether he succeeded ornot, I cannot exactly tell. It was a "_great_ sermon" and had littleeffect. I did not feel much interest in it. 

--Heard him preach another great sermon on Isaiah's vision. It amountedto nothing. I prefer a simpler and more practical kind of preaching. 

--Heard him preach another sermon on death by Adam. It was not so greatnor so foolish as the others. The logic was wearisome, but theapplication was tolerable. 

--Heard Dr. Newton, on preaching Christ. His views on the subject arevery different from Wesley's, and as different from mine. I have heardmany silly sermons on the subject, but not one wise one. Many seem to beafraid of being sensible on religious subjects. They are wise enough onsmaller matters; it is only on the greatest that their understandingsare at fault. But the silliest preachers repeat good words in theirsermons, such as Christ, God, love and heaven, and these words no doubtcall up good thoughts, and revive good feelings in the minds of people, so that the most pitiful preachers may be of some use. But how much moreuseful would good, sound, sensible and truly Christian preachers be, whoalways talked plain Christian truth, and pressed it home in a loving, Christ-like spirit. 

--Heard Mr. Curtis last night. His text and introduction were good; butthe sermon was good for nothing. 

--Heard Mr. Pea this afternoon. The chief use of many preachers is tovisit the members, and stand at the head of the societies as centres ofunion. They do not do much good by preaching. 

--God save me from error and sin. Lead me in the way of truth andrighteousness. I feel a dreadful contempt for some men's preaching. Saveme from going too far. But really, to hear how careful some are to warnpeople against thinking too highly of good works, one might suppose thatthe world and the Church were going to be sent to perdition for too muchpiety and charity; for doing too much good, and making too manysacrifices for God and the salvation of the world. O fools and blind, not to see, that selfishness, idleness, luxury, pride, worldliness, slavery to fashion, neglect of the Bible, ignorance and lukewarmness arethe things which disgrace and weaken the Church, and hinder thesalvation of mankind. 

--Mr. Stoner preached powerfully last night. He said all true Christianswould "sigh and cry on account of the abominations that are done in theland, --that they would accompany their sighing and crying with ceaselesslabors for the removal of those abominations, --that they would try tobring the world into the Church, and lift up the Church to the standardexhibited in the life and character of Christ, --that they would pray, teach, live and give, and if needful, suffer for this great end. " Ihave not heard such a practical, --such a truly Christian Gospel sermonfor a long time. 

--I notice, that in some men's mouths, evangelical sermons meantheological sermons, --wood, hay, and stubble sermons, --sermons withoutany Gospel in them; and that sermons which are evangelical indeed, theytalk of as legal, moral, dry. 

--Mr. Lynn preached on the fall of Jericho yesterday. It was quite adramatic sermon, and it was plainly interesting to the congregation. Iexpect it was useful too. There was not much Christian truth in it, butit stirred the people's better feelings. It made them feel like doingsomething for God. The nonsensical theology introduced would not beunderstood I hope. 

--Heard Mr. T. Parsons preach a beautiful Christian sermon on "Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such aone in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself lest thou also betempted. Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law ofChrist. " It was full of useful instruction and needful caution, and itwas uttered in a truly Christian spirit. It did me good. 

--Heard Mr. Scott on justification. He ventured to "speak as the oraclesof God. " It was a thoroughly Gospel and Wesleyan sermon. He was plainerthan he is in his pamphlets on that subject. I can't say he _made_ thesubject plain, for it was plain already in the Bible--but he _left_ itplain, and that is saying a great deal. He said that the simple way fora man who believes in Christ, to obtain pardon and eternal life is, todo God's will. I distinguish between faith and trust; faith is _belief_;trust or hope is one of its fruits. People _believe_ in Christ, and turnto God; then they _trust_ in Christ and find peace. He did not statethis point with sufficient clearness; and that was the only defect I sawin the discourse. How rich and how apt he is in Scriptural quotationsand illustrations! I had rather hear one of his discourses, than ten ofMr. Allin's. And I had rather hear ten of his, than one of Mr. Allin's. I had rather hear one of Mr. Allin's, than ten; and I had rather hearten of Mr. Scott's than one. I could listen to Mr. Scott the whole yearround. 

--I have just been reading a big book, nearly five hundred pages, on theway of salvation. The Scriptures explain the way of salvation in lessthan a thousandth part the space. "Repent and be converted, that yoursins may be blotted out;" that's the first thing: "Be ye steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord:" that's the second. These two include the whole way of salvation. "Blessed is everyone thathears the word of God and keeps it. " This is both in one. Mystery makerswould be a proper name for some theologians. "In the multitude of wordsthere wanteth not sin;" and there's a fearful multitude of words, --idlewords, and mischievous ones too, --in that Book. "When will vain wordshave an end?"

--Mr. Hatman preached on instantaneous sanctification last night. He wasvery confused, and, as I think, inconsistent in his remarks; and hisarguing about the instantaneousness of sanctification seemed weak. Sanctification, in Scripture language, means, 1. Separation of thingsand persons from common uses, and consecration to sacred uses. 2. Purification. A man is sanctified in the first sense when he ceases todo evil, and begins to do well; and he is sanctified in the second sensein proportion as he is freed from inward defilement, from bad passions, bad tempers, bad dispositions, bad tendencies, and filled with love toGod, to Christ, to God's people, to mankind at large, and to all thingstrue and good. There is no mystery about sanctification. People aresanctified by God's truth. Christ's doctrine enters the mind, and is themeans of changing both the disposition and the life. Men are sanctifiedby the Spirit, using the truth as its instrument. They are sanctified byafflictions, used by God as means to bring them to think on the truth, and see its meaning, and feel its power. They are sanctified by faith, which is a belief in the Truth. They are sanctified by their ownefforts, "Cleansing themselves from all filthiness, both of the fleshand the spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of the Lord. " "For everyone that hath this hope, --the Christian hope of heaven, --in him, purifieth himself even as God is pure. " All this is perfectly plain. Butwhere does the Scripture say anything about people being whollysanctified, or perfected in goodness, instantaneously, by someparticular act of faith? "But God can do it in an instant, " said Mr. Hatman. But it is not all God's work. It is partly ours; and it ispartly the truth's. Can _man_ purify himself as God is pure, in aninstant? God could make a babe into a man in an instant, for anything Iknow; but that is not His way. He allows it to grow gradually, first bythe use of milk and exercise, and then by the use of stronger meat, andgreater labors. And according to Scripture, this is His plan of bringingup spiritual babes to spiritual manhood. God could make seed produce acrop instantaneously, if He would, I suppose; but His plan is to let thegrain grow and ripen gradually. And it is His plan, according toScripture, to let the spiritual grain grow up and the spiritual harvestripen gradually. And it is better it should be so. Gradual growth inknowledge and goodness is most conducive, I believe, to the happiness ofman. I would not make a child into a man all at once if I could. I wouldlet him have the pleasure and the privilege of passing, in the ordinaryway, through all the intermediate stages. Nor would I alter thearrangement with regard to spiritual growth. It is best to learn alesson at a time. You might raise the dough quicker by gunpowder than byleaven or yeast; but I prefer to see it raised in the ordinary way. I amcontent to grow in grace and knowledge, as people grow in strength andstature. It is God's plan, and I like it. If anybody can pass from thegates of hell to the gates of heaven, from the bottom of the horriblepit to the top of the delectable mountains at a jump, let him; I preferto trudge with ordinary pilgrims, and enjoy the pleasures of thejourney, and the beautiful scenery of the road, at my leisure. "The waysare ways of pleasantness; the paths are paths of peace;" and I enjoythem. And I would not for the world, make the impression on people'sminds, that they are in danger of perdition, if they cannot skip acrossthe universe from hell to heaven in no time. God likes spiritualchildren as well as spiritual men, though He would not have them tocontinue children. Why should preachers make things hard that God makeseasy, and require impossible tasks where God asks only a reasonableservice? Some folks have little minds, and some have crooked ones. That's my view of the matter. I am charged with rejecting God's truth. The fact however is, God's truth is the joy and rejoicing of my heart. It is my pleasant food. But I do not like some people's manglement ofthat truth, and I sometimes think the manglers belong to the classof whom Christ said, "It were good for those men if they had neverbeen born. " They lay stumbling-blocks in men's ways, and cause themto fall into doubt, perplexity, and misery. I am a believer insanctification, --full sanctification, --but I won't go beyond the Biblein what I say, either on this or any other point. I will go as far asthe Bible, but no farther. 

--Christianity is love; and love prompts to diligence in all good works. To be a Christian is to have the mind of Christ; but the mind of Christwas a self-sacrificing mind. "He pleased not Himself, " but lived andlabored, suffered and died, for the welfare of mankind. 

How seldom one hears a sermon on living for the good of others, --onloving our neighbors as ourselves, --on going about doing good. I haveread sermons on those subjects; but I have not heard one for years. Ihave heard _charity_ sermons as they are called, and missionary sermons, into which a remark or two on doing good were thrown; but a _sermon_ onthe subject I have not heard. Certain preachers talk about preachingChrist, but they preach any thing rather than Christ. 

--I have just been reading a labored and foolish attempt to prove thatAbel was accepted because he offered animals to God, and that Cain wasrejected because he offered the fruits of the ground. There is no end tothe nonsense that can be talked and written on religious subjects. Hereis a man from whom one expected instruction and guidance, wasting hisgreat powers in worse than idleness. It is a foolish and a dangerousthing to hang the doctrine of reconciliation or redemption on a slenderhook, when there are strong ones plenty to hang it on. But it is not the_Christian_ doctrine of redemption for which Mr. W. Labors so zealously, but a theory, a crotchet, an invention of the elders. The doctrineitself requires no labored proof, no doubtful criticisms, no learned orunlearned inquiry into Greek and Hebrew etymologies. It lies on thesurface of the sacred page. "The Son of man came not to be ministeredunto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many. " "He diedthe just for the unjust, to bring us to God. " "He died for all, thatthey who live should henceforth live not unto themselves, but unto Himwho died for them and rose again. " These theorists make Christianitydisgusting by their metaphysical vanities, and their outlandish jargon. The idea that it is necessary for me to believe that Abel understood theChristian doctrine of redemption, is monstrous. There is no proof thatAbel know anything about it. The probabilities lean all the other way. It is a pity those self-satisfied theorizers have not something else todo, than to encumber religion and perplex good people by their miserablespeculations. 

--There's another book, one thousand two hundred and fifty pages, by aman that had real talent, and that could preach well when he took inhand practical subjects, and who had the appearance of a good man, andnine-tenths of this work of his is mischievous trifling. The clown at atheatre, the mountebank on the stage, are not so badly employed astheological triflers, who darken counsel by words without knowledge. Itis not in prayer only, but in preaching and writing, that men should bein God's fear, and let their words be few. 

Mr. Jones preached last night on Christ in you, the hope of glory. I canunderstand, 1. How Christ, in the sense of _Christianity_, or the_doctrine_ of Christ, can be in us. We sometimes hear from people suchexpressions as: "He is full of Plato, or full of Seneca, or full ofShakespeare, " when speaking of a man who has got his mind full of thesentiments of those writers. And I can understand well enough howChristianity, which brings life and immortality to light, should begetin men's minds a hope of glory. 2. I can understand how Christ, in thesense of Christ's _spirit_, _temper_, _disposition_, _mind_, can be inus. We sometimes say of a person who exhibits much of his father'sdisposition, He has got a deal of his father in him. And I canunderstand how Christ in us in this sense should be, or should kindle, the hope of glory. For the mind of Christ is man's fitness for glory. The mind of Christ, and the life to which it prompts, are the things towhich eternal glory is promised. But I couldn't understand Mr. Jones. Either he had no ideas on the subject, or he failed to convey them tome. 

--I see no mystery in John's doctrine that God dwells in those in whomlove dwells, for God is love. And I see no mystery in what Peter saysabout Christians being partakers of the divine nature; for the Divinenature is purity, wisdom and love. We share the common human nature andthe common animal nature; that is, we have certain qualities orproperties in common with men generally, and with the inferior orders ofliving things. So we share the divine nature, when we have the samedispositions, affections, qualities as the divine Being. And theproperties of the divine being are purity, knowledge, love. 

--I have just been listening to another antinomian sermon. The preachercontended that we are justified and saved solely on account of whatChrist has done and suffered for us, and that the only thing we have todo, is to believe this, or trust in the merits of Christ, and be at restas to our eternal destiny. But if we are saved _solely_ on account ofwhat Christ has done and suffered, why talk as if our _believing_ this, or _trusting in Christ's_ merits, was necessary to salvation? Why not goa step further and say, that neither believing nor trusting has anythingto do with our salvation? But the whole theory is as anti-scriptural andfalse as it is foolish and mischievous. The preacher said, "We are notunder the law, --Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law. " Verytrue; but we are under the Gospel; and the Gospel requires a moreperfect life than the law required. The law of Christ is much stricterthan the law of Moses. He said, "By the works of the law no flesh livingcan be justified. " But we may still be justified by the works of theGospel. "Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven. " "By thy words shalt thou bejustified, and by thy words shalt thou be condemned. " "With what measureye mete, it shall be measured to you again. " "Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy. " "Because thou hast been faithful over afew things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou intothe joy of thy Lord. " "Repent and be converted, that your sins may beblotted out. " "We have confidence in the day of judgment, because as Hewas so are we in this world. "

He said circumcision availeth nothing; and it is true that "thecircumcision which is outward in the flesh" avails nothing under theChristian dispensation: but that which is inward, namely, the puttingaway of all filthiness, and living a holy life, availeth much. 

Then followed a lot of unscriptural and unwise talk about our ownrighteousness and Christ's righteousness. But the truth is, when we loveGod and keep His commandments, --when we love Christ and do as He bidsus, and believe, in consequence, that we are approved of God, and in afair way for heaven, we trust in _God's_ righteousness, or _Christ's_righteousness, and not in a righteousness of our own. The righteousnessof God means the righteousness which God _requires_; the righteousnessof _Christ_ means obedience to His precepts, and conformity to His mindand character. True, if I obey the Gospel, my obedience is my own, butthe _law_, or the righteousness _prescribed_, is Christ's. It is whenmen make a law of their own, --when they set aside God's law, and putsome other law in its place, and expect God's blessing in consequence ofobeying that, that they trust in their _own_ righteousness. And in allsuch cases men's own righteousness, in God's sight, is "as filthy rags. "But hearty, loving obedience to God's _own_ law is never regarded by Him"as filthy rags, " but as a rich adorning. Real Christian goodness is, inthe sight of God, "of great price. "

 "Than gold or pearls more precious far, And brighter than the morning star. "

Christian obedience is a sacrifice with which God is well pleased: "Todo good and to communicate forget not, for with such sacrifices God iswell pleased. " He alone trusts in the righteousness of Christ who hearsChrist's words and does them, --who cultivates Christ's mind, and livesas Christ lived, and who, in doing so, expects, according to Christ'spromise, God's blessing and eternal life. The idea that God looks on anypersons as having lived like Christ when they have not done so; or thatHe supposes any persons to be righteous, or treats them as righteous, when they are not so, is foolish and anti-scriptural in the extreme. Andit is unmethodistical too. Yet here is a Methodist preacher so-called, dealing out this mischievous and miserable folly. And alas he is notalone. And these are the men who abuse others as heretics. 

--The good done where preachers preach theology is not done by thepreaching, I fancy, but by stray truth from the Gospels, and by theChristian lives and Christian labors of simple-minded, Bible-loving, non-theological members of the church. God bless them!

--Wesley has thirty definitions of religion, and they all mean, insubstance, loving God and loving man, and living to do good. Wesley wasalways sensible in proportion as he got away from under the influence ofthe prevailing Theology. 

--Some talk as if a religious education can never be the means of achild's conversion, --that, do for your children what you will, they willstill, like others, require a distinct and full conversion when theycome of age. I cannot see why a good Christian mother talking to herchild from her old arm-chair, and praying with it as it kneels by herside, or the good example and godly training of a pious father, may notbe made as effectual to the gradual conversion of a child as thepreaching of a pastor from the pulpit. Nor can I see why a gradualelevation of a child to the higher spiritual life should not be aspossible and as probable as the sudden elevation of a hardened andinveterate sinner. 'You cannot give your children grace, ' it is said:but it is easy to answer, 'GOD can give children grace throughthe medium of Christian parents, as well as through public preachers andteachers. ' I encourage people to bring up their children in Christianknowledge and goodness, by telling them that God may be expected tobless their labors to the sanctification and salvation of their childrenfrom their early days. Baxter used to thank God that he was led by hisgood parents to love God so early that he could not recollect a timewhen he did not love Him. 

--Churches exist in this world to remind us of the eternal laws which weare bound to obey. So far as they do this, they answer their end, andare honored in doing so. It would have been better for all of us--itwould be better for us now, could churches keep this their peculiarfunction steadily and singly before them. Unfortunately, they havepreferred in later times the speculative side of things to thepractical. 

--There is a tendency in men to corrupt religion; to change it from anaid and incentive to a holy life, into a contrivance to enable men tosin without fear of punishment. Obedience to God's law is dispensedwith, if men will diligently profess certain opinions, or practicallytake part in certain rites. However scandalous the moral life, theprofession of a particular belief, or attention to certain forms, at themoment of death, is held to clear the soul. 

--It would be easy to give a hundred instances of doctrines to be heardin sermons and found in religious books, which are nowhere taught inScripture. And some of them exert a mighty influence for evil on thechurch and the world. They check the spread of Christianity. Theystrengthen the cause of infidelity. They keep people away from Christ. They make an all but impassable gulf between the church and the mass ofhumanity. 

--Some think they would not have enough to talk about if they were togive up all the doctrines or notions for which I say there is noscriptural authority. One preacher told me I had already spoiled some ofhis best sermons. He said he had never been able to preach them withcomfort since he began to listen to my conversation. The truth is, preachers will never know what great, good things there are to be talkedabout, till they get rid of their foolish fancies. Nor will they knowthe true pleasure of talking till they come to feel that theirutterances are the words of eternal truth. And so far will they be fromnot having enough to talk about, that if they give themselves in aChristian spirit, to study the truth as it is in Jesus, they will neverhave time to utter a tenth of the blessed things that will presentthemselves to their minds. 

A hundred years would not afford me time enough to say all that I getglimpses of on religious subjects as presented in nature and in theScriptures. Every subject I take in hand requires ten times more time todo it justice than is generally allowed for a sermon. And the subjectsare numberless. We live in an infinite universe of truth. 

"I rejoice, " says one, "that I have been led, in the course of God'sprovidence, to do so much as I have done, towards purging revelationfrom those doctrines and practices which were discordant with itsteachings, and prevented its reception with many. "

Shall I ever be able to do anything in this way? God help me. If I couldmake the Church and the ministry more Christ-like, and more powerful forgood, what a blessing it would be. What a world of work wants doing, both in the church and in the world. Save me from an impatient, pugnacious, disagreeable spirit. Perhaps I see the needs of others morethan I feel my own. Perhaps I am in danger of being more eager forreform in others, than for a thoroughly Christian spirit and behavior inmyself. 

How many words and phrases one hears in sermons and in prayers, and whatheaps of expressions one meets with in religious works, that are notwarranted by Scripture or common sense!

--Some of the words and phrases that are more frequently used byChristians than any other, are unscriptural ones. Some of them expressunscriptural ideas. Some of them are names of things that have noexistence. Both the words and the ideas for which they stand areanti-christian. Many of the things said from the pulpit areunintelligible. The people strain their minds to get at a meaning, butto no purpose. It is Latin or Greek to them. They listen, but do notlearn. They hear sounds, but catch no sense. They reverence, theyworship, but they do not understand. They believe, they feel, that thereare great spiritual realities, but they are not made clear to theirminds. The devouter portion of the people still pray, and on the whole, live sober, righteous and godly lives; but multitudes are discouraged, and take themselves away. 

 "The hungry sheep look up and are not fed. "

They hear words, but get no ideas. Religion does not come to them fromthe pulpit as a reality. It does not make itself felt as truth. Booksand lecturers on science treat of realities, and treat of them in wordsthat can be understood; but many books on religion, and many preachers, seem to deal only in words. And the consequence is, many fancy religionis a delusion, a fanaticism, a dream. Others believe there is somethingin it, but they cannot conceive what it is. Yet teachers and preachersappear not properly to understand why so many get weary of sermons andreligious books. Let them talk in plain good English, and say nothingbut what has some great Christian reality under it, and sermons andreligious books will be the most popular things on earth. 

--I would never sacrifice Christian truth to conciliate the world; but Iwould sacrifice everything at variance with Christian truth; and I wouldpresent Christian truth itself in as intelligible and taking a form aspossible. 

--The antinomian theology has had a terribly corrupting effect on manymembers of churches. I meet proofs of it every day. God help me to do myduty. Some of my hearers say to me, 'We come to church to be comforted, and not to be continually told to do, do, do. ' I do not wish people tobe comforted unless they will do their duty; and they will never _lack_comfort if they _do_ do it. Comfort is for those who labor to comfortand benefit others, and not for those who care only for themselves. Itry to make the easy-going, indolent and selfish professors miserable:and in some cases I succeed. But I make others happy, thank God, byinducing them to give themselves heartily to Christian work. 

--Here are a few more good words from Baxter: 'Many proclaim the praiseof truth in general, but reject and persecute its various portions. The_name_ of truth they honor, but the truth itself they despise. '

'Passion is a great seducer of the understanding, and strangely blindethand perverteth the judgment. '

'When passion hath done boiling and the heart is cooled, and leaveth thejudgment to do its work without clamor and disturbance, it is strange tosee how things will appear to you to be quite of another tendency thanin your frenzy you esteemed them. '

'Be more studious to hold and improve those common truths which allprofess, than to oppose the particular opinions of any, except so far asthose common truths require you to do so. '

'Be not borne down by the censoriousness of any, to outrun your ownunderstanding and the truth, and to comply with them in their errors andextremes; but hold to the truth and keep your station. 'Let them returnunto thee, but return not thou unto them. ' Jer. Xv. 19. '

'Believe nothing that contradicteth the end of all religion. If itstendency be against a holy life, it cannot be truth. '

'Plead not the darker texts of Scripture against those that are moreplain and clear, nor a few texts against many that are as plain. Thatpassage that is interpreted against the most plain and frequentexpressions of the Scriptures is certainly misinterpreted. '

I will carry out these principles to the best of my ability. 

--I notice that Christ never tells people that they cannot repent and doGod's will without divine help. He did not think it necessary to supplypeople with excuses for their neglect of duty. And He knew that divinehelp is never withheld from any man. All _have_ the help needed to dowhat God requires. There is no danger of any man trying to do anythinggood before he receives power from God. God is always beforehand withmen. 

--I have had a troubled night. I have not slept soundly for a week. Ihave had odd hours of sleep, but never a quarter of a night's unbrokenrest. Parties will talk with me about religion, and I am foolish enoughto talk with them, yet we never quite agree. They insist on thesacredness of every old notion and of every old word they have receivedfrom their teachers, and I believe in the sacredness of nothing butScripture truth and common sense. They cannot understand me, and Icannot accept their nonsense. And they have no idea of liberty ortoleration. They allow no excuse for not being sound in the faith, andno one is sound in the faith according to their notions but those whoagree with them. They know nothing of the foundation on which theConnexion was built. They know nothing of Wesley: nothing, at least, ofhis liberal views. The fundamental principles of the Connexion justifyme in my freedom of investigation, and in the sentiments which I holdand teach; but they do not know this. They know nothing but that everyone is to think as they think, and talk as they talk. Hence they keep meon the rack. 

I am tired. I feel sad. I could weep. I feel as if I could like to runaway, like Elijah, and hide myself in the wilds of some great mountain. But no; I must stand my ground, and do my duty. Shall truth be timid, and error bold? Shall folly rage and be confident, and wisdom be afraidto whisper? Help me, O God, to do my duty as Thy servant, and as theminister of Thy Gospel. 

--There are some verses of hymns that are sung in almost all religiousassemblies that have nothing answering to them in Scripture. John Wesleyonce said, that the hymns which were the greatest favorites among theMethodists were the worst in the whole Hymn Book. It is the same still Ifear, to some extent. Let those who would like to know to what words andhymns we refer, take themselves to task for a time, and demandScriptural authority for every word and expression they utter. We wouldsave them the trouble, were it not that we have learned that instructionfrom others is of no use to people who do not endeavor to teachthemselves. 

But take a sample or two. I cannot sing the following:

 "Forbid it Lord that I should boast Save in the death of Christ my God. "

 "The immortal God hath died for me, " &c. 

Jesus died, and God dwelt in Jesus, but God did not die. Greatallowances are made to poets; but they should not be encouraged to writeimpossibilities. 

 "A heart that always feels Thy blood, " &c. 

I feel thankful for the love which led Jesus to die for me; but I cannotsay I feel the blood. I feel the happy effects of the death orblood-shedding of Jesus; and perhaps that is what the poet means. 

 "When from the dust of death I rise, To claim my mansion in the skies, Even then this shall be all my plea, Jesus hath lived and died for me. "

This is not scriptural. The good servant in the parable of the talentssays: "Lord, Thou deliveredst unto me five talents: behold, I havegained besides them five talents more. " And so far was his Lord fromfinding fault with his plea, that he answered, "Well done, good andfaithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will makethee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy Lord. " Andwhy may not other faithful servants use the same plea?

John makes perfect love, or likeness to Jesus, the ground of confidenceor boldness in the day of judgment. How strange that Christian writersshould be so ignorant of the Bible, or so regardless of its teachings. Some of them seem to think they are saying very fine things when theyare talking their anti-Christian nonsense. Help me, O God, to speak andact in accordance with Thy word. 

Fine writing may be a fine thing, but true writing is a finer. 

I suppose it is as hard for theologians to give up their anti-Christianwords and notions as it is for drunkards to give up their drink. But itwould be well for them to consider, that self-denial may be as necessaryto _their_ salvation, as it is to the salvation of infidels andprofligates. 

I would sacrifice a little poetry to truth. I would not be veryparticular, but do let us have substantial truth. Do not let us encumberand disfigure religion by absurdities, impossibilities, and antinomianabominations. 

Some one has said, "The world is very jealous of those who assail itsreligious ignorance. Its old mistakes are great idols. No man has evercarried a people one march nearer the promised land without being indanger of being stoned. No man has ever purified the life of an age, without substantially laying down his own. "

I am anxious only for truth and righteousness. Truth and righteousness Irespect in all sects, from the Quakers to the Catholics; and I hatenonsense, and lies, and sin, in professing Christians, as much as inTurks and pagans. 

So end the extracts from my Diary. 

I have just been reading an article in the _Christian Advocate_, and Ican't resist the temptation to give a short extract or two. 

"Not only is there an emasculated theology, but there is not a littleemasculated preaching. 

"Nothing is emptier or feebler than cant--ringing the changes on whatmay be called the stock phrases of one's sect. John Wesley once said, 'Let but a pert, self-sufficient animal, that has neither sense norgrace, bawl out something about 'Christ, ' or 'His blood, ' or'justification by faith, ' and there are not wanting those who will cryout, 'What a fine Gospel sermon!' For myself, I prefer a sermon oneither good tempers or good works to such 'Gospel sermons. '

"Take away from certain preachers their 'heavenly tone, ' as the old ladycalled it--their sing-song cadences, and their favorite pulpitphrases--and you take away the principal part of their stock in trade. Out upon such 'words without knowledge'--sound without sense!

"Quite as destitute of Gospel power is that preaching which consistslargely in the presentation of old worn-out theories, musty scholasticphilosophies about religion, usually paraded under the pretentious titleof 'doctrine. '

"The devil, it is said, once inspired a dead priest to preach anorthodox sermon. On being questioned by his imps why he ventured on sucha deliverance, he replied very significantly, that nothing made infidelsmore effectually than orthodoxy preached by dead men's lips. "

CHAPTER X. 

THE REFORMING TENDENCY. 

I had a third tendency which helped to get me into trouble; namely, areforming tendency. Earnest and active-minded young men are generallyreformers. In me the reforming tendency was unusually strong. I wantedto reform everybody and everything, and to do it thoroughly, and withoutdelay. And I commenced operations very early. 

1. It was the custom of my class-leader to read over to his class once aquarter the rules of society, and to request the members, if they wereaware of any breach of any of the rules by any of the members, to namethe matter as he proceeded. Now one of the rules forbade the putting onof gold or costly apparel; yet several of the members of our class puton both. So when he came to that rule, I asked why it was not enforced. The leader seemed confused. One of the offenders was the wife of one ofthe travelling preachers, and another was the wife of an influentiallayman, and both were customers at his store, and he had neverentertained a thought, I imagine, of running the risk of offending themby rebuking them for their offences; so he muttered something in the wayof excuse and then passed on. The truth was, that the rule, thoughcopied from the New Testament, and regarded by Mr. Wesley as of greatimportance, was no longer considered binding either by the preachers orthe leading members. The reading of the rules in the class was merely aform, and my remarks, instead of inducing my offending class-mates toreturn to the old Methodist custom, only caused them and those who sidedwith them, to look on me as a troubler of Israel. 

2. I got myself into a little trouble on a later occasion at a localpreachers' meeting. It was the custom at those meetings for thesuperintendent preacher to read over the names of the local preachers, and to request any brother who knew of any breach of rule by any of hisbrethren, to name the matter. When the name of Mr. H. Was read over, Istated that he had been guilty of evil speaking against one of hisbrethren. I gave the particulars, and the offence was acknowledged, butthe offending brother was not without excuse, and the business of themeeting proceeded. But there was a very strong feeling in the minds ofmany that such attempts as I was making to press neglected rules on theattention of the meeting, ought not to be encouraged; and my endeavorsto enforce consistency brought down upon me many sharp rebukes. 

3. Among the books that I read in those early days was _Mason onSelf-knowledge_. I found some excellent remarks on temperance andfrugality in this work. I met with some similar remarks in translatingportions of the writings of Seneca and Cicero. In a conversation that Ihad with one of the travelling preachers, and a person that wassupplying the place of another travelling preacher, I quoted thebeautiful sentiments which I had been reading and translating, and addedsome remarks of my own, with a view to recommend attention to thelessons they inculcated. The travelling preacher remained silent, buthis companion answered me with a scornful laugh, and said, there was noneed to urge such matters on them, for they had not the _means_ to beanything else but frugal and temperate. This was neither true norcourteous, and though I made no answer, it left an impression on my mindby no means favorable to the wisdom and piety of those who, at thattime, were placed over me as my teachers and guides. 

4. Though I met with such poor encouragement in my early efforts toreform or check abuses among my brethren, I still persisted in mycourse, even after I became a travelling preacher. It was the custom ofthe richer members of society to have large parties, to which theyinvited each other and the preachers and their families. At many ofthese parties there was a good deal of drinking, and a serious waste ofmoney on many things that were not only useless but injurious. And eachfamily tried to outdo the rest in the costliness of their parties. Iregarded this custom as anti-Christian, and tried to get it changed forsomething better. I thought the money wasted on drink and hurtfulluxuries would be better spent in doing good. In some cases I referredto the words of Christ about making feasts, recorded in Luke xiv. 12-14;but no one seemed to think Christ's rule to be binding on professingChristians now. Even my brother ministers thought me needlesslyparticular, and helped to render my efforts for reform bothunsuccessful, and productive of disagreeable results. 

5. The custom of treating the rich who came to our chapels with morerespect than the poor, was as prevalent probably when I became aminister, as it was in the days of James. I often saw the officials ofthe church conducting gaily-dressed people to comfortable pews, whilethey left such as were poorly clad to stand in the aisles, or to findtheir way into seats themselves; and on some occasions I showed mydissatisfaction with such proceedings. 

6. It was customary to have society meetings in each place once aquarter, and at these meetings I used to refer to what I thought amissin the conduct of professors, and to urge attention to such lessons ofChrist and His Apostles as seemed to be generally overlooked orforgotten. On some occasions too on week nights, instead of preaching aregular sermon, I used to give a kind of lecture or exhortation, inwhich I presented a summary of neglected duties, and read over thepassages of Scripture in which they were enjoined, making remarks onthem. There were many matters pertaining to marriage, to the educationand government of children, and to domestic duties generally; and therewere matters pertaining to trade, to social intercourse, to mentalimprovement, and the like, on which preachers, as a rule, were entirelysilent in their sermons, from the beginning of the year to the end. Yetmany of these matters were of the utmost importance, and for want ofinformation on them many religious people were neither so happythemselves, nor so useful to others, as they ought to be. On thesematters I spoke in as plain and faithful a way as possible. I cautionedthe young against wasting their time, advised them to spend theirleisure hours in reading and writing, told them what books to read, andhow to read them, showed them the most profitable plan of reading theBible, warned them against bad company, and advised them not to spendtoo much time even in good company. I urged them, if they thought ofbeing preachers, to endeavor to be preachers of the highest order, workmen that needed not to be ashamed, rightly distributing the word oftruth. And whether they thought of being preachers or not, I urged themto improve their talents, and to become as wise, as able and as usefulas possible. Many were delighted, and reduced my lessons to practice. Others however took offence, and repaid my endeavors to do them goodwith uncharitable censures. 

7. It was the custom in the Body to which I belonged to keep the doorsof the annual conference closed against all but those who were sent asdelegates by the circuits. I and a few others thought this course led toinconsiderate, and, in some cases, to unjust and oppressive measures, and in 1835 I wrote a letter on the subject to the _Christian Advocate_. My remarks were not agreeable to the leading members of conference, andI was instantly called to account and severely censured, and threatenedwith the heaviest punishment if ever I offended so grievously again. Thereason why my letter proved so offensive was probably its truthfulness, for the change I recommended was afterwards adopted, though not till theold objectionable system had produced most disastrous consequences. 

8. One rule of the Connexion to which I belonged forbade the preachersto marry till after they had been engaged in the ministry from four tofive years or upwards. This regulation seemed to me to be the cause ofserious evils. Some of these evils I had myself experienced, and othersI had seen in the conduct and mishaps of many of my brethren. The reasonassigned for the law seemed to me to be not only insufficient, but to bea disgrace to a body of Christians situated as _we_ were. I urged analteration or a repeal of the law, recommending conference to take outthe best and ablest men as ministers, whether they were married or not, and to allow such ministers as were single to marry whenever theythought fit, and to urge the churches to provide for the additionalexpense of married preachers by a little additional liberality. Therewere members that wasted as much on one foolish and mischievous party, as would have made up the difference between a single man's salary and amarried man's salary. There were members that spent as much inintoxicating drinks as would have kept a married preacher or two out andout. There were tradesmen that could have supported five or sixpreachers out of their yearly profits, if they had been as liberal asthe old selfish Jews were required to be. If they had been as liberal as_Christians_ are required to be, --if they had loved their neighbors, orJesus, or God, as they loved themselves, they could have supportedtwenty preachers, and still retained enough to keep their families incomfort and plenty, and to carry on and extend their businesses too. Toshut good men out of the ministry because they were married, and take indoubtful men because they were single, was, in my view, disgraceful andinexcusable. But in this also I was considered wrong by the rulers ofthe Connexion, and was once more censured and admonished for what wasconsidered my presumptuous interference. 

9. Fifty years ago, and for some years after, almost everybody used todrink intoxicating drinks. Ale and beer, wine and spirits, were asfreely used as tea and coffee, and were taken in great quantities bymany even in the church and ministry. I remember once, while yet a localpreacher, going round with Mr. Etchells, a new minister in my nativetown, on his first pastoral visits, to show him where the principalmembers of the church lived. He was invited to drink at every house, andnever failed to comply with the invitations. I saw him drink sixteenglasses of beer, wine and spirits, on that one round, occupying only twoor three hours. This same minister prosecuted Mr. Farrar, hissuperintendent, for drunkenness, and got him suspended. Whether hissuperintendent drank more than he or not, I do not know, but he did notkeep up appearances so well. He showed himself drunk in the pulpit, --sodrunk, on one or two occasions, that he was unable to speak plainly, oreven to stand steadily. He also fell down in the streets sometimes, andhad to be carried home. His colleague did not commit himself in suchways, though he drank enough at times in one day to make half a dozensober people drunk. 

The leading member in the Methodist church, Richard Wilson, opened thefirst wine and spirit store at Bramley, and corrupted the whole countryround with his wares, doing far more for the devil and sin than thepreachers could do for God and holiness. Yet no one seemed to thinkthere was anything dishonorable or diabolical in the business. 

At a social party to which I was invited at Leeds, consisting ofpreachers and leading members of the church, one man, a preacher, got sodrunk, that he became a most distressing spectacle. I cannot describehis mishaps. There were others who ought to have committed themselves inthe same sad way, for they drank as much, and even more, but they hadstronger constitutions, or were better seasoned. 

At Liverpool, my first station, every one on whom the preachers calledin their pastoral rounds, asked them to drink. Even Dr. Raffles, thepopular Congregational minister, had wine and cakes brought out, when Iand my superintendent called on him one morning. Wine and cakes, orcakes and spirits, were placed on the table by all who were not too poorto buy such things, and even the poorer members contrived to supplythemselves with rum or whisky. And all expected the preachers to drink. And the preachers did drink. Mr. Allin, my superintendent, was not byfar the greatest drinker in the Connexion, yet he seldom allowed thepoison placed before him to remain untasted. I was so organized, that Inever could drink a full glass of either wine or ale without feelingmore or less intoxicated, and for spirits I had quite a distaste; sothat I was obliged to take intoxicating drinks very sparingly. Yet Iconformed, to some extent, to the prevailing custom; and it was not, Ifear, through any great goodness of my own, that I did not become adrunkard. Several of my fellow-ministers became drunkards. Mr. Allinhimself, after he fell under the influence of that bad rich man atSheffield became a drunkard, and brought on shocks of paralysis by hisexcesses. My superintendent at Sheffield drank himself into _deliriumtremens_, and I fear he never got over his bad habits. Mr. Chapman was anotorious sot. I knew him personally, and was compelled, at times, towitness his disgusting habits. Yet he was never expelled, though he wassuperannuated some forty years or more before his death. Hissuperannuation reduced his income some seventy-five per cent. , and madeit impossible for him to drink so freely as he had been wont, and so, very probably, helped to prolong his miserable life. 

While stationed at Liverpool, I was called away to supply the place ofthe superintendent preacher in the Chester circuit for a few weeks, whohad died very suddenly, under very peculiar circumstances. His name wasDunkerley. I was told by persons likely to know the truth, that he was avery drunken man. On one occasion, while he was over at Liverpool, hefell down in the Theatre Square, and had to be taken up and carried intoa neighboring shop. At first it was supposed he had had a fit; but alittle further attention to the case revealed the secret that he wasdrunk. On another occasion, on his return from Liverpool to Chester, hewas observed, when he got off the coach, to stagger backwards and falldown. Some friends that were waiting for his arrival, ran and helped himup, and took him to a member's house just by. He was found to be drunkthen also. The members spoke to him on the subject, and reproved himsharply, and then put him to bed. The Tuesday night following, thematter was mentioned at the leaders' meeting, when he was present. Theleaders told him that such conduct could not be tolerated, and thatunless a change took place for the better, the matter would have to belaid before the Quarterly Meeting. The preacher acknowledged his fault, and promised, if they would forgive him that once, that he would do sono more. I believe that from that time he gave up the use ofintoxicating drinks for a week or two; but shortly after, having to goto the Welsh side of the Circuit, he began to use them again. At one ofthe places on that side of the Circuit, the leaders were accustomed tohave their meetings in a room in a public-house, near the Chapel, and tolodge the preacher there. Perhaps poor Dunkerley thought it would hardlylook right for him to be accommodated at a public-house with a bed, andyet take nothing to drink; so he got some gin. The relish for the ginmust have returned upon him with great power when he began to taste it, for he drank very freely. He drank so much, that the publican himselfbegan to feel alarmed for him. A short time after he had gone up stairsto bed, the people of the house heard a noise of an unusual character inhis room, and on going to see what was the matter, they found thepreacher on his knees, in an apoplectic fit, the blood gushing from hisnose and ears. He died the same evening. He died drunk. 

It was this man's place that I went to supply. I do not wonder now thatDunkerley and several other preachers in the New Connexion weredrunkards, when I take into consideration the customs and habits of thepeople of the Connexion in those days. I never met with anything in anysociety, that I recollect, more at variance with the principles ofChristian temperance, and more likely to lead both preachers and peopleinto drunkenness and profligacy, than the habits and customs of many ofthe members of the New Connexion in the Chester circuit. In the firstplace they were all users of intoxicating drinks, and all those thatwere in tolerable circumstances regularly kept spirits as well asmilder, weaker kinds of intoxicating drinks in their houses. In the nextplace a preacher could never call at the houses of those people, whatever the time of day, without being urged to drink of either thestronger or weaker kinds of intoxicating drinks. And he could hardlyrefuse to drink without seeming to slight the kindness of the people, and running the risk of giving offence. In the third place they werevery much addicted to extravagant social parties, pleasure jaunts, &c. They were worse than the people of Leeds in this respect; unless theywere worse than usual while I was there. All the time that I was inChester, there was not a single week or day when they had not eithersome dinner-party or tea-party, or both, or else some pleasure jaunt onthe water or on land. And those pleasure parties and feasts were alwaysoccasions of extravagant eating and drinking. Besides abundance of fleshand game, and other luxuries, there was always an overwhelming supply ofintoxicating drinks, and great quantities were consumed. I have seen menon those occasions drink five, six, eight, or even ten glasses of wineor spirits, besides drinking ale, or porter, or wine at meals. Irecollect very distinctly seeing a person, and that a preacher, drink, in addition to what he consumed over his meal, ten glasses of Port winebetween dinner and tea, after which he went to preach. 

Religious society was not quite so corrupt in the principal towns of theHanley circuit, where I was next stationed, as at Liverpool and Chester, yet there was a fearful amount of respectable intemperance there. Therewas no end to the feasting. And as I, though so young, was very popular, I was always expected to be present. The luxuries in which I indulgedbrought on indigestion. Indigestion, and close study, and hard work inthe pulpit, brought on a most wearisome languor and depression. To helpme, one rich friend sent me a bottle of Sherry wine. Another sent meElderberry wine. These made me worse. It was well this mistaken kindnessdid not ruin me. But I was preserved, thank God, both from death anddrunkenness. 

For two years more I was in the midst of these awful temptations tointemperance, and a witness to their deadly effects on several of mybrethren. I felt that I was in danger. And I saw that the church wassuffering. I looked round for a remedy. 

Just then there came rumors of a temperance society, and of attempts ata temperance reformation. One of our young preachers had joined thisnew society, and had labelled his whisky and brandy _medicine_. He lefthis beer, and porter, and wine, unlabelled, and drank them as freely asbefore. The people who told me of this, ridiculed the man, and ridiculedthe movement for temperance reform. I was rather pleased with the news, though news of a more thorough movement might have pleased me better. But the beginnings of things are small. The movement soon became radicalenough, and I kept pace with it. 

In 1832 I gave up the use of ardent spirits, and became a member of theold-fashioned temperance society. In 1833 I gave up the use ofintoxicating drinks of all kinds, and joined the teetotal society. In1834 I gave up the use of tobacco. A few months later I gave up tea andcoffee, and took water as my usual drink. 

These changes in my way of life gave great offence to many in the churchto which I belonged, and led them to speak of me, and act towards me, ina way that was anything but kind and agreeable. This was especially thecase with regard to my disuse of intoxicating drinks, and my advocacy ofteetotalism. I might have been borne with perhaps if I had become adrunkard; for drunkards were in some cases tolerated; but a teetotalerwas not to be endured. Some called me a fool, and some a madman, and oneman pronounced me no better than a suicide and a murderer. "You will bedead, " said he, "in twelve months, if you persist in your miserablecourse, and what will become of your wife and children? And what accountcan you give of the people you are leading to untimely death by yourexample?" One person at Chester, at whose house I had visited some yearsbefore, when supplying the place of the deceased minister, would neitherinvite me to his house, nor speak to me in the street, except in the wayof insult, now that I had become a teetotaler. He said no one shouldever sit at his table who would not take a glass of wine. And I neverdid sit at his table after. He invited my colleagues, and he invited theold superannuated minister, whose character I cannot describe, but henever invited me. 

One object that I had in view in adopting my abstemious way of life wasto save a little money to buy books. I had become an author too, andhad thoughts of publishing a number of works, and I wanted to be able todo so without having to go into debt. Then I wanted to do good in otherways. I liked to be able to give a little to the distressed and needythat I was called upon to visit. And I liked to subscribe occasionallyto funds for the erection of new schools and chapels in circuits where Iwas stationed. Among my reasons for becoming a teetotaler was a desireto induce others to do so, who seemed to me to be likely, if theycontinued to use intoxicating drinks, to become drunkards. Then I hadseen the terrible effects of the drinking system, both in the Church andamong my relations. And I was anxious for the success of every kind ofmeasure that seemed likely to promote the reformation and salvation ofmankind. 

10. I had not been a teetotaler long before I became anxious to see mybrethren in the ministry teetotalers. I wrote a letter to the_Temperance Advocate_, giving an account of the experiment I had made, and stating the happy results by which it had been followed, and urgingothers, by all the considerations that had influenced my own mind, toadopt and advocate the teetotal principle. Mr. Livesey sent a copy ofthe _Advocate_ containing my letter to all the ministers of the Body towhich I belonged. There were but few of them however who seemed to beable to enter into my views and feelings, or to understand andappreciate the motives by which I was actuated. The generality looked onthe course I had taken as a proof of a restless and ill-regulated mind, and instead of following my example, treated me and my teetotalism withridicule. Some were angry, and scolded me in right good earnest. Theysupposed that it was _I_ that had sent them the Paper containing myletter, and seemed to think themselves called upon to resent myinterference with their tastes and habits in a very decided manner. Several of them sent me very offensive letters, and one of themconcluded a long outpouring of abuse and insolence with some verycutting but just remarks on my inconsistency in pressing abstinence fromintoxicating drinks so earnestly on others, while I myself was guilty ofthe unreasonable and offensive practice of smoking tobacco. 

I had long had misgivings as to the propriety of smoking, and when Iread this cutting rebuke, I resolved to smoke no more. I said to mywife, "They shall not be able to charge me with inconsistency again onthat score, " and I there and then broke my pipe on the grate, andemptied my tobacco cup into the fire, and I have never annoyed others, or defiled myself, with the abomination of tobacco smoke or tobaccospittle from that day to this. My angry correspondent had done me animportant service. 

11. I met with some of the bitterest and most persistent enemies ofteetotalism in the circuit in which I was then travelling. There wereseveral members of society, class-leaders, and local preachers, in andaround Chester, who were slaves to intoxicating drinks. Some of themwere habitual drunkards, and others of them were not much better; andthey treated all who would not countenance their excesses as personalenemies. Many of them were accustomed to go to public houses, and sitthere drinking and smoking for hours together, like ordinary drunkards. This horrible habit they gave up shortly after my appointment to thecircuit, but several of them raged against me with tremendous fury, andwould have done anything to destroy my influence. At first they werekept in check to some extent by the wisdom and goodness of mysuperintendent, who, though he did not become a teetotaler himself, showed great respect for those who did. When he left Chester, a man of avery different character came in his place, who sided with the drinkers, and took a savage delight in annoying the teetotalers, and exulted as ifhe had achieved some wonder of benevolence and piety when he had inducedsome poor reformed drunkard to break his pledge, though he plunged againinto the horrors of intemperance. I called one forenoon on Mr. Downs. Hewas frantic, and his wife was wild with anxiety and terror. She seemedas if she had been awake and weeping all the night. I soon saw the causeof the dreadful spectacle. Downs had been a drunkard, but had, under myinfluence, become a teetotaler, and joined the church. His wife had beena member of the church for some years. She was overjoyed with thereformation and conversion of her husband, and was promising for herselfand her husband, for the future, a very happy life. My superintendenthad got poor Downs into his company, and by reasoning, ridicule, andcoaxing, had induced him to take a glass of ale. His horrible appetitefor intoxicating drink returned with irresistible force, and he drankhimself drunk. He went home in a very deplorable condition. His wife, distressed beyond measure, got him to bed, and he fell asleep, and she, poor woman, sat watching him, and weeping, hoping he might wake tolament his error and become again a sober man. He awoke in a fury, andattempted to destroy himself. He was mad with shame and horror, anddeclared he could not and would not live. When I entered, his wife hadbeen watching him and struggling with him for several hours, to keep himfrom suicide. I just got in in time to save the man, and relieve hisexhausted wife, and I was enabled to reconcile the man to live a littlelonger, and try teetotalism again. My misguided superintendent neverattempted to reason with me, but when he thought he had a chance ofpunishing me for my teetotalism, he snatched at the apparent opportunitywith the greatest eagerness. 

One week night, when appointed to preach in Chester Chapel, I gave thepeople a sermon on temperance. Some days after, I was summoned to ameeting of officials, to give an account of my doings. I attended. Mysuperintendent, the bitter enemy of teetotalism, was in the chair, andon each side of him sat a number of men of similar feelings, and ofgrosser habits. I was told there was a complaint against me, to theeffect that the last time I was at Chester I had preached teetotalisminstead of the Gospel. I said, "Is that all?" And they answered "Yes. ""Then you ought to be ashamed of yourselves, " I said, and left themeeting. What they did after my departure I was never told. 

One man in that neighborhood circulated a report that I had asked mymother-in-law, who had been staying some time at our house, to have aglass of brandy and water, when she was leaving for home in the coach. This slander was refuted by a deputation, who at once visited mymother-in-law, and brought back from her a flat contradiction of thestatement. 

I ought to say, that while I was in this circuit, hundreds of drunkardswere reformed, many of whom became happy, exemplary, and useful membersof the Church. I was the means of tens of thousands becoming teetotalersin the country round about, and the happy effects of my labors in thoseregions remain, to some extent, to the present day. 

12. In 1837, while I was stationed in the Mossley Circuit, I began aweekly periodical called the _Evangelical Reformer_. I had long wishedfor a suitable means of laying my views before my friends, but had foundnone. The editor of the magazine published by the Body to which Ibelonged was a very disagreeable man, and to me he was moreunaccommodating and offensive than to others. He would have publishedarticles under my name, but not till he had altered them, and made themconformable to his own ideas and tastes. And this was more than I couldendure. There was another periodical which I could use, and had usedoccasionally, but it lent itself to ill-disposed people as a vehicle ofslander, and I had ceased to feel myself at liberty to give it mycountenance. With a small periodical of my own I could communicate withmy friends at pleasure, and I used my _Evangelical Reformer_ for thispurpose with great freedom. I published my views on temperance, onmarriage, on trade, on education, on dress, on diet, on religiousparties, on books and reading, on the use of money, on the duty of theChurch to support its poor members, on toleration and human creeds, andon a multitude of other subjects, and urged on the churches a reform onall these points. My freedom of expression soon brought me into freshtrouble. An article which I published on "Toleration and Human Creeds, "was considered by some of my brethren to be highly objectionable anddangerous, and was brought before Conference. Conference was pressed bymany to condemn the article, and to show its disapprobation of it bypunishing the author. Others entreated that Conference should spare theauthor, lest mischief should follow, and content itself with privatelyexpressing disapprobation of the article. The latter parties prevailed;but their moderation was made of no effect by the editor of the magazinewho wickedly published the obnoxious resolution to the world, and sorendered it necessary for me to write again on the subject, to defendmyself and my article. The result was a controversy between me and someof my brethren, which led at length to the most serious consequences. 

Another article was objected to by many of my brother ministers. Adraper, a leading member of the society at Ashton, published a circular, announcing the winter fashions, and sent copies to members of mycongregation, pressing them to go and purchase his wares, many of whichwere both costly and useless. I copied this circular into my periodical, and advised my readers to disregard its counsels, and to spend theirmoney like Christians. I added some remarks on the inconsistency ofprofessing Christians urging people, even in the way of trade, to wastetheir Master's money on things forbidden by His word. This articlecreated a great amount of excitement, and some would fain have had itcensured by Conference, along with the other article; but they were notallowed to have their way. 

Both my periodical and my other publications were favorably received, and had a large circulation, and my opponents thought they gave me toomuch power, and made me dangerous; and this became the occasion offurther unpleasantness. On the other hand the magazine had but a poorcirculation, and the Book-room, though it had a large amount of capital, did but a very limited business; and I suggested reforms with a view torender them more useful. I urged an improvement of the magazine, and thepublication of cheap books, with a view to supply useful reading to themembers of the churches, and to people generally. All these propositionsproved unpalatable to the easy-going officials, and brought on me freshtrials. 

13. Again; the standard of morality was low in many of our societies, and I pleaded for the enforcement of Christian discipline. Some of ourmembers were brewers, some publicans, some spirit-merchants, somebeer-shop keepers. Old Mr. Thwaites was a publican. His son, who wasboth class-leader and local preacher, was both a drink-seller and apawnbroker. And I am not certain that pawnbroking in England is not asbad a business as drink-selling. The two are nearly related and are fastfriends. Drunkenness leads to pawnbroking, and pawnbroking helpsdrunkenness. Timothy Bentley, one of the greatest brewers in England, the poisoner-general both of the souls and bodies of the immensepopulation of my native county, was a Methodist class-leader atHuddersfield. I once met in his class. He was a most venerable andsaintly-looking man, and stood in high repute. I regarded thesebusinesses as anti-christian, and contended that those who persisted inthem after due admonition, should be expelled. 

The businesses named above were not the worst. Some members of societywere wholesale panders. Take the following facts. When I was sent toLiverpool I had a young man, whose name I need not give, for abed-fellow. He was a draper, and his customers were unfortunate women. He sold to them on trust, and went round weekly to collect his money. His father, who was a leading man in the society, and his brothers, werein the same way of business. Another man who was a leading member and anofficial, followed the same dishonorable occupation. It was usual withthose people, when their wretched customers were turned out of theirhouses by their landlords, to provide them with fresh houses, and evento supply them with furniture. When fairs or races were at hand, theysupplied them with extra dresses and ornaments, to enable them to plytheir horrible trade to better advantage. These facts I had in part frommy bed-fellow, and in part from the people in whose house he kept hisshop, and with whom I lived. When I came to know these things I was veryuneasy; and on finding that it was unsafe to sleep with my bed-fellow, Igot fresh lodgings. This vexed my bed-fellow and all his family, andmade them my enemies. I spoke of these things to my superintendent, buthe advised me to be cautious what I did and said in reference to suchmatters. And he told me a story that he had met with in a work on theministry by an American, which he had just been reading. This authorsaid, that out of fifty ministers whom he had known expelled from theirholy office, only one or two had been expelled for immoral conduct orgross inconsistency: all the rest had been discarded on account ofimprudences. This was meant to deter me from interfering either by wordor deed with faulty members of society. And he backed his ungodlycounsel by as bad an example. For he not only left those wicked peopleto pursue their evil courses undisturbed, but visited at their houses, allowed his family to receive presents from them, and, when he wasleaving the circuit, did himself accept from their unclean hands aportion of their filthy gains, in the shape of a testimonial of theirrespect for his great abilities and distinguished virtues. This person, whose general conduct was much in keeping with the facts I have givenabove, though he was the foremost minister in the Connexion, proved mymost persistent adversary in after life, and never rested till he hadbrought about my expulsion from the ministry. 

14. I will mention another affair to show what notions certain membersof the church had of what was required of Christians in reference tobusiness matters. I bought some handkerchiefs of a man, a member ofsociety, in Chester, on his assurance that they would wash. When wewashed them they came to pieces. I asked the man afterwards if he wasaware when he sold the handkerchiefs that they were rotten. He said hewas. "Then why did you sell me them?" I asked. He said he had boughtthem for good ones himself, and that he could not afford to lose what hehad given for them. I wanted such people to be dealt with according tothe rules of Christian discipline. 

15. There were many other sad facts, far more than I have either time ordisposition to mention, which forced themselves on my notice, andobliged me, in conscience, to plead and labor for reform. There seemed adreadful distance between the character of Christ and the character ofthe Church; and I wished to make it less. How far I erred in my effortsto bring about this desirable result, and how far I acted wisely, it isnot for me to say. I know that my object was good, and that the course Itook was the one that seemed best to me at the time; but it is probablethat some would have gone about the work in a wiser way. I neverexcelled in certain forms of prudence. I was prone to speak forth mythoughts and feelings without much consideration and with but littlereserve; and I often used the plainest and even the strongest words. Iwas too open. My heart was too near my mouth. I thought aloud. And I wasnot sufficiently tender of people's feelings. Nor did I make sufficientallowance for their prejudices and imperfections. I probably expectedtoo much from men. And some of the reforms which I proposed might atthe time be impracticable. I was accustomed to muse very much on theteachings of Christ and His Apostles, and to image to myself a state ofthings in the Church which, though very desirable, was probablyunattainable, except through many slow preliminary changes. I wished fora church "without spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, "--a church thatshould set forth and carry out the highest principles of Christianpurity and charity--and that was a blessing to be looked for not in thepresent, but in the future only. 

16. Then I had but little knowledge of human nature, either in itsregenerate or unregenerate state. I over-rated men's virtues, andunder-rated their defects. I trusted them too much and feared them toolittle. I took all who put on a fair appearance, for friends, andimparted to them the innermost thoughts of my soul. And many provedunworthy of my confidence. And I often over-rated men's talents orcapabilities. I was not aware of the infinite difference in men'spowers. I thought all my brethren in the ministry, and almost all mybrother Christians, were capable, under proper culture, of being made aswise, as able, as eloquent, as the most distinguished in the Church. Iwas not aware that some men were naturally palm-trees, and others onlybrambles; that some were pearls, and others only pebbles; and that theseconstitutional differences were unalterable. Hence I expected too muchof some, and was too impatient perhaps when disappointed. I erred withregard both to men and institutions, and my colleagues were oftenoffended with what they deemed my unreasonable expectations and demands. 

17. But in truth, it is not necessary for reformers to err, in order togive offence. The best and wisest One that ever appeared on earth gaveoffence to those who were wedded to error and abuses. A Christianreformer can never please the "earthly, the sensual, and the devilish. "The history of Christ and of Paul has settled that. A Christian reformernever does the right thing in the estimation of the idle, the selfish, the corrupt: and if he does, he never does it at the right time, or inthe right way. He always meddles too early, or too late; and he alwaysgoes too fast, or too slow; and he always does too much, or too little. He interferes with their ease, their interests, and their pleasures, and that is enough. They will, in return, endeavor to destroy hisinfluence, if not to take away his life. They will impute to him thevilest motives. They will stick at no lie, no wrong, that seems likelyto damage his reputation. They will magnify his innocent weaknesses ortrifling inconsistencies, and represent them as gross and unpardonablefaults. If he is faithful they will call him rash; if he is prudent theywill call him hypocritical; and they will labor in every way to awakenagainst him distrust and prejudice in the minds of the better-disposedamong their brethren. 

And many of the better-disposed themselves often see what tries themgreatly in the character and doings of reformers. It is the naturaltendency of the reforming spirit to lead a man to look too much at whatis amiss in men and systems, and too little at what is right andpraiseworthy. It is what is amiss that _wants_ reforming, so he fixeshis mind on that, and makes it the constant subject of his conversation. And so it was with myself no doubt to some extent. And this, to men ofconservative tendencies, who look more at the good and less at the evilin the men and systems with which they are connected, seems a grievousfault, an inexcusable piece of injustice, deserving the severestcensure. And they repay it with the sternest condemnation. 

And conservatives can be as blind or one-sided as the most eagerreformers. They can shut their eyes to what is evil, or treat greatabuses as excusable trifles; while they magnify what is good beyond allbounds. And when they get excited or vexed they can be as unjust towardsthe reformer, as the most rabid reformer can be towards them or theirpet institutions. And there are few things fiercer than the fire ofbigotry, even in minds not destitute of piety. The truth is, when menwax hot, either in favor of reform or against it, justice is forgotten, and kindness and courtesy are out of the question. 

And so it was in the controversies which arose out of my efforts atreform. I was assailed both by the malignity of the corrupt, and by thebigotry of the misguided. I was hated by the bad, and dreaded by some ofthe good, and abused and persecuted by both. And some of my enemies hadneither mercy nor moderation. They pressed matters to the most terribleextremes. 

And I was not sufficiently on my guard. Instead of possessing my soul inpatience, and casting my care on God, I allowed their persecutions toincrease the bitterness of my unhappy feelings, and render my ultimateseparation from them inevitable. 

18. There were several other matters which had something to do incausing unpleasant feelings between me and a number of my brethren. 

It fell to my lot to be unusually popular. I became so at a very earlyperiod. I was, in consequence, often invited by other circuits to preachtheir special sermons, and I frequently accepted those invitations. Someof my superintendents were annoyed at this, and showed their displeasurein very offensive ways. While I was in Hanley circuit my superintendentcalled a meeting of a number of leading friends, before which I wassummoned to appear. There my acceptance of invitations to preachoccasional sermons was charged against me as an offence, and I wasordered not to _go_ into other circuits any more, without the consent ofmy superintendent. I offered no objection to this. My superintendentnext charged me with having a number of objectionable books in mylibrary. He had requested the woman at whose house I lodged to show himinto my room during my absence, and there he had found the works ofShakespeare, Barrow, Tillotson, and Paley, and some volumes of poems byLord Byron. The meeting advised me to get rid of Shakespeare and Byron, and to be careful how I used the works of Barrow, Tillotson, and Paley, as they were not Methodistical, and my great concern, it was said, should be to excel as a teacher and defender of Methodism. With thisrecommendation I could not entirely comply. I retained my Shakespeare; Ihave him yet. And I read the works of Tillotson, Barrow, and Paley asfreely as I had done before. But I lost all confidence in mysuperintendent, and a portion of the respect I had felt for those whotook his part. Towards the close of the year my superintendent and hisfriends endeavored to prevent me from receiving a perfect certificate, on the pretence that I had expressed a doubt whether my health wouldprove equal to the work of the ministry. Their objections proved of noavail; but the spirit which my superintendent showed, increased theunhappy feeling which his previous unkindness had awakened in my breast. 

19. The wife of one of our ministers published a book, and the husbandsent it to me for review. It contained, mixed up with a great variety ofuseful remarks, a number of anti-scriptural and antinomian passages. While I did justice to the rest of the book, I exposed its errors withgreat fidelity, and gave the husband great offence. 

20. About the same time a gentleman at whose house I was billeted atBury, when lecturing there on temperance, made me a present of a volumeof Channing's discourses. I read this volume with the greatest delight, and spoke of it highly in my periodical. Now Channing was a Unitarian, and in one of the discourses contained in the volume which I hadcommended, there were several Unitarian expressions. The husband of thelady whose book I had reviewed brought the matter before Conference. Healso quoted from my periodical a number of passages which he contendedwere not Methodistical. He was very violent in his remarks, andconcluded his address by demanding my expulsion. He had conferred with anumber of other preachers before Conference came on, and formed aconsiderable party, and the clamor for my condemnation was both loud andsomewhat general. A gentleman, however, of great influence inConference, --the same who had pleaded for moderation at the Conferenceprevious, --rose and proposed a gentler course. The result was acommittee, explanations and a settlement. After the Conference, theterms of the settlement were misrepresented by my opponents, and I feltcalled upon to put them in their proper light. This revived thecontroversy, and made matters worse than they had been before. 

21. I have referred to the rule which required young preachers to remainsingle for four or five years. When a person was received into theministry, he was required to give a pledge that he would keep this rule. I declined to give this pledge, I said I had no _intention_ to marrybefore the appointed time, and that if I _did_ so, I should be in thehands of the Conference, and they could do with me what they thoughtbest. This was considered sufficient, and I was accepted. As it happenedI _did_ marry before the appointed time. I had had such unsuitablelodgings found me where I had been stationed, and I had suffered so muchin consequence, that I felt justified in taking a wife and providingaccommodations for myself, I took for my wife a woman of exemplarycharacter, of amiable disposition, and engaging manners, and I put thecircuits in which I was stationed to no additional expense or trouble. Itook my own house, and provided my own furniture. And I neither beggednor borrowed a penny, nor did I run one penny into debt. And I worked ashard after marriage as before, and probably harder, and to betterpurpose. The Conference however punished me by putting me a year back, and transporting me to the most distant part of a very distant circuit. Thither I had to remove my wife and furniture at great expense. And theallowance for board there was the lowest that the laws allowed a societyto give. My whole yearly income was only forty pounds, or two hundreddollars. I was required too to be often and long from home in distantparts of the circuit. I went however to my appointment and set to work, disposed, though sorrowful, to do my duty. I got a part of an olduninhabited house, and my wife made it comfortable. We livedeconomically, and kept out of debt, without the aid of either gifts orloans, and I never had a happier year, and my labors were never betterreceived or more successful; and Blyth, the place of my banishment, willbe dear to me as long as I live. 

22. Yet I had many trials while stationed there. My superintendent wasunkind, and tried from time to time to do me harm. But though he causedme much trouble at times, a higher power overruled things for my good. One of the societies over which he had great influence was really cruel. It refused to postpone a service to allow me to go and see my child whenit was very ill, and thought to be in great danger. The circuit wasnearly thirty miles in length, and I had to spend nearly half my timefrom fifteen to twenty-three miles away from home. Once when startingfor the most distant of my appointments, I had left my little childvery unwell, and apparently in danger of death. It was too bad that Ishould have had to leave my little family under such circumstances; butthe feeling in many parts of the circuit was so unfriendly towards me, in consequence of the unfavorable representations of my views and habitsof thought circulated by my superintendent and his friends, that I couldnot have missed an appointment with safety. I had been away five days, when I heard that my child was worse, and likely to die. I had still oneappointment to fulfil, but I resolved, if possible, to get it postponed, and hasten home. I went to the place and requested the leaders to allowme to put off the appointment to the following week. They refused myrequest. I told them I had received word that my child was likely todie, and that I was anxious to be with its afflicted mother; but theywould not give way. I was sadly tried, and I said, "I shall go homenotwithstanding. If I find my child alive and likely to recover, I willreturn and preach; if I do not find it better, I shall not return. Ishall stay at home and take the consequences!" I had already walkedthirteen miles. It was ten or eleven more to Blyth. I walked the wholedistance. There was no conveyance. My superintendent was allowed horsehire; but I was not: and I could not afford to pay for a horse myselfout of sixteen dollars or three pound five a month. I reached home, andfound my child a little better. After a little rest, I started back onfoot to my appointment. My wife looked out of the window after me, weeping, afraid to ask me to remain with her. She knew the temper of mysuperintendent, and the feeling of the people, so she wept in silence. Iwalked over ten miles more, and then preached. I walked altogetherthirty-three miles that day. I was very much tired; but I had seen mywife and child, so I went through my work without complaining, and wasup very early next morning, and walked ten miles more to breakfast withmy darling wife, and to comfort her sorrowful heart. My child got well, and all things turned out happily in the end. Still, the unkindness ofthe Conference in punishing me so undeservedly, and the cruelty of mysuperintendent and the Westmoor leaders, made me feel very keenly, and Icould never think of those matters without something like indignationand horror. And all these annoyances lessened my respect for many of mybrethren, and helped to prepare the way for future troubles. 

My troubles did not all come from the preachers. There were severallaymen in and about Newcastle-on-Tyne, who seemed to think it a duty toannoy their young minister. The worst, though in some respects the best, of that class was Thomas Snowdon, an old local preacher, leader, andtrustee. The first interview that I had with this man he took occasionto insult me respecting my marriage, and also gave me to understand thathe should expect me to be in perfect subjection to his will, if I wishedto enjoy much peace or comfort in the circuit. It fell to my lot to belodged and boarded for part of my time at his house, and to show his wayof proceeding I may give the following. 

It was his custom to read a portion of the Scriptures to his familyevery morning, and as he passed along he would make comments on what heread. When I was there, he would frequently stop in his readings andcomments, to ask my opinion, and he seemed to expect that I must alwaysconcur in what he said. At times however I was obliged to dissent fromhis sayings, and then would follow a little controversy. Thosecontroversies were never very profitable, in consequence of his constantdesire to force his own opinions on me, and to extort from me assent tohis whimsical and foolish observations. Yet he still continued to forcethose controversies. 

He also took upon himself the office of perpetual censurer of mydiscourses. And his censures were generally proportioned to the goodnessof the sermon. If I happened to be particularly at liberty in mydiscourse, and preach better than usual, he would blame almosteverything. If I preached indifferently, he would censure less; and if Ipreached poorly, if I was embarrassed in my discourse, and seemedtroubled or sad on that account, he would scarcely censure at all. Thenthe things which he censured would be sure to be the best and truestparts of my sermon. He appeared to think that he was out of his duty, unless he was endeavoring to torture the mind of the young preacher, andto force him, if possible, into subjection to his will. 

On one occasion he and I had nearly quarrelled. He had tried me till Icould keep silence no longer, so I told him plainly what I thought abouthis manner of proceeding. I spoke so plainly, that both he and his wifewere seriously put about. Soon after that, on my visiting the Newcastleside of the circuit, I found that the people at whose house I was thenaccustomed to sleep, had gone off, and closed the house, so that I wasobliged to look out for other lodgings. I went directly to Mr. Snowdon's. He was the principal man in the circuit, and it was his placeto see that I was properly provided for. His wife seemed astonished whenI entered the house: but I told her how the matter stood; and I added, that I did not feel disposed to go, at that time of the night, (for itwas getting rather late) to any other lodging; so that I hoped she wouldgive me a bed. I also said, that unless I could be accommodated with abed there, I would at once return to Blyth. She said, 'I should alwaysbe glad to see you, and to give you either bed or anything else, if youwould not disagree and dispute so with our master. ' I replied, 'It isyour master that will disagree and dispute with me. I should be quietenough, if he would let me alone. I never force my opinions on him; itis only when he attempts to force his opinions on me that I ever speak. You must yourself have seen that he will neither allow me to be silent, nor allow me quietly to speak my mind; that he _will_ oblige me tospeak, and yet always finds fault if I say anything at variance withwhat _he_ says. ' She acknowledged that her husband was rather queer inthat respect, but still thought that I might manage a great deal betterwith him if I would. I told her I had done my best, and that it was allto no purpose. 'He will ask my opinion, ' said I, 'on every subject thatcomes into his head, and then begin to complain whenever my opinionhappens to differ from his. ' I also added, that I thought he sometimesdisputed with me merely for the sake of disputing, and contradicted me, not because he thought I was wrong, but because he thought that it wouldbe too much of a compliment to acknowledge that he agreed with me on anysubject. She thought I was too severe upon him. I said, 'Well, just waitand see to-night, and if it is not as I have said, you shall blame meas much as you like, and I will acknowledge myself in error. '

Almost immediately Mr. Snowdon came in. 'What are _you_ doing hereto-night?' said he. 'I have come to sleep here, ' I replied, 'and morethan that, I _must_ sleep here, or else return to Blyth. Mr. G----'shouse is closed, and it is too late to seek a bed elsewhere. ' He made noobjections, and things proceeded as usual. He soon took his Bible, called the family around him, and began to read. The lesson was inIsaiah. He had not read far before he began to explain a passage. 'This, ' said he, 'refers to our blessed Lord Jesus Christ. It points outthe glory of His character and of His person as the supreme God and Lordof all; exhibits Him as the _Maker_ as well as the _Saviour_ of theworld. Do you not think so, Mr. Barker?' said he. I remained silent. 'Isnot that your view of the subject, Mr. Barker?' he added. 'I have noobjections to offer, ' I said. This did not seem exactly to satisfy him;but he went on, and read again. 'And so it is, ' said he; 'we are all bynature as an unclean thing; there is no health in us. How deeply we arefallen, Mr. Barker! Do you not think so, Mr. Barker?' I made no reply. He wished to know why I was silent. I said I did not like to be alwaystalking on those matters, --that I would rather he would read on, andallow us to think about the chapter at our leisure afterwards. All thistime his wife was dreadfully fidgetty. She wanted to speak to him, butcould not. She wished to catch his attention by her looks, but to nopurpose. The proof of the truth of what I had said was becoming toostrong for her, and she could scarcely sit still on her chair. Heproceeded: 'This, ' said he, 'refers to the glory of the Church of Christin the latter days, when the Gentiles shall be converted, and the Jewsbrought back to their own land. This will be a glorious time, Mr. Barker. What are your views on this subject, Mr. Barker?' Then he addedsome further remarks, concluding with the question, 'Do you not thinkso, Mr. Barker?' I now began to laugh: I could hold no longer. 'And doyou laugh at God's holy word?' said he: and a terrible lecture he wouldhave read me, had not his wife broke out and said, 'Hinney, you are toblame, you are to blame. You won't let Mr. Barker alone: he would besilent if you would allow him: you are too bad. ' He repeated histerrible rebuke of my levity, and I began to explain. I told him whathad passed between his wife and me before he came in. I told him allthat I thought about his way of proceeding towards me in those matters, and he, poor fellow, was completely confounded. I told him that itseemed to me as if he really took pleasure in tormenting people; as ifhe could not be happy unless he thought that he was making other peoplemiserable, --that he seemed to begrudge those that were around him theleast ease, or quietness, or pleasure, and to wish to keep them on aperpetual rack. It was his time now to explain and apologize, and whatdo you think was the reason he assigned for his proceedings? 'Hinney, 'said he, 'Mr. Barker is a young minister, and I wish to inure him tohardness as a good soldier of our Lord Jesus Christ. ' I told him therewere painful things enough in the world to inure men to hardness withouthis making more, &c. After this he never annoyed me much in that wayagain. He did not allow me to rest altogether; that would have been toomuch; but he was a vast deal better; and if he ever after this began tobe queer, I always felt greater confidence in refusing to talk to him, and in letting him know that I expected to be allowed to have a littleof my own way. 

I never could persuade myself but that this man was, after all, a goodman. I believe he really feared God and loved his fellow-men. I think hewas conscientious and benevolent. Among other proofs of his benevolenceI may mention, that he took an orphan family under his care, and rearedthem. He made them _work_, it is true; he made _every_ one work that wasunder _him_; but he fed them, and clothed them, and taught them in hisway. He acted, in short, like a father to them. 

Again, when my mother came over to see me at Newcastle, he invited herto his house. He showed her every possible attention. He was as kind asit was possible for a man to be. And when she had to leave for Leeds, hewas up by four or five o'clock in the morning, to provide her acomfortable breakfast, and take her to the coach. But I observed that hewas always kinder to old people than to young people. I suppose hethought that old people had had trouble enough, and that he hadtherefore no need to give them more; but that young people were indanger of being too happy, of having too little trouble, and that it wasnecessary therefore that he should be their tormentor. But even to theyoung he could be kind on occasions, very kind; and if the young showeda disposition to meet his views, to receive his sayings as oracles, andalways to consult his will, he would even caress and commend them. Buthe could receive no measured or limited subjection. They must neitherthink, nor speak, nor smile, nor stir but in accordance with his will ifthey wished to enjoy his favor. The least imaginable opposition to hisjudgment or his pleasure, would draw forth his rebukes. 

There were laymen in almost all places who took upon themselves to tellyou what you should believe and teach, and to condemn you as a hereticif you did not attend to their suggestions. 

24. In 1837, shortly after I was stationed in Mossley, I had a publicdiscussion with a clergyman on the propriety or lawfulness of teachingthe children of the poor to write in our Sunday-schools. The NewConnexion people in the Mossley circuit taught writing in theirSunday-schools, and they had, in consequence, a very large attendance ofscholars, and very prosperous churches. Their scholars outnumbered thoseof all the other schools put together. This seemed to annoy theministers of the other denominations, and it was no uncommon thing forthose ministers, when they came to preach the yearly sermons in behalfof the funds of their Schools, to say strong things against the practiceof the New Connexion. Dr. Nunn, of the Established Church, contendedthat it was Sabbath-breaking, and challenged the New Connexion officialsto a public discussion on the subject. They accepted the challenge, andappointed me their champion. I contended, that in the circumstances inwhich the children of the poor were placed at that time, it was an actof mercy and Christian beneficence to teach them to write on Sundays. The clergyman gave up the contest before the time allowed for the debatecame to a close, and I was proclaimed victor. I published my views onthe subject in a pamphlet, entitled MERCY TRIUMPHANT, whichhad an extensive circulation, and produced a powerful effect on theviews of large numbers of people. Some of my brethren denounced thepamphlet as heretical, and the editor of the _Magazine_ took occasion toinform his readers, in an offensive way, that my views were not theviews of the body to which I belonged. 

25. In the Sheffield circuit I had several unpleasant collisions withone of my colleagues, and a couple of superannuated ministers, about arich but very unworthy member there. This man was anxious to control theaction of the whole circuit, and even of the whole Connexion, and one ofmy colleagues, and the two superannuated ministers, one of which was Mr. Allin, my old and persistent opponent, took his part. I had myself nofaith in the man. I knew him to be both an ignorant and unworthy person. He was, in fact, a drunkard. Both he and Mr. Allin once, after havingspent the day at a public feast, came into an official meeting drunk inthe evening. I was present, and saw the horrible sight. It afterwardscame out that this rude, ambitious man was something worse than adrunkard. I did what I could to avoid an open rupture with my colleaguesand this man's friends, and succeeded for a time, but they obliged me atlast, either to sanction what I felt to be wrong, or openly to protestagainst their proceedings. I protested. And now the unsubstantial peacewhich had existed between us for a time was followed by a very unhappyrupture, which left deep and angry wounds in the hearts of all thecontending parties. 

26. But to give all the incidents which proved the occasion of bitterfeeling and alienation between me and a number of my brethren wouldrequire a book. They were happening almost continually. When once peoplehave ceased to regard each other with love and confidence, they canneither speak nor stir without giving each other offence. And this wasthe state to which I and several of my brethren had come. Indeed suchwas the unhappy state of our feelings, that we had ceased to takepleasure in pleasing, and had come almost to take delight in trying oneanother. Instead of coming as near together as we could, we got as faras possible apart. We came at length to feel a kind of gratification infinding what appeared good reasons for differing from one another. Theconsequence was, we came to differ from each other so much, that itbecame impossible for us to work together to any advantage. 

And there was no one with wisdom and piety sufficient to interpose andheal the breach, or even to prevent it from getting continually wider. The gentleman who had acted as mediator and moderator when my article on_Toleration and Human Creeds_ was arraigned, and who had also broughtabout the temporary settlement of a more serious dispute at theConference following, now found the case beyond his powers, and made nofurther attempts at reconciliation. He saw it necessary, if he wouldretain his influence in the Body, to become a partizan, instead of amediator, and he chose the side of my opponents. There were two othermen--two of the oldest and ablest of our ministers--and two of the mostexemplary Christians in the Body--who saw the danger of the tempest thatwas raging against me, and who would have been glad to screen me fromits violence, but they were afraid to interpose. They loved me andesteemed me, and sympathized with me in many of my views; but to haveattempted to save me from the fury of my opponents, would have been torisk their own reputation and position. One of them had already sufferedin consequence of the freedom with which he had expressed his views oncertain anti-christian doctrines, though he had written with far morecaution, and acted with much more prudence, than I had done; and he nodoubt felt, that if he could not, without so much difficulty, savehimself, it would be vain to attempt to save another, who had spoken andwritten with so much more freedom, and acted with so much moreindependence. So the storm was left to rage and spend its fury on my ownhead. 

I cannot give an account of all that followed during the last two yearswhich I spent in connection with the Church; it would make my story toolong. But things got worse and worse as time passed on. 

In 1840 I brought my _Evangelical Reformer_ to a close. In the lastnumber I declared my unchanged belief in the sentiments set forth in myarticle on "_Toleration, Human Creeds, &c. _" I also contradicted thereports that had been spread abroad by my enemies, to the effect that Ihad, at the preceding Conference, retracted certain expressions used inmy writings with regard to justification, the witness of the Spirit, &c. ; and censured the conduct of the ruling party in my case in veryplain terms. I said, "If any of my opponents imagine that I haverecanted a single sentence that I have published in this work, they areunder some misapprehension. There is not a doctrine that I haveinculcated in it that I do not still maintain. And I declare my fullconviction that the resolutions which were passed in reference to me bythe Ashton and Huddersfield Conferences were based in error, and thatthe proceedings of my opponents in this matter were uncalled for andunchristian. "

My enemies at once decided on my expulsion. Their purpose was to cast meout at the following Conference, and Mr. Allin published a small tractin reply to my article on Human Creeds, to prepare the minds of thepeople for the intended measure. He published it just before Conference, when he supposed it would be impossible for me to prepare a reply beforethe Body assembled. I never saw it till the evening of Thursday, the daybut one before that on which I was to leave home for the distant placewhere the Conference was to meet. But I wrote a reply the same night, and got it printed, and in less than twenty-four hours it wascirculating in every direction. I had been able to show that myopponent's arguments proved just the contrary of what they were broughtforward to prove. I also showed that the views advocated in my articlewere the views of Mr. Kilham, the founder of the Body to which we allbelonged, and were, in fact, the views of some of the best and ablestmen that the Church universal had ever produced. I gave quite amultitude of quotations justifying my article to the very letter. Theeffect was astounding. The people saw at once that I was right. Myenemies were confounded. They were paralyzed. And I was saved. 

But it was only for a time. The contest had lasted so long, and hadproduced such a fearful amount of unhappy feeling between me and myopponents, that reconciliation and comfortable co-operation had becomeimpossible. It could not be expected that a powerful party would restcontent under a defeat; and it was not in me to give up my efforts tobring about a better state of things in the Connexion. And hence arenewal of the unhappy strife. 

It is natural to suppose that my enemies would now be anxious to get ridof me, and would watch for a suitable occasion to cast me out; and myideas of duty were such, that it was impossible for me long to refrainfrom giving them the opportunity they desired. I did it as follows. 

1. The early churches provided for their poor members. The Quakers, theMoravians, and the early Methodists did the same. This exercise ofbrotherly love is enjoined by Christ and His Apostles. I urged this dutyon the church to which I belonged. I preached and published a sermon onthe subject, and circulated a number of tracts on the same point, published by others. 

2. The travelling preachers had a Fund, called the Beneficent Fund, forthe support of superannuated preachers and preachers' widows. Some ofthe rules of this fund seemed to me to be anti-christian, and I laboredto get them altered. I also recommended that there should be a fund forworn-out and needy local preachers. 

3. Members of the churches mingled with drunkards, profligates, andinfidels, in benefit societies, and many other associations. This seemedto me to be very objectionable, and plainly unscriptural, and Irecommended that they should come out from such societies, and formassociations for good objects among themselves. 

4. Wesley had provided cheap books and pamphlets for his societies, andI urged the Conference to do the same for ours. I wrote letters to theAnnual Committee, the representatives of the Connexion, showing thatbooks published at eight or ten shillings a volume, could be supplied atone or one and sixpence. I reminded them of the fact that the Book-roomhad abundance of spare capital which might be profitably used in such awork, and I pointed out the advantages likely to result from theencouragement of thoughtful and studious habits among the people. Ipublished a pamphlet on the subject, entitled _The Church and thePress_, showing that the churches might almost monopolize the supply ofbooks, and become the teachers and the rulers of the nations, I said, "If the Church at large would do its duty, every dark place on earthmight be visited, and the seeds of truth and righteousness sown in everypart of the globe in a few years. " With regard to our own Connexion Isaid, "Our Magazine and Book-room, which ought to be promoting theintellectual and religious improvement of the Connexion and the world, are doing just nothing at all, or next to nothing. The leading articlesof the Magazine are among the dullest and most useless things everprinted. The Book-room, which has capital enough to publish thirty orforty new books a year, does not issue one. An institution which oughtto be filling the Connexion and the country generally with the light andblessings of Christianity, and which is capable of being made a blessingto the world at large, is allowed to 'stand there all the day idle. '"

I then proposed, as a means of stimulating the Book Committee and theEditor of the Magazine to greater activity, that I and my friends shouldbe allowed to publish a periodical, and to establish a Book-room, at ourown expense. The proposal was not only rejected, but even treated as acapital offence. 

5. I had labored hard against the infidel socialists, lecturing againstthem in almost all the large towns in the kingdom, and I was, to a greatextent, the means of breaking up their societies. But my contests withthose infidels made me more sensible of the necessity of abandoning allhuman additions to Christ's doctrine, and of having nothing to defendbut the beautiful and beneficent principles of pure unadulteratedChristianity. Hence I became still less of a sectarian in my belief, andmore and more of a simple Christian, and I labored to promote a stricterconformity to the teachings of Christ among ministers and Christiansgenerally. 

6. I wrote against the waste of God's money by professing Christians inluxurious living and vain show, and exhorted the rich to employ theirsurplus wealth in doing good. 

7. That it might not be said that I received pay from the church fordoing one kind of work while I employed a portion of my time in doingothers, I gave up my salary, and refused to receive anything from thecircuit in which I was stationed, except what was given me as afree-will offering. 

8. I withdrew from the preachers' benefit society, resolved, in case ofsickness or old age, to trust for a supply of my wants to the providenceof God. 

9. I recommended the Connexion to pay off all the chapel debts, andprepare itself for more vigorous and extensive aggressions on thekingdom of darkness. 

All these things increased the anxiety of my opponents to get me out ofthe ministry; but they would probably have failed to give them the powerto accomplish their object, if I had gone no farther. But I believed itmy duty to take another step. 

10. It was the custom in the Body to which I belonged, to baptizechildren in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Thisform of words was understood by me to imply that infant baptism wascommanded by God in Scripture. This, however, I doubted, and I declinedto use the words when naming or baptizing children. I had no objectionto name children, to pray for them, or even to sprinkle them; but Icould not use an expression in a sense in which I did not think itstrictly true. This emboldened my enemies to attempt my expulsionwithout more ado, and this time they adopted measures calculated toensure success. They issued circulars on the subject to the ministersand to the leading and influential laymen. They called secret meetings. They employed a variety of means which seemed to me and my friends tosavor more of Popish tyranny than of Christian discipline. At lengthConference came, and I was called to account. The charges against mewere--

1. That I had denied the divine appointment of baptism, and refused toadminister the ordinance. 

2. That I had denied the divine appointment and present obligation ofthe Lord's supper. 

3. That I had declared myself opposed to the beneficent fund. 

4. That I had announced the formation of a book establishment, therebyengaging in worldly pursuits, contrary to rule, and by this meansopposing the best interests of the Book-room. 

None of those charges were true. 1. What I proposed to do with regard tothe supply of books, was no more worldly business than preaching was, or selling the publications of the Connexion. The object was not profit, but extended usefulness. 2. I had not declared myself opposed to theBeneficent Fund, but had simply proposed the improvement of its rules, and the extension of its operations. 3. I had not denied either thedivine appointment or present obligation of the Lord's supper. 4. Norhad I denied the divine appointment of baptism, but only declared mybelief that _water baptism_, though a becoming rite under the Christiandispensation, was the baptism of John, and absolutely binding only underhis intermediate dispensation. 

The two latter charges were not pressed, and even the second wasspeedily given up, the one on baptism only remaining. This was pressed, and as my views on the subject were deemed intolerable, I was expelled. 

There was a fearful display of bad feeling on the part of many of myopponents. And no little pressure was brought to bear on those who wereopposed to extreme measures. It was a time of terrible trial to thosewho showed themselves my friends. The height to which the excitementagainst me rose can hardly be made intelligible to my readers of thepresent day. I regarded the proceedings of my opponents from beginningto end as dishonorable, unjust and cruel. "They have gone, " said I, inmy account of the proceedings of the Conference, "they have gone inopposition to every dictate both of equity and charity. The principleson which they have acted are the low, the dark, and the tyrannicalprinciples of Popery. They have covered themselves with dishonor, andearned for themselves a name for injustice, intolerance and cruelty, beyond all the religious denominations in the land. Many a time, as Isat in my place in Conference, hearing what was said, and observing whatwas done, I asked myself, 'Is this like Christ? Can this be pleasing toGod? What must angels think to look upon a scene like this? Perpetualtalk about the authority of Conference and the majesty of the rules; butnot a word about the authority of Christ, or the majesty and supremacyof the Gospel. And such overbearing, such harshness, such determinedunrelenting cruelty towards all who showed a determination to actaccording to their own convictions of duty. ' In the evenings, after thesittings of Conference were adjourned, I and a friend frequently walkedout among the hills surrounding the town, conversing with each other, and with our heavenly Father, and oh! what a contrast! What a boundlesscontrast between the atmosphere of Conference, and the atmosphere ofthose sweet hills! What an infinite relief to be placed beyond the soundof angry strife, and jealous, persecuting rage; to walk at large overthe lofty hills, to breathe the fresh air of heaven, to converse withGod, to look upon His wondrous works, to hear the sweet music of thebirds, to trace the silent path of the shadowy woods, or to stand on theexposed, uncovered peaks of the mountain tops, and cast one's eyes onfruitful vales, and quiet homes, and all that earth can show of grandand beautiful, and most of all, to see in every sight the hand ofGod--to hear in every sound His voice, --to feel that the Great, Almighty, Unseen Spirit of the Universe, that lived and worked throughall, was our Father and our love, --to feel that we were one with Him, and that He was one with us. 'This is heaven, ' I cried; and, pointing tothe scene of strife and hate that lurked below, I added, 'That is hell. 'Never before did we understand why Jesus, after having spent the day incrowds, and being harassed with the captious, cruel, persecuting Scribesand Pharisees, retired at night into the desert, or withdrew to themountains. Never before did the Gospel seem so true a story. Neverbefore were we brought into such living sympathy with the Saviour ofmankind. I can recollect nothing I ever met with so trying as to sit inConference; but in our walks upon the high places, God made up for all. ""Well, " I added, "I thank God I am now free. My Conference trials areended. O never more may I be found shut up with men who set at noughtthe authority of Christ, and who, by all the cruel acts of unrelentingpersecution, strive to bend the immortal godlike mind into unnaturalsubjection to their ambitious will. "

CHAPTER XI. 

EXPLANATIONS. 

A few explanations are required before we go further. 

_Explanation First. The Different Methodist Bodies. _

The Methodist Body to which my parents belonged, and to which I myselfbelonged till I was twenty-one years of age, was the Old Connexion orWesleyan Body. I was a local preacher in that Body, and was expected andrequested to go out as a travelling preacher. But insurmountabledifficulties lay in the way. In the first place, none could be receivedas travelling preachers, unless they were willing to go to whatever partof the world the conference or the missionary committee might think fitto send them, and unless they could _express_ their willingness to be sodisposed of before they went out. This I could not do. It was myconviction that God had called me to labor in my own country, and to dogood amongst my own people. I did not believe myself called to go to anyforeign country to preach the gospel, and I did not therefore feel atliberty to offer to go out on the terms required. I felt as if I shoulddo wrong to expose myself to unseen dangers and unknown trials anddifficulties in foreign lands, without a conviction that God required itat my hands. And I could not think that I should be likely to succeed inmissionary labors, unless I could enter on them with a belief that thosewere the labors for which God designed me. 

There was another difficulty. Conference had made a new law, establishing a new test of orthodoxy, and no one could be taken out as atravelling preacher now, who could not subscribe to the doctrine of theEternal Sonship, as taught by Richard Watson and Jabez Bunting, inopposition to Adam Clarke. This test I could not subscribe. I cannot saythat I altogether disbelieved the doctrine of the Eternal Sonship; but Iwas not in a state of mind to justify me in subscribing the doctrine. Whether the doctrine of the Eternal Sonship was right or not, I had nota firm belief in it: and that was reason enough why I should refuse tosubscribe it. 

About this time Conference passed laws forbidding the teaching ofwriting in all the Sunday Schools. I disapproved of these laws, and wasunable to bind myself to enforce them. I was obliged therefore to giveup all thoughts of becoming a travelling preacher in the Old Connexion. 

Not long after this, disturbances took place in the Methodist society inLeeds, respecting the introduction of an organ into Brunswick Chapel. Conference, through the importunities of some rich people, had brokenthrough its own laws, and given authority for the introduction of anorgan into Brunswick Chapel contrary to the wishes of a great part ofthe members, trustees, local preachers, and leaders. I of coarsedisapproved of this proceeding on the part of Conference. I had heardthe Rev. Joseph Suttcliffe speak very seriously and with great andsorrowful dissatisfaction of the proceedings of those who were then atthe head of Methodistical affairs, and though I did not, at the time, rightly understand him, events that took place afterwards, both broughthis words to my mind, and showed me their meaning. In consequence ofwhat I saw, I began to be greatly dissatisfied with the manner in whichthings were carried on in the society. 

A division took place in Leeds, and in several other places, and theseceders formed a new body, called the Protestant Methodists. I left theold Body at the same time, but having heard favorable accounts of theMethodist New Connexion, I joined that community. This Body had secededfrom the Old Connexion some thirty years before, under the Leadership ofAlexander Kilham. Kilham was a great reformer both in religion andpolitics. He sympathized with the French revolutionists, and with theEnglish religious Latitudinarians. He was a great admirer of RobertRobinson of Cambridge, and reprinted, in his periodical, _the MethodistMonitor_, his writings on religious liberty. He denounced all humancreeds, and proclaimed the Bible the one sole authority in the churchboth in matters of doctrine and matters of duty. The conference of theBody was to consist of one-half preachers and the other half laymen. Inthe circuit and society meetings the power was to be divided in the sameway. A list of doctrines generally held in the Body was afterwards drawnup and published, but was not put forward as an authoritative creed. Thewritings of Wesley and Fletcher were referred to, but not asauthorities, but only as works to be consulted. I found on lookingthrough the rules, that there was nothing to hinder me from becoming atravelling preacher in this Body. I offered myself as a member, and wasreceived. I was then sent out as a travelling preacher; and it is tothis Body chiefly that I refer in this work. 

I entered the ministry with the full understanding that I should haveperfect Christian liberty both of thought and speech, --that nothing wasrequired of any minister but a belief in the New Testament, a life inaccordance with its teachings, and the abilities necessary to fit himfor his work. The perfection of the Scriptures, both as a rule of faithand a rule of life, was one of the first articles in the connexionallist of doctrines, and each preacher was left to interpret theScriptures for himself. 

To show that the liberty I took in revising my creed was in fullagreement with the principles on which the Body to which I belonged wasfounded, I will give a quotation or two from the Founder's works. 

"Subscription to all human creeds implies two dispositions contrary totrue religion, love of dominion over conscience in the imposer, andslavery in the subscribers. The first usurps the right of Christ; thelast implies allegiance to a pretender. " Vol. I, page 77. 

"The revelation itself is infallible, and the Author of it has given itme to examine; but the establishment of a given meaning of it rendersexamination needless, and perhaps dangerous. " P. 78. 

"I have no patience with those who cover their own stupidity, pride, orlaziness, with a pretended acquiescence in the unexamined opinions ofmen who very probably never examined their own opinions themselves, butprofessed those which lay nearest at hand, and which best suited theirbase secular interest. " Vol. II, p. 340. 

"I am seriously of opinion, and I wish all my readers would seriouslyconsider it, _that real Christianity will never thoroughly prevail andflourish in the world, till the professors of it are brought to be uponbetter terms with one another; lay aside their mutual jealousies andanimosities, and live as brethren in sincere harmony and love; but whichwill, I apprehend, never be, till conscience is left entirely free; andthe plain BIBLE become in FACT, as it is in PROFESSION, the ONLY rule oftheir religious faith and practice_. " P. 271. 

Such were the sentiments which Alexander Kilham thought proper topublish on the subject of creeds. 

He adds, that he did so for the purpose of "giving to our people andothers _suitable views of religious liberty in general_, AND OF WHATOUGHT TO BE ESTABLISHED AMONG US IN PARTICULAR. "

In all I did, then, both in endeavoring to bring my views into harmonywith the teachings of Christ, and in suggesting reforms in the laws andinstitutions of the Body, I acted in perfect accordance with theprinciples on which the Connexion was founded. Whether the principle wasa good one or not may be questioned: all I say is, it sanctioned mycourse. 

_Explanation Second. Immoralities. _

What I say of immoralities in ministers and members of the Church referschiefly to ministers and members of the New Connexion. I must nothowever be understood as saying that the ministers and members of theOld Connexion were free from such vices. They were not. James Etchells, the minister who drank sixteen glasses of intoxicating drinks on oneround of pastoral calls, and John Farrar, his superintendent, whom hegot suspended for drunkenness, and Richard Wilson, who opened the firstspirit shop in my native town, and corrupted the people all round thecountry, and Timothy Bentley, the great Brewer and Poisoner-General ofthe bodies and souls of the Yorkshire people, and John Falkener, of NewCastle-on-Tyne, the wholesale Beershop-Keeper, &c. , were all members andhigh officials in the Wesleyan Body. And I never heard of a man beingeither kept out or put out of the Wesleyan Connexion either for being aBrewer, a Distiller, a Spirit Merchant, a Ginshop Keeper, a Publican, aPawnbroker, or a Beershop-keeper. And I never heard of the Conferencedoing anything to promote teetotalism, or the suppression of the liquortrade. The rules and teachings of Wesley, and the principles of Christon this subject, were as little cared for in the Old as in the NewConnexion. 

There were points though in which the Old Connexion seemed to mesuperior to the New. There seemed more hearty religiousness in the OldConnexion than in the New. The preachers in the Old Connexion seemed tobe a higher order of men, both in piety and intelligence. They seemed tobe kinder too to each other, less jealous, less envious, and lessdisposed to annoy and persecute one another. And they worked harder. They had more of the spirit of Wesley. They were less anxious to stealsheep from other folds, and more disposed to go out into the wildernessto bring in those which were astray. With many of the New Connexionmembers religion was too much of a form and a name: with an immensenumber in the Old Connexion it was a life and a power. Hence the OldConnexion prospered, while the New Connexion languished and declined. The New Connexion trusted to their democratic principles of churchgovernment for additions, and were disappointed. The Old Connexiontrusted to honest, zealous, Christian work, and succeeded. The OldConnexion, bred great and mighty men, the New Connexion bred weak andlittle ones. The New Connexion was afraid of superior men, and if anymade their appearance, drove them away, as in the case of Richard Watsonand others; the Old Connexion welcomed such men, and used them, andreaped from their labors rich harvests of blessing. I might myselfperhaps, if my way into its ministry had not been blocked up, have beenmuch more happy and useful in the Old Connexion than in the New, andhave had a very different story to tell in my old age, from that which Iam telling you now. I don't know. 

No; I don't know. It is quite possible that I was so formed, --thatreligious freedom was so essential to the soul God had given me, --that Ishould have broken through the enclosures of any sect, and made formyself a history like that which I am now writing. But speculations onsuch subjects are all vain. A man can live but once, and in one way, andall we can do now is to live well for the future, --as well as we can. God help us. 

God will help us. And we must not suppose that because we have not hadthe lot which imagination pictures as most desirable, we have lived invain. Let us look on matters in a more cheerful light. The world, andall our affairs, are in the hands of an all-perfect God, and always havebeen, and I am inclined to believe, that with regard to myself, He hasdone all things well. I meant to do right from the first. I neverwickedly departed from God. I erred unintentionally and unexpectedly. Ierred seeking for the truth. I erred praying to God to lead me right. And I am inclined to believe that my course was not entirely of myself, but was a discipline appointed me by a higher power, and meant tofurther some desirable end. So I will go on hoping and rejoicing, interpreting God's doings as favorably as I can, and believing, thatwhat I know not now, I shall know hereafter. And all the time I willrejoice in God's love, and sing Glory, Hallelujah. 

_Explanation Third. Christianity and Methodism not to Blame. _

Do not let any one judge of Christianity or Methodism, nor even of thewhole body of the Methodist Church, from the cases of immorality which Ihave found it necessary to name. Christianity and real WesleyanMethodism are as opposed to bad trades and bad deeds as light is todarkness. And bad as things were in the churches to which I havereferred, a large portion, if not the great bulk of the members, weresincere Christians, fearing God and working righteousness. Nor were allthe preachers bad-hearted or cruel men. It often happens that a fewcontrol the many. And the ruling few are often worse than the many whomthey rule. The least worthy members of the church are often, likeDiotrephes, eager for the pre-eminence, while the best are modest andretiring. It is not always the cream that comes to the top, either incivil or religious society; it is sometimes the scum. And my readersmust take these things into account while reading my story. The earlyMethodist churches were blessed organizations, bitterly as Wesley andFletcher lamented their shortcomings and backslidings. With all theirfaults they were the lights of the world, and the salt of the earth. They are so still. They were so in the days of which I write. And thesame may be said of other churches. They fall very far short of theperfection of Christian knowledge and holiness, but they are as far inadvance of a godless world, as Christianity is in advance of them. Ithink it no objection to Christians or to Christian churches that theydo not at once embody and exemplify Christian truth and virtue in alltheir fullness, any more than I think it an objection to men of scienceand scientific associations that they do not know and set forth all thelaws of the material universe. Men are finite, while Nature andChristianity are infinite. Christianity will always be ahead ofchurches, and nature will always be ahead of science, as God will alwaysbe ahead of man. I would have churches and ministers improve, and Iwould tell them of their faults and shortcomings that they may see whereimprovement is wanted, but I would not on any account do them injustice, or give countenance to the infidel slander that the church is worse thanthe godless world, or a twentieth part as bad. 

And though I would explain how unhappily I was influenced by the errorsand misdoings of my brethren, that I may make my apostacy from Christintelligible, I have no desire to make the impression that all with whomI came in uncomfortable collision were great sinners, while I was a meekand faultless saint. I know the contrary. There were errors and failingson both sides. I may sometimes think 'I was more sinned against thansinning, ' but at other times I am ashamed and confounded at my great andgrievous errors. God forgive me. I was dreadfully tried at times by mybrethren; but my brethren were tried by me at other times past allendurance. God only knows which was most to blame; but I was bad enough. If either I or my brethren had been as wise and good as men shouldstrive to be, both they and I might have had a very different story totell; a story much more agreeable to our readers and much morecreditable to ourselves. But the past is past, and my brethren, most ofthem, have gone to judgment, and I am hastening after; and it behoovesme to tell as fair a story, and to tell it in as meek and lowly andloving a spirit as possible. And I here declare, that if any expressionof bitterness, or any statement savoring of harshness or injustice, escapes my lips, I wish it softened, and brought into harmony withperfect truth and charity. 

It is very difficult, when a man is giving an account of his life, to bestrictly just and impartial. Perhaps it is impossible. It is verydifficult, when he is telling of his trials, to keep from allexpressions of strong and unpleasant feeling towards those whom heregards as the causes of his trials. Perhaps this also is impossible. Myreaders must consider this, and make allowances both for me and mybrethren. 

And both my readers and I must try to bear in mind, that men are not thesole actors in the pitiable blunders and melancholy tragedies of theirlives. God had to do with the descent of Joseph into Egypt. His brethrenwere the visible actors, but a Great Invisible Actor directed andcontrolled their doings. Our ignorance and our vices are our own, butthe form they take in action, and the effects they produce, are God's. Shimei's wickedness was his own, but it was God that caused it to showitself in throwing stones at David. All our trials are, in truth, fromGod, and it would be well for us to regard them in that light. And weought no more to be malignantly resentful towards the men whom God makesuse of to try us, than we ought to murmur against God. We should try togo through all with the meek and quiet spirit with which Jesus wentthrough the still greater trials that lay in His path. And in speakingof our trials, we should try to exhibit the sweet forgiving temper thatshines out so gloriously in the life and death of the Redeemer. And ifwe can go a step farther, and rejoice in tribulation, and smile inpeaceful tranquility at the erring but divinely guided actors in ourtrials, so much the better. And if we can believe that all things worktogether for good not only to them that love God, but even to those whofor a time are unwittingly separated from God, why should we not'rejoice evermore, and in everything give thanks?' My gracious God, Iknow that there are expressions in this book that might have beenbetter, --that feelings sometimes show themselves that are not theperfection of Christian love and meekness; and I ask Thee in Thy mercyto forgive them all: And I pray Thee so to influence my soul for thetime to come, and to enable me so to use my tongue and pen, that all Isay and write may savor of Jesus, be in agreement with my Christianprofession, and tend to the instruction and spiritual improvement of myhearers and readers. 

_Explanation Fourth. My Own Defects. _

My character was very defective in my early days. I have felt this ahundred times while I have been writing and revising the foregoingpages. I was wanting in humility. There were some kinds of pride fromwhich I was probably free; but there were others of which I had morethan my share. And I was lacking in meekness. I could control myself andkeep quite calm in a public debate; but could be angry and resentful inother cases. I was not sufficiently forbearing. I was not sufficientlyforgiving. 

And I was too critical, too pugnacious, too controversial. I was toomuch in the habit of looking for defects in what I heard and read;defects in style; errors in thought; mistakes in reasoning; faults inarrangement; and improprieties in manner and spirit. 

Considering that I was to a great extent self-taught, that much that Ilearned I learned after I had become almost a man, this perhaps wasnatural; but it was a disadvantage. It would have been better if I hadsought only for the true, the good, the beautiful in what I heard, andread, and saw. I ought, perhaps, instead of exercising my criticalpowers on others, to have contented myself with exercising them on myown character and performances, and with endeavoring in all things toset an example of what was worthy of imitation. It may be that I was_naturally_, _constitutionally_ critical; but that does not make itright or wise. I ought to have warred with my constitutionalpropensities, and to have kept my critical tendencies within the boundsof prudence and charity. 

But this wisdom was too high for me in my early days, and I fear thatwhile I was pressing attention to practical matters on others, I wasmyself too much busied in doctrinal matters. I was too zealous _against_certain doctrines while rebuking others for being too zealous _for_them. While they were too doctrinal and controversial positively, I wastoo doctrinal and controversial negatively. They erred in going too far;I was too zealous in pushing them back. 

In many things my enemies were wrong: but there were other things inwhich I was not right. They were very foolish; and I was far from wise. I see it, I feel it all, and I lament it too. And still I feel theremains of my old defects and vices clinging to me. I have still greatneed of the mercy of God, and of the forbearance and kind considerationof my brethren. God help me, if it be not too late, to improve both inwisdom and in Christian virtue. My Gracious God, it is Thy wish that Thypeople 'should be conformed to the image of Thy Son, that He might bethe first-born among many brethren. ' Oh, if I could but approach thatpoint, and be worthy to take some humble place as a brother of thatglorious embodiment of all moral and spiritual excellence, what would Inot give, --what would I not do! If it be possible, Make me, by thy transforming love, Dear Saviour, daily more like Thee. 

And while the blessed process of transformation is going on, keep me, OThou Friend and Saviour of mankind, from every evil word and deed, andfrom every great and grievous error. 

_Explanation Fifth. Theology and Theologians. _

If any think I have been too severe in my remarks on theology andtheologians, and on the preachers who mock their hearers withtheological vanities, and puzzle them with their senseless theologicaldialect, let them read the remarks of the Rev. Joseph Parker, D. D. , G. Gilfillan, Albert Barnes, John Wesley, Richard Baxter, and others onthis subject. Quotations from their writings may be found farther on inthe volume. We would give a few of their remarks here, but we must nowhasten on with our story. 

CHAPTER XII. 

THE STORY CONTINUED. WHAT FOLLOWED EXPULSION. DESPERATE WORD FIGHTING. ABUSE. 

I was expelled on a Saturday afternoon. I was unable to stay till theclosing scene, as I had an engagement to preach anniversary sermons onthe Sunday, some thirty miles away. But the news soon reached me, and Ireceived it with strange and indescribable emotions. I felt thatsomething very important had happened, --that I was placed in a new andserious position, and was entering on a new and untried way of life; butI little dreamt what the results would be. I expected an eventfulfuture, but not the kind of future that was really waiting for me. Ianticipated trials, and sorrows, and great changes; but how strangelydifferent the realities have proved from what I anticipated in myfevered dreams! But I had strong faith in God, and a firm trust in Hisall-perfect Providence, and no one saw me tremble or turn pale. 

I had not been expelled long when I found myself face to face with aterrible host of trials. Some who had promised to stand by my side tookfright, and left me to my fate. Some found their interests wereendangered by their attachment to me, and fell away. Some wereinfluenced by the threats of their masters, and some by the tears andentreaties of their kindred, and reluctantly joined the ranks of myenemies. Some thought I should have yielded a point or two, and werevexed at what they called my obstinacy. There were fearful andmelancholy changes. People who had always heretofore received me withsmiles of welcome, now looked cold and gloomy. Some raged, some wept, and some embraced me with unspeakable tenderness; while some wished medead, and said it had been better for me if I had never been born. 

One man, a person of considerable influence, who had encouraged me in mymovements, and joined me in lamenting the shortcomings of the Connexion, and in condemning the conduct of my opponents, no sooner saw that I wasdoomed, than he sent me a most unfeeling letter. I met the postman andgot the letter in the street, and read it as I walked along. It painedme terribly, but it comforted me to think that it had not fallen intothe hands of my delicate and sensitive wife. That no other eye might seeit, and no other soul be afflicted with the treachery and cruelty of thewriter, I tore it in pieces, and threw it into the Tyne, and kept thematter a secret from those whose souls it might have shocked too rudelyfor endurance. 

Another man, who had said to me a short time before my expulsion, thatwhoever else might close their doors against me, his would always beopen, proved as faithless as the basest. I called one day at his shop. As soon as he saw me, he turned away his eyes, and stood motionless andspeechless behind the counter, as if agitated with painful andunutterable passion. I saw his family move hurriedly from the roombehind the shop to another room, as if afraid lest I should step forwardinto their presence. The man kept his door open sure enough, his _shop_door; but his heart was closed, and he never spoke to me more as long ashe lived. 

One day I went with a brother of mine to the house of a tradesman nearGateshead, a member and a leading man in the New Connexion, on a matterof business. As soon as the person saw me, he began to abuse me in avery extravagant manner. I had always had a favorable opinion of theman, and I quietly answered, "I can excuse your severity; for you nodoubt are acting conscientiously. " "That is more than I believe you aredoing, " he answered, and turned away. 

There was great excitement throughout the whole Connexion. And whilemany were transported with rage, great numbers took my part. The feelingin my favor was both strong and very general. One-third of the wholeConnexion probably separated from my opponents, and formed themselvesinto a new society. Several ministers joined them, and had not thechapels been secured to the Conference, it is probable that the greaterportion of the community would have seceded. As it was, the existence ofthe Body seemed in peril, and the leaders found it necessary to strainevery nerve to save it from utter destruction. 

And they were not particular as to the means they used. Before myexpulsion even my enemies had considered me a virtuous, godly man, andacknowledged me to be a most laborious and successful minister. Now theyfabricated and circulated all manner of slanderous reports respectingme. One day they gave it out that I had broken my teetotal pledge, andhad been taken up drunk out of the gutter, and wheeled home in awheelbarrow. Then it was discovered that I had not broken my pledge, butI had been seen nibbling a little Spanish juice, so it was said I waseating opium, and killing myself as fast as the poison could destroy me. 

At another time it was said I had gone stark mad, and had been smotheredto death between two beds. A friend came, pale and dismally sorrowful, to condole with my wife on the dreadful catastrophe, and was himselfalmost mad with delight when he found that I was in the parlor writing, as well and as sane as usual. 

Then it was reported that I had applied for a place in the ministryamong the Calvinists, though I had up to that time professed views atvariance with Calvinism, and had even objected to be a hired minister. When I called for the names of the parties to whom I had made the offer, and engaged to give a large reward if my slanderers would produce them, they found it was another Joseph that had applied for the place, and notJoseph Barker. But the death of one slander seemed to be the birth oftwo or three fresh ones. And sometimes opposite slanders sprang uptogether. "If he had been a good man, " said one, "he would have stoppedin the Connexion quietly, and waited for reform!" "If he had been anhonest man, " said another, "he would have left the Connexion long ago, and not remained in a community that he thought in error. " I had been"too hasty" for one, and "too slow" for another. One wrote to assure methat I should die a violent death in less than eighteen months. Anothersaid he foresaw me lying on my death-bed, with Satan sitting on mybreast, ready to carry away my soul to eternal torments. One sent me anumber of my pamphlets blotted and torn, packed up with a piece of wood, for the carriage of which I was charged from four to five shillings. Another sent me a number of my publications defaced in another way, with offensive enclosures that do not admit of description. 

At one time it was reported that I had died suddenly at Leeds. "Afterlecturing there one night, " the story said, "a certain person got uponthe platform to oppose me, and I was so frightened, that I first turnedpale, then fainted, and in two hours breathed my last. " I was preachingat Penrith, in Cumberland, some seventy or eighty miles away, at thetime I was said to have died at Leeds. 

Some weeks later it was rumored that I had destroyed myself at Otley. The maker of the tale in this case had been very particular, and givenhis story the appearance of great truthfulness. He said I had gone tolecture at Otley, and on my arrival there, was found to be more thanusually thoughtful and depressed. I lectured with my usual freedom andpower, but seemed oppressed with some mysterious sorrow. After thelecture, instead of going along with my host, I unaccountablydisappeared, and though my friends sought for me and inquired for me allabout the town, I was nowhere to be found. In the morning, as the son ofmy host was seeking for some cows in a wood on the side of the Chevin, he found me dead and cold, with my throat cut, and the razor in my handwith which I had done the deadly deed. The news soon spread, and my bodywas taken back to Otley, where an inquest was held. The verdict was thatI had died by my own hand, in a fit of temporary insanity. 

These stories were printed and published, and circulated through thewhole country. They were shouted aloud in the street opposite my owndoor, in the hearing of my wife and family, during my absence. At firstmy wife and children were terribly alarmed when they heard men crying, "The melancholy death of Mr. Joseph Barker. " But they got so used to medying and destroying myself in time, that they took such matters morecalmly, especially as I always came again, and appeared no worse for theterrible deaths through which I had been made to pass. 

For a year or two my enemies published a periodical called _The Beacon_, every page of which they filled with malignant slanders. The loss ofmembers exasperated them past measure. The danger which threatened theConnexion drove them mad. They took up evil reports respecting mewithout consideration. They looked on all I did with an evil eye, andrecklessly charged me with wicked devices which had no existence but intheir own disturbed imaginations. One charged me with having actedinconsistently with my views with regard to the use of money, andanother with having acted inconsistently with my belief with regard tobaptism. Any tale to my discredit was welcome, and the supply ofslanderous tales seemed infinite. They wrested my words, they belied mydeeds, they misinterpreted my motives, they misrepresented the wholecourse of my life, and the whole texture of my character. 

One of the pitiful slanders circulated by my enemies was the following. My custom was, when I went out to lecture, or to preach anniversarysermons, to charge only my coach fares, rendering my services gratis. For eighteen years I never charged a penny either for preaching orlecturing. But the people of Berry Brow, near Huddersfield, said I hadcharged them thirty shillings for preaching their anniversary sermons, and the Conference party took the trouble to spread the contemptiblecharge through the Connexion. 

The facts of the case were these: I had an engagement to preachanniversary sermons at Hanley, in the Staffordshire Potteries. The BerryBrow people heard of this, and as I had to pass their place on my way toHanley, they requested me to spend a Sabbath with them, and preach_their_ anniversary sermons. I did so, and charged them thirtyshillings, about one-third of the expenses of my journey, taking theother two-thirds from the Hanley people. This was all. 

Of course such matters would not be worth naming, if it were not to showhow much there was in the conduct of my persecutors to give me a disliketo their character, and to prejudice me against their views. 

That you may have an idea of my labors as a preacher, take the followingaccount of one week's work, when I was lecturing against the infidelSocialists, previous to my expulsion. I had preached three times on theSunday, walked six miles, and attended to several other duties. At halfpast ten at night I started by stage coach for Bolton, a hundred andfifty miles away. I travelled all night, and all next day, outside thecoach. It was winter, and the weather was very cold. About six in theevening I reached Bolton. At half past seven I began my lecture, in aplace crowded almost to suffocation. After the lecture, I had an hourand a half's debate. Between eleven and twelve I went to bed. I spentnext day mostly in writing. At half past seven I began my secondlecture, with a congregation more closely packed than the night before. The lecture was followed with a somewhat longer debate. This continuedfive nights. On Friday night I got to bed about twelve. At half past twoI started in an open gig for Manchester, twelve miles off. The morningwas very cold. There was a severe frost and a thick fog. At Manchester Itook the coach for Newcastle, and I rode outside all day, until halfpast ten at night. The Sunday following I preached three times again. And in this way I labored for nearly two years. I paid all my ownexpenses. I also engaged and paid a person to preach for me, and toattend to my other duties in the circuit, during the week. If there wasa loss at my meetings I bore it myself; never asking any one for aid. And at times I had heavy losses. At Manchester once, after giving fivelectures, I was eleven pounds out of pocket. At Birmingham I had a lossof thirty-seven pounds on five lectures. That was about the hardest weekI ever had. My tongue got rather white. My food lost its relish. Mythoughts kept me awake after I lay down in bed sometimes, and sometimesawoke me after I had gone to sleep. I caught myself drawing long breathsat times. Money came into my head at prayer, though none came into mypocket. I did not even ask for that. I met with Combe's work ondigestion and read it, but it did not help me much, either in digestingmy food, or my heavy loss. But I made no complaints. I did not even tellmy wife till long after, when I was prosperous and comfortable again. And none of those who heard my lectures, saw in me any sign ofdiscouragement. I lectured to my small audience as earnestly as if thevast amphitheatre had been crowded. And I paid the whole loss out of myown pocket, asking help from neither stranger nor friend. 

Just about this time Mr. Hulme, the son-in-law of my chief persecutor, set afloat a story that I was getting immensely rich by my lectures, anddemanded that I should hand over my gains to the Connexional funds. Icould hardly help wishing that he had been compelled to take one-half ofmy Manchester and Birmingham gains. 

I never charged more than two-pence, I seldom charged more than a penny, for admission to my lectures: but such were the crowds that attended, and such was the readiness of my friends in different places to help mewithout charge, that in nine cases out of ten I had a surplus. I hadforty pounds in hand with which to pay the loss of thirty-seven atBirmingham. Besides, I sold large quantities of my pamphlets, and theyyielded me a profit, though I sold my works eighty or ninety per cent. Cheaper than my envious brethren sold theirs. 

After my expulsion I worked harder than I had done before. The followingis only a part of one week's work. I preached three times on the Sunday;twice to immense crowds in the open air. The time between the threemeetings I spent in talking, writing, and walking. I walked fifteenmiles. On Monday I wrote a lengthy article for my periodical, the_Christian Investigator_. At night I lectured to a crowded audience, andhad a three hours' discussion after. About one I got to bed. At five Iwas up to take the coach to Manchester. At Manchester I carried a heavypack two miles to the railway station. I went by train to Sandbach, thenwalked about twenty-three miles to Longton, carrying my carpet bag, andsome thirty pounds weight of books, on my shoulder. It was a hot day inJune. At Longton I preached an hour and a quarter to about five thousandpeople in the open air, and had a lengthy discussion after. How I slept, I forget. I believe I was feverish through the night. In the morning mynose bled freely, and I was better. I walked six, eight, or ten milesdaily, carrying my bag and books along with me, and preaching, orlecturing and discussing, every night. I did this daily for weeks, andmonths, and years. And I never charged a penny for my labors. And I hadno salary. I supported myself and my family by the sale of my cheappublications. 

Yet one of the slanders circulated by my enemies was, as I said, that Iacted inconsistently with my published views on the use of money. Itaught, as Wesley had taught, and as Jesus and Paul had taught, that aman should not lay up _for himself_ treasures on earth, --that money wasa trust from God, to be used in His service, for the good of mankind. And I acted on these principles. I did not lay up a penny for myself onearth. I employed all I received in doing good, hardly spending enoughon myself and family to purchase the barest necessaries. But my enemiesfound I had placed fifty pounds _on interest_, in the hands of Mr. Townsend; and away went the charge of inconsistency, hypocrisy, and whatnot, through the country. There was no inconsistency at all in what Ihad done. 

It was a principle with me, never to go into debt. And my plan was, never to begin to print a book, till I had, in the first place, got themoney ready to pay the expense of printing, and, in the second place, reconciled myself to lose the money in case the book did not sell. Atthe time I placed the fifty pounds in the hands of Mr. T. , I waspreparing to print a book that would cost me thrice that amount. I didprint it, and paid the expense in cash, according to my principles andplan. I follow the same plan still: my printers like it; and so do I. Iowed a dollar and a half at the close of last year. The thought of ittroubled me, not much, but still a little, during the watch-nightservices at Siloam church. I had only owed the sum ten hours, and I paidit next morning, but still, the thought of the debt made the ending ofthe old year, and the beginning of the new one, a trifle less happy thanthey might have been, if I had been entirely straight with all theworld. 

In some cases, when I went out to lecture, the leading ministers of theConnexion would come to my meetings, and exciting discussions followed. These injured the Connexion still more, for I invariably gained thesympathy of the audience. On some occasions my enemies behaved in such amanner as to provoke my audiences past endurance, and uproar followed;and the greatest coolness on my part, and the employment of all myinfluence, were necessary to keep the more excitable of my friends fromresorting to violence. 

Very curious incidents took place sometimes, strangely confounding myopponents, and making the impression on my friends, and on myself aswell, that God had specially interfered on my behalf. On more than oneoccasion, when discreditable tales were told of me by my opponents, someone in the audience who knew the facts, would rise and testify in mybehalf, and publicly convict my slanderers of falsehood. In one case, atDudley, Mr. Bakewell, who had always taken a leading part against me, charged me before a crowded audience, with having baptized a child ofcertain parents, at Hawarden in Wales, a hundred miles away, after I haddeclared my belief that it was improper to baptize children. He adducedsome testimony in support of his statement, which seemed to satisfy manyin the audience that I had been guilty of inconsistency. What could Ido? I had nothing to oppose to his testimony and his pretended proofs, but my solemn denial of the statement. Most happily for me, as soon asmy opponent took his seat, a lady rose, towards the farther end of theroom, with a baby in her arms. "I wish to speak, " said the lady. Thepeople near her helped her to step upon a seat, that she might be seenand heard to better advantage. "_I_ am the mother referred to by Mr. Bakewell, " said the lady, "and this is the child. Mr. Bakewell'sstatement is untrue. Mr. Barker did not sprinkle my child. He only namedit, and asked God's blessing on it. Here is my husband, and he cantestify to the truth of this statement. " The lady stepped down and thehusband rose. "I am the Richard Burrows mentioned by Mr. Bakewell. Thisis my wife, and that is our child. Mr. Barker did not baptize it. Mr. Bakewell's statement is false. " That settled the question. The feelingagainst my slanderer was tremendous. The people would not hear him speakanother word. 

It had so happened that Mr. And Mrs. Burrows had been obliged to removefrom Wales to the neighborhood of Dudley, and had just arrived at theirnew home. Hearing that I was lecturing at Dudley, they hastened to themeeting, and got there just in time to hear my opponent mention theirnames in support of his charge of inconsistency. What could be morenatural than that I and my friends should regard this remarkable andhappy incident as a gracious interposition of Providence in our behalf?

The conduct of my opponents had a most injurious effect not only on myown mind, but on the minds of my wife and children. We came to look onNew Connexion Methodist preachers as some of the worst of men, --as thevery essence or embodiment of deceit and malignity; and our respect forMethodist preachers generally, and even for Methodism itself, wasgreatly abated. The consequence was, we were prepared to move in almostany direction that would take us farther away from our old associates, and we all became, to some extent, anti-Methodistical in our feelingsand sentiments. 

Exciting meetings like the one at Dudley took place in almost every partof the country. The numbers attending them were so great that no roomcould hold them, so that I generally had to speak in the open air. And Ilectured almost every night, and often through the day as well; andevery lecture was followed with discussion. When opponents did not riseto assail me, friends rose to consult me, and our evening meetings oftencontinued till nearly midnight. And I preached three times on a Sunday. And after every meeting there was a crowd of friends anxious to talkwith me, or have my counsel about the formation or management ofsocieties. Some had heard strange stories about me, and wanted to knowwhether they were true or not. Others had had discussions withopponents, and wished to tell me how they had fared. Some had beenpuzzled with passages of Scripture quoted by opponents, and they wishedto know my views of their meaning. Some were sick, and wanted myprayers. Some wanted prescriptions as well as prayers, and I was obligedto be a physician as well as a preacher and reformer. Reports of cureswrought by my means led many to believe I had the gift of healing, andsufferers sought my aid wherever I made my appearance. 

While one-half of each day was taken up with talking, another half wastaken up with writing. I had hundreds of letters to write, and hundredsupon hundreds of all kinds of letters to read. I had, besides, a newperiodical on hand, for which I was expected to provide the principalpart of the articles. And special attacks on me or on my views requireda constant succession of pamphlets. 

In addition to my press of work, I had no small share of anxiety. Mywife was greatly tried, and saw no prospect of a speedy end to hertrials. When expelled I was living in the preacher's house, and had thepreacher's furniture, and many in the circuit considered that I had aright to them, and advised me to keep them, and set the Conferencepartly at defiance. I however refused to retain possession of propertywith a doubtful title, and gave all up. And now I had not a chair onwhich to sit, nor a bed on which to sleep. And the little money I hadwas wanted for the printers. My friends provided for me in a way, butnot in the way to satisfy an anxious mother. One child was taken by onefamily, and another by another, while I and my wife were accommodated bya third. And one of the children was unkindly treated, and the rest werenot content; and no house could be a home to my wife which was not herown; and no condition could make her content while deprived of thecompany of her children. And I saw her heart was the seat of fearfulconflicts. 

For several months I went through my arduous and ceaseless labors, andmy varied and exhausting trials, without apparent injury to my health. At length, however, continual excitement, intense thought, ceaselessanxiety, the foul air of close and crowded rooms, perpetual travelling, loss of sleep, lack of domestic comforts, unhealthy food, and trials ofother kinds without end, so exhausted me, that I found it difficult torise from my chair, or to steady myself on my feet. To walk was quite atask, --a really painful one. I had a difficulty in putting one footbefore the other. It was a labor to drag myself along. A walk of two orthree miles quite wearied me. And when I got to my journey's end, mylungs lacked power to utter words; my brain lacked energy to supplythoughts; and lecturing and preaching became a weariness. When I satdown to write, my pen seemed reluctant to touch the paper. My mindshrank back from its task. In my ignorance of the laws of life, Icharged myself with idleness, and tried to spur myself on to renewedactivity. The attempt was vain. One afternoon I ventured to lie down andtreat myself to an after-dinner nap. I slept three hours. I had noengagement that night, and feeling still unaccountably sleepy, Islipped off to bed about eight o'clock. I slept till nearly nine nextmorning. I slept an hour or two more after dinner. At night I sleptabout ten hours more. Next day I felt as if my strength was runningover. I could do anything. My pen seemed to point to the paper ofitself, as if anxious to be writing. Walking was a pleasure. I couldpreach or lecture without effort. Words, thoughts, and feelings were allat hand to do my bidding. What I had charged on myself as idleness, wasstrengthlessness, the result of sheer exhaustion. 

I had suffered so much from the intolerance of my old colleagues, that Inow resolved to be subject to no authority whatever but God and my ownconscience. And I kept my resolution. I would neither rule nor be ruled. The extreme of priestly tyranny, from which I had suffered sogrievously, had begotten in me the extreme of religious license. I haveseen since, that a man may have too much liberty, as well as too little;too little restraint as well as too much; and that a church withoutauthority and discipline must inevitably lose itself in confusion andruin. We are none of us fit for unlimited liberty: we all need thesupervision, and counsels, and admonitions, of our Christian brethren. 

After my separation from the Methodist New Connexion I became the pastorof a church in Newcastle, which had left the Connexion on account of myexpulsion. The trustees had legal and rightful possession of the largeand nice new chapel there, and they and the other officials of thechurch were both dissatisfied with the doings of Conference, anddesirous to secure me as their minister. They were aware of myadmiration of the Quakers, and of my leaning towards some of theirpeculiar views and customs. They were also acquainted with my way ofpreaching, for I had travelled in that Circuit some years before, and Ihad preached for them frequently while stationed at Gateshead. They knewmy character too, and were acquainted with all my conflicts with theruling party in the Connexion from which I had been expelled. And thoughthey did not think exactly as I thought on every point, they saw nothingin my views but what they could freely tolerate. They were satisfiedthat I was conscientious; and they considered my general deportment tobe highly exemplary. And they knew I was a hard-working and successfulminister. One of the leading members was a printer, and had beenconsulted by the Annual Committee of the New Connexion in reference tomy communications to them about the publication of cheap books by theBook-room. They thought my statements were extravagant; he told themthey were very near the truth, if not the truth itself. This gentlemanwas one of the most eager now to arrange for my settlement as a ministerin Newcastle. The officers and members of the church generally weredisposed to consult my feelings and meet my views. They did not requireme to be a hired or salaried minister. They knew the wants of my family, and they would provide for them. They would appoint a person to baptizechildren. They were not particular about theological niceties. They hadread my writings; they were acquainted with the controversies that hadtaken place between me and my opponents; and they were satisfied that Iwas right on every point of importance; and that was enough. And theyliked my simple, earnest, practical style of preaching. So everythingwas comfortably arranged. 

We united on the principle laid down in my article on "_Toleration, Human Creeds_, " &c. The Bible was our creed: the Bible was our law-book;though we were still, on the whole, methodistical, both in doctrine anddiscipline. Numbers of other churches were organized on the sameprinciple, in various parts of the country; and several young preachersleft the body to which I had belonged, or were expelled on account oftheir attachment to me, and became their ministers. And the churchesprospered. Numbers of people joined them, both from the world and fromother religious communities. 

For nearly two years things went on very happily at Newcastle, and thechurch was very prosperous. I labored to the utmost extent of my powers. I preached twice every Sunday to my own congregation, and once toanother congregation at Gateshead, or in the country. I visited thechurches also in every part of the land, preaching and lecturingcontinually. 

All this time my old opponents continued their abuse. Though Irelinquished no Christian doctrine, and added to the truth no dreams orspeculations of my own, but employed myself continually in preaching thegreat practical principles of the Gospel, and in urging my hearers tolove and good works, they assailed me with the bitterest hatred. And themore the churches with which I was connected prospered, the morefuriously my enemies raged. 

And when people left other denominations to unite with my friends, ministers and members of those denominations joined my opponents intheir evil work. They preached abusive sermons and published abusivepamphlets. There was eager, angry controversy on every hand. Hard wordswere used on both sides. The feelings of both parties were heated to ahigh pitch. And as is usual in such cases, both parties, under theinfluence of their passions, came to the conclusion that their opponentswere neither sound in doctrine, nor good in character. 

Towards the close of the second year I got into trouble at Newcastle. Areligious reformer of the name of George Bird came to the town. Hisfather was a clergyman in the Church of England, and he himself wasrector of Cumberworth. He was recommended to me by some of my friendswho lived near Cumberworth, and as he was wishful to spend some time inNewcastle and the neighborhood, I took him into my house, and gave him ahome. He had published a book on the Reform of the Church of England, urging the abolition of a number of abuses, and recommending therestoration of what he considered true Christian discipline. His ideawas, that Christians should meet for religious _worship apart_ frompeople of the world, --that though preachers might _preach_ to mixedaudiences, they should reserve their singing and praying, and all thatwas strictly worship, for assemblies of Christians alone. He recommendedthat the members of the church should meet first, in a place apart, orin a part of the chapel marked off for themselves, and go through theirdevotions all alone, and that the sermon, addressed both to believersand unbelievers, should be quite a separate service. He had passages ofScripture, and church tradition, and considerations of fitness andpropriety, by which he recommended his doctrine, and to some they provedconvincing. I began myself, after thinking the matter over for awhile, to have a leaning towards his views. My friends could so far toleratethe new views, that they allowed Mr. Bird to preach in their chapels, letting some one else conduct the singing and praying parts of theservice. But when they found that their own minister began to look withfavor on the new plan, they became alarmed. They could toleratepeculiarities in others, but they were not disposed to appear before theworld as reformers and innovators themselves. Nor would they allow theirminister to go any farther in the way of reform than he had gone beforethey had accepted him as their pastor. They had reconciled themselves tothe changes of which he had been the subject previous to his specialconnection with them, but they would have no new ones. He might go backa little if he pleased, but not forwards. 

Both my friends and I were placed in a trying position. I was bent oncompliance with whatever seemed to be the requirements of the Gospel, and my friends, who had no misgivings on the subject of public worship, were resolved not to tolerate a change. I kept the usual course as longas I could do so without self-condemnation, but at length wasconstrained to change. One Sunday night I preached from the concludingwords of the Sermon on the Mount, --"Therefore whosoever heareth thesesayings of Mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, whichbuilt his house upon a rock: and the rain descended, and the floodscame, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: forit was founded upon a rock. And every one that heareth these sayings ofMine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, whichbuilt his house upon the sand: and the rain descended, and the floodscame, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: andgreat was the fall of it. " I reviewed the sayings of Christ referred toin the text. I dwelt at some length on the passage about praying in thesynagogues and in the corners of the streets. The congregation was verylarge, and the sermon was unusually impressive. Some said they had neverheard me preach with so much power. As I drew towards a close, Ireferred again to the words on public prayer, and gave what appeared tome to be their meaning. I remarked, that I felt bound to comply withwhat I believed to be the command of the Saviour, and that I musttherefore decline to conclude the service in the usual way, by a publicprayer, and request the disciples of Christ to retire to their homes andsecret places to pray. 

The result was exceedingly painful. The confusion was dreadful. Some, who had never thought on the subject before, and who had probablylistened to me that evening without comprehending properly my meaning, were horrified. The officers of the church, who had accepted me as theirminister in the belief that I should never try them by anything new inmy views or proceedings, were grieved beyond measure. One of them saidto me at a meeting the following evening: "You have committed a crime, compared with which the sin of him who betrayed his Lord for silver, washonor and piety!" This, of course, was madness, if not blasphemy. But ithelps to show the fearful difficulties that lie in the way of the manwho feels himself called to be a religious reformer. And it tends toshow the tempest of excitement in which, for so long a period, it was mylot to live. 

The result of this last step in my reforming career was, that almost allthe richer and more influential members of the church deserted me, andsome even of the less influential followed their example. This howeverdid not change my determination to do what I believed to be the will ofGod. Nor did it dispose me to hesitate longer before making changes whenthey seemed to be called for by the teachings of Christ. On thecontrary, it led me to resolve, that I would hold myself more at libertyto follow the revelations of truth and duty than ever. I blamed myselffor having accepted the situation of a regular minister, blamed myselffor having allowed myself to be influenced so much by a regard to thejudgments and feelings of others. I felt a kind of pleasure at length, when I found the leading friends who had held me so much in check, weregone. I attributed their departure to my fidelity to Christ, and to mygrowing conformity to His likeness; and I resolved to labor more thanever to come to the perfection of Christian manhood, "to the measure ofthe stature of the fulness of Christ. " I comforted myself with thethought that Jesus had been deserted, betrayed, and persecuted, beforeme; and felt happy in the assurance, that if I "suffered with Him, Ishould also be glorified with Him. "

I now resolved to speak and write and act more freely than ever. I wouldno longer keep my thoughts to myself till I was thoroughly convinced oftheir truth, but submit them to the consideration of my friends as soonas they assumed the appearance of probability. I would think aloud. Iwould search to the bottom of all things, and make known the resultwithout reserve. I would favor a free and fearless discussion of everysubject. And I would reduce to practice everything inculcated by Christand His Apostles, however much at variance it might be with the customsof the Church. I would rid myself of prejudice. I would take nothing ontrust. Old things should now, at last, pass away, unless they were foundto form part of the doctrine of Christ; and all things should becomenew. And what I purposed, I did, to the best of my ability. I arrangedfor meetings of the church, at which we sang and prayed, and endeavoredto instruct and comfort one another, and provoke each other to love andgood works. When this church meeting was over, I ascended the pulpit, and addressed the public congregation. We changed the manner ofconducting class-meetings, encouraging the members to read hymns, orportions of Scripture, or extracts from any instructive book, or tospeak to each other for comfort or improvement. I would be no longer_the_ teacher of the church, but only _one_ of its teachers. 

That I might be able to support my family without the aid of the church, and so feel myself thoroughly free and independent, I resolved tocommence business as a printer. I bought a press, and type, and all theother requisites of a printing-office, and set to work. Elizabeth Pease, a good kind Quakeress of Darlington, gave me thirty pounds to help me inmy undertaking, and others, nearer at hand, assisted me according totheir ability. I engaged a man to work for me, and teach me how to workmyself, for I was quite a stranger to the business. I soon was able bothto set up type and work the press, though the pressure of other workprevented me from excelling in either of those lines. Before long I hadtwo men at work. But my workmen were not so faithful as they shouldhave been, and it cost me more to print my works myself, than it haddone to get them printed by others. I got a foreman, but he used myoffice to carry on a business of his own, instead of doing what he couldfor mine, and I was obliged to turn him off, and pay him a considerablesum to keep him from troubling me with a law-suit. A short time after, avery unpromising-looking young man came and asked me for a place in myprinting establishment. He was hardly a young man, in fact, but just ahalf-taught random-looking kind of boy. I asked what he could do. To myunspeakable astonishment he told me that the place he wanted was that offoreman. I smiled, and looked on the poor creature as a simpleton. Butthough he seemed a little disconcerted, he was not to be abashed. Hetold me, that if I would give him a trial, he would let me see whetherhe could manage the office or not. "But how can you manage the men?"said I. Nothing however would satisfy the poor boy but a trial, and I, under some kind of influence, agreed to give him one. What the menthought when he took his place, I don't know; but they seemed to act onthe principle, that as I had made him foreman, they must obey hisorders; and obey him they did, and to my agreeable surprise, everythingwent on in a satisfactory manner. The youthful foreman, who turned outto be a sensible, modest, hard-working, honest young man, did well fromthe first, and improved every year, and remained with me, givingsatisfaction both to me and to my men, so long as I continued inbusiness. 

I had many fearful trials to pass through after I offended the leadingmembers of my congregation by giving up singing and prayer at publicmeetings, and a heavy loss entailed on me by the dishonesty of one ofthose leading members was not the least. 

Ever since the time when I first became an author, I had acted as my ownpublisher and bookseller, sending out parcels to my friends, keepingaccounts, and doing the whole work of a Book-room. When I engaged to beminister of the church in Newcastle, and became servant of thenewly-formed churches all over the country, Mr. Blackwell, the printerreferred to on page 175, advised me to put the book-selling businessinto the hands of Mr. Townsend, another leading official of the church. "You have work enough, " said he, "and too much, in preaching, lecturing, writing, and travelling, and Mr. Townsend can do the book-selling betterthan you. He is a business man; he understands book-keeping; and he willconduct the business in an orderly and efficient manner. " It had alwaysbeen a principle with me never to go into debt, and I said to Mr. Blackwell, who was then my printer, "If you will give me a guaranteethat no debt shall be incurred, --that you will never print anything tillMr. Townsend has paid you for all work previously printed, I will agreeto your proposal. " He gave me his word that he would do exactly as Irequested. Mr. Townsend was accordingly made wholesale agent for my newperiodical, and for all my other publications, and all my stock of bookswas placed in his hands. For fifteen or eighteen months I gave myself noconcern about matters of business, trusting to Mr. Blackwell to keepthings right, according to his pledge. 

Mr. Townsend had another business besides my book concern, the china andearthenware business, and about eighteen months after my business wasplaced in his hands, he went into Scotland to dispose of a quantity ofhis surplus stock. He had only been gone a few days before word camethat he was dead. It then came out that Mr. Blackwell had allowed him torun up a debt of nearly seven hundred pounds for printing. It also cameout that Mr. Townsend was insolvent. He had been in difficulties foryears, and he had used the money he had received for my books to preventhis creditors from making him a bankrupt. His journey to Scotland washis last shift, and failing in that, he had taken opiates, it was said, to such an extent, as to cause death. The dreadful revelations that werelaid before me shocked and troubled me beyond measure, and I knew notwhat to do. Mr. Blackwell, through whose neglect or unfaithfulness thedebt had been incurred, exhorted me not to be alarmed, assuring me thathe should never trouble me for the money. So I set to work to gather upthe fragments of my property, and re-organize the business. I got inwhat money I could from the agents, and gave it, along with all I couldearn, to Mr. Blackwell, to reduce the debt, though it was not inreality a debt of mine. I gave him also a sum belonging to my wife, which she had just received as a legacy. I gave him all that came intomy hands, except a trifle that I spent in procuring food for my family;and in eight months I had reduced the debt to two hundred and thirtypounds. 

It was while I was exerting myself to pay off this debt that I offendedthe leaders of my congregation by giving up public worship. The personwho said that in doing so, "I had been guilty of a crime, compared withwhich that of Judas in selling his Master, was honor and piety, " wasthis same Mr. Blackwell. When I began to print for myself, he demandedthe instant payment of the remaining two hundred and thirty pounds, andfollowed the demand by legal proceedings. A friend, Mr. John Hindhaugh, who had heard how I was situated, and who had also heard that Mr. Blackwell had said that he would soon put a stop to my printing, wentand paid the amount demanded, and brought me the receipt, and said, thatif ever I found myself able, I might repay him the amount, but that Imust by no means put myself to any inconvenience. In course of time Irepaid my friend, and was once more out of debt. 

It was just while tried by this sad affair, that I formed the resolutionto throw off all restraints of prevailing creeds and customs, and enteron a career of wholesale and untrammelled investigation and discussion. I was not in the fittest state of mind to do justice to the forms ofChristianity in favor with the churches. On the contrary, the influencesto which I had been long subjected, and the peculiar state of excitementin which I was still living, could hardly fail to carry me intoextremes. No matter, I set to work. I printed thousands upon thousandsof hand-bills, announcing a three months' convention and free discussionin my chapel, and had them posted and distributed all round the country. Free admission and freedom of speech were promised to all comers. Amongthe subjects announced for discussion were, the Trinity, the Godhead ofChrist, the Atonement, Natural Depravity, Hereditary Guilt, EternalTorments, Everlasting Destruction, Justification by Faith alone, theNature of Saving Faith, What is a Christian? Trust in the Merits ofChrist, Instantaneous Regeneration, Christian Perfection, the directWitness of the Spirit, the Sabbath Question, Non-resistance, Peace, War, and Human Governments, Law-Suits, the Credit System, Toleration andHuman Creeds, the Church, the Hired Ministry, Public Prayer, PublicWorship generally, Preaching, Sunday Schools, Freedom of Thought, Freedom of Conscience, Class-Meetings, and the Duty of the Church to itsPoor Members. 

The chapel was kept open every day, and every day, when not called outof town, I delivered one or two lectures on one of those subjects, stating my own views on the point, and my reasons for holding them, andthen calling on any one that might differ from me, to state his views inreply. The chapel was generally crowded, and the discussions were oftenvery animated. Persons of various denominations took part in them, andpeople came from almost every part of the country to witness theproceedings. My principal opponent, for a portion of the time, wasGeorge Bird, the rector of Cumberworth, who had inoculated me with hisviews on public worship. He was very orthodox on many points, while I, on some points, was leaning towards Latitudinarianism. We had, at times, very exciting contests. Mr. Bird was exceedingly anxious to gain avictory, both for himself and for his views. And he was not particularas to the means he employed to accomplish his object. He was veryunfair. He could not, or he would not, refrain from personal abuse, norfrom misrepresentations of my views and statements. I was severe enoughin my criticisms, but I never was knowingly, and I do not think I wasoften even unintentionally, unjust to an opponent. I never chargedpeople with saying what they did not say, and I never forced a meaningon their words which they were not intended to express. And if at anytime an opponent charged me with misquoting his words, or withmisrepresenting his meaning, I always accepted his corrections orexplanations. Nor did I indulge in personal abuse. Nor did I lose mytemper. I did my utmost to be just to all, and when I could not exhibitmuch esteem or love for an opponent, I tried to be respectful. 

The records of those long-continued and strange debates are, I am sorryto say, lost. But while they were proceeding I drifted further away, onsome points, from the views maintained by orthodox communities. I am notaware however that I went much further than Wesley went during thelatter years of his life. I found, not only in Scripture, but in thesermons of Wesley, and in the writings of Baxter, who was a favoritewith Wesley, what seemed to me fully to justify all that I had taught onthe great doctrines of Christianity up to this period. 

I gave up the _Christian Investigator_ at the end of two years, and astwo of my friends were anxious to publish a periodical, I refrained fora time from commencing another, to give them a better chance of success. I also helped them by writing for them, at their request, a number ofarticles for the earlier numbers of their work. Their attempt howeverproved a failure. The work contained a heap of Antinomian andMillenarian nonsense, and my readers had no taste for such stuff; andthe work was given up, and the Editors shortly after left me and myfriends, and joined the Plymouth Brethren, repaying me for my kindnessby treachery and abuse. One of them published a tract when he tookhimself away, exhorting my friends to be on their guard lest they shouldbe led by me into anti-christian error. Their conduct towards mealtogether, as I thought, was unjust and dishonorable, and though theyare now both dead, I can think of no good excuse for the way in whichthey acted. But God is judge. 

I now laid aside the name of _Methodist_ and adopted that of_Christian_, and I commenced a new periodical, bearing the same title. Imade it, as I had made my other periodicals, the organ of my own mind, the vehicle of my own thoughts on every subject of importance thatengaged my attention. My writing was simply free and friendly talk withmy readers on matters in which we were all greatly interested. And thework contains the history of the changes which took place in my viewsduring the period of its publication. 

While publishing _The Christian_, I published a multitude of pamphlets. In answer to a pamphlet by the Rev. W. Cooke, in which I was roughly andunjustly handled, I published seven letters entitled _Truth and Reformagainst the World_, signing myself _A Christian_. In these letters Ispoke with the greatest freedom both of myself and of my opponents, aswell as on a great variety of other subjects. I exposed a number of whatseemed extravagant or unguarded statements made by my assailant withregard to the Scriptures. I also published a work on _The HiredMinistry_. My tracts on _Saving Faith_ and _The Atonement_ came outabout the same time. My aim in these latter publications was to free thesubject of Saving Faith and the doctrine of the Atonement from needlessmystery, by separating from the teachings of Christ and the Apostles onthose points, the bewildering and mischievous additions of ignoranttheologians. I did not deny the doctrine of salvation by faith inChrist, but only showed that the faith in Christ spoken of in the NewTestament was simply a belief in Him as the Messiah, leading us toreceive and obey His teachings, and to trust in Him for salvation. Nordid I deny the doctrine of redemption or atonement; but simplyendeavored to put what the New Testament said on these subjects in itstrue light. In most of those works, if not in all of them, there areevidences of undue excitement, and in many of them there are passageswhich, in one's calmer and more candid mood, one is obliged to condemn. 

I extended my investigations to all religious subjects, endeavoring tobring my views and proceedings on every point into perfect harmony withthe teachings of Christ and His Apostles. I also did my best, inconnection with my friends, to carry into practice in our church atNewcastle what we regarded as the New Testament principles of disciplineand church government. The following were among our regulations:--Wewould have no fixed payments. All must be given freely. There must be nocharge for admission to the church feasts. We would support our poormembers. We would deal with offenders according to the instructions ofChrist: first, tell them of their faults between them and us alone, &c. , &c. 

We encountered many difficulties in our attempts to carry out some ofour principles. Some, that were able to contribute, were too selfish todo so, and left the expenses of the church to be met by the generousfew. They would eat like gluttons at the church feasts, but give nothingtowards paying for the provisions. Some seemed to enter the church toget supported in idleness out of its funds. This seemed to be the caseespecially with a blind beggar. He spared no pains in making known hisconnection with the church, and its generosity in supporting him, to thepublic. This brought in a number of others who were wishful to besupported. But many of these people, after joining the church, refusedto work. It was plain that we must either give up the attempt to carryout our generous principles, or else adopt some method of testing peoplebefore admitting them as members, and some wise system of discipline andgovernment with regard to those already admitted. But we had said somuch about unlimited liberty, that we could do neither the one nor theother without breaking up the church and building it up anew; and itseemed too late to do that. So we dragged along as well as we could. Some lost patience, and went to other churches. Some came to theconclusion that Christianity as laid down in the New Testament wasimpracticable, and so became skeptical. Some kept aloof from all thechurches, but still retained their faith in Christianity, and theirattachment to the principles to which we had given prominence. 

At one period I lectured frequently on Peace. The Quakers aided me inobtaining rooms for my lectures, and supplied me with money to pay mytravelling expenses; and the Backhouses and Peases of Darlington, andthe Richardsons and others of Newcastle, contributed to the support ofmy family. I met with some of the best and most agreeable people I everknew, among the Quakers. Many of them were remarkably liberal andenlightened in their views, not only on religion, but on many othersubjects. I was astonished at the extent of their reading, and at theamount of knowledge they possessed. And they had a wonderful amount ofcharity towards other religious denominations. They believed thechurches were doing much good, and rejoiced in their usefulness, thoughthey could not always join them in their labors. I also found that intheir dealings with each other, they were exceedingly conscientious. OneFriend had recommended another, a lady, to invest her money in somemining speculation, which he believed was likely to prove profitable. She did so, and lost her money, or received no interest from it. TheFriend who had counselled the investment, took the shares, and returnedthe lady her money. This, I believe, was not a thing by itself, but asample of Quaker dealings with each other. I learned some useful lessonsfrom the Quakers, and I received from them many favors. I retain manypleasant recollections of my intercourse with them, and expect to thinkof them with pleasure to my dying day. 

After I ceased to receive a salary for preaching, I and my family wereoften in straits, and at times we seemed on the very verge ofstarvation. My printing business did not pay its own expenses at first, and for several years after it began to yield a profit, the profit wasrequired for new presses, new type, or had to lie dead in the shape ofincreased stock of publications. And I had no income from property. Yetin every case when we seemed to be reduced to extremities, supplies camefrom some quarter or other. Sometimes I knew the hand by whichassistance was sent, but at other times my benefactors remained unknown. There was one good Christian, John Donaldson, who was always ready withhis help. He not only aided me by many gifts, but busied himself toinduce his friends to send mo aid. He gave the first subscriptiontowards a steam press; and when the press was bought, he sent a sum topurchase the first load of coals to get up the steam, to put the pressin motion. 

On one occasion, while I was lecturing in the South, nearly two hundredmiles away from home, I failed to receive the supplies I expected fromthe agents for my publications, and my family seemed likely to be out ofprovisions before I could send them help. My wife and children had begunto feel uneasy and afraid. That day a man came up to the door with acart-load of provisions. "Does Mr. Barker live here?" said the man to myeldest son, who had answered the knock at the door. "Yes, " answered myson. "I have brought you some things, " said the man, "some flour, andpotatoes, and things. " "They are not for us, " said the poor littlefellow, "my father is away. " "But this is Mr. Barker's, is it not?" saidthe man. "Yes, " said my son, "Then it is all right, " said the man, "Iwas told to leave them here, " and he began to unload. Both children andmother were afraid there was some mistake, but the man went onunloading, and stocked the house with food for weeks to come. 

A day or two before, my wife and children had been talking to eachother, and expressing their apprehensions, as I had not been able tosend them any money, that they would soon be without anything to eat. One of the children said, 'Let us pray, mother: perhaps God will send ussomething. ' They all knelt down, and both mother and children prayed:and when they saw the abundant supplies with which the cart had stockedthe house, they believed that God had sent them in answer to theirprayers. 

I refused to buy paper, or type, or anything, on credit, and I was oftenat a loss, when my stock of paper was almost out, to know where themoney was to come from to get a fresh supply. And I had not so muchfaith as G. Müller of Bristol; at any rate, my faith did not give me thesame pleasant assurances that I should receive what I desired, thatMüller's faith gave him. I am inclined however to think that I had notso much trust in Providence, as I ought to have had. I certainly had notso much as I have now. But then, I am better off now than I was then. But I was lacking, to some extent, in Christian trust in God, as well asin resignation to His will, and hence my uneasiness. Many a time when Ilaid myself down on my bed at night, instead of going to sleep, I spentlong hours in thought about my business, looking in every direction fora prospect of supplies to enable me to pay the wages of my men, andpurchase paper. The first thing was to think of all the men that owed memoney, --to consider which of all the number would be likely to send meremittances in time, and to reckon up the sums, to see if they wouldenable me to meet the demands upon me. The next thing was to do the samething over again; and the next, to do it over again a third time. Allthis was accompanied with long and deep-drawn sighs, which were listenedto by a fond and wakeful bedfellow, who silently sympathized with me inall my trials, and who was as restless and anxious as myself. SometimesI moaned, and sometimes I prayed; and when I was wearied out with myfruitless labors, I fell asleep. It would have been better, if I couldhave done it, to have "given to the winds my fears, " and lost myself inpeaceful and refreshing slumbers; for generally, on the followingmorning, the needful supplies arrived. They seldom came from the partiesfrom whom I expected them, but they came notwithstanding. 

One day, towards the close of the year, my stock of paper was very low, and I had nothing with which to purchase a fresh supply. Next morning aletter came, enclosing thirty-five pounds, a Christmas gift from friendsin Ireland. 

On one occasion, when I was unwell, a gentleman whom I had never seen, and whom I have not seen yet in fact, sent me forty pounds, to enable meto spend a month at some hydropathic establishment. He had read a numberof my publications, and had been pleased with them, and having learnedin some way that I was not well, had sent this proof of his kind regard. 

There was one man in Newcastle, a wealthy man, who said to me, "Come tome whenever you are in difficulty, and you shall have whatever youneed. " I was often in difficulties, but hesitated to ask his help. Oneday, however, after having waited for supplies from other quarters aslong as I durst, I went to him, and stated my case. He kept me waitingan hour or more, and then said, "No. " I turned away ashamed and sad. Afriend whom I encountered on my way home, said, "What is the matter withyou? Are you ill? You look bad. " I was obliged to tell him my story. "Isthat all?" said he. "We can soon put that right. " And he gave me, unasked, as much as I needed. 

While we were struggling with our other difficulties, my wife was takenill. The house in which we lived was badly drained, or rather, thedrains being out of order, the offensive materials from other houseslodged under the floor of our cellar kitchen, and sent forth, throughthe floor, deadly effluvia. In this cellar kitchen we were obliged tolive. I was so much from home, and when at home was so much in the openair, travelling to my appointments, and even when in the house, I spentso much of my time in an upper room writing, that I took no harm. It wasotherwise with my poor wife. She had to be in this room almost all daylong, and often till late at night. The result was a deadly attack offever. She had felt unwell for some days, but had still gone on with herwork, and sought no medical advice or help. At length, as she was goingto bed one night, she fainted on the stairs. The stairs were very steep, and the point at which she lost her consciousness was a most dangerousone, and it seemed a miracle that she had not fallen back to the bottomand been killed. But somehow she fell only a step or two. My eldest sonheard there was something the matter, and ran to see what it was. Therehe found his poor, darling mother apparently dead, in the middle of thesteep and winding staircase. How he did it, I do not know, nor does he, but though he was only a child of about thirteen years of age, he tookhis mother, and by some mysterious means, carried her up the remainderof the stairs, placed her on her bed, and then stood sorrowing andtrembling till she came to herself. She was ill thirteen weeks. For twoor three weeks she seemed on the point of death. On my return, late onenight, from one of my engagements, ten miles away in the country, Ifound her strangely changed for the worse. She looked at me with a lookI can never forget. She thought she was dying. I thought so too. Her eyesaid, Death; her whole expression said, Death. I burst into tears, andgave what I thought was my last fond embrace. She had power to utterjust one sentence: it was an expression of tenderness and kindness, morekind and tender than I deserved; and then fell back on her pillow, as ifgiving up the ghost. But she lived through the night, and she livedthrough the following day, helpless and speechless, yet still breathing. She recovered, and remained with us to comfort and guide and bless usfor nearly thirty years, and then, alas, all too soon apparently, forthose who loved and all but adored her, she passed in peace to theworlds of light. 

I believed myself all this time engaged in the service of my Maker, andI regarded the arrival of seasonable help from time to time, as a proofthat I was an object of His tender care, and that my labors had Hissmile and blessing. Why did I not trust Him more fully?

By the time I had carried on my printing business for four or fiveyears, the outlay for type, and presses, and other kinds of printingapparatus, became much less, while my income from the sale of booksbecame much greater, and I found myself able, at length, to purchasewhatever I needed as soon as I wanted it. By-and-bye I had money alwayson hand. The relief I felt, when I found myself fairly above want anddifficulty, was delightful beyond measure. 

CHAPTER XIII. 

CONTACT WITH UNITARIANS, AND DOWNWARD TENDENCY TO DEISM. 

I had now for some time been gradually approaching the views of the moremoderate class of Unitarians. Some of my friends, when they saw this, became alarmed, and returned to their old associates in the orthodoxcommunities; others got out of patience with me for moving so slowly, and ran headlong into unbelief; while the great majority still chose tofollow my guidance. 

Two of my Quaker friends, who had aided me in my peace lectures, waitedupon me and said, that it would be necessary for me, if I meant tocontinue to lecture in connection with the Peace Society, not to allowmyself to be known as holding heterodox views. I answered that I wouldnot submit to one hair's breadth of restraint, nor to a feather's weightof pressure; and the consequence was, the withdrawal of all assistanceand countenance from the orthodox portion of the Quakers in every partof the country. 

The Unitarians had long been observing our movements, and when theyfound us coming so near to their views, they began to attend ourmeetings, and to court our company. At first we were very uneasy attheir advances, and shrank from them with real horror; but our dislikeand dread of them gradually gave way. They were very kind. They lent usbooks, and assisted us with the loan of schools and chapels. They showedthemselves gracious in many ways. And after the cruelty we hadexperienced from other parties, their kindness and sympathy proved veryagreeable. I read their works with great eagerness, and was oftendelighted to find in them so many sentiments so like my own. I had readsome of Channing's works before, and now I read them all, and many ofthem with the greatest delight. I read the work of Worcester on theAtonement, of Norton on the Trinity, and of Ware on a variety ofsubjects. I also read several of the works of Carpenter, Belsham, Priestley, and Martineau. Some of those works I published. I alsopublished a work by W. Penn, "The Sandy Foundation Shaken, " which somethought Unitarian. I came at length to be regarded by the Unitarians asone of their party. They invited me to preach in their chapels, andaided me in the circulation of some of my publications. I preached forthem in various parts of the country. I was invited to visit theUnitarians in London, and I preached in most of their chapels there, andwas welcomed by many of the ministers and leading laymen of theMetropolis at a public meeting. When my friends raised a fund topurchase me a steam printing press, many Unitarians gave liberalsubscriptions. Several of their leading men attended the meeting atwhich the press was presented, and took a leading part in theproceedings. 

I had not mingled long with the Unitarians before I found that theydiffered from one another very much in their views. Some few were Arian, some were Socinian, and some quite Latitudinarian. Some admiredPriestley, some Carpenter, some Channing, and some Parker. Some lookedon Channing as an old fogy, and said there was not an advanced orprogressive idea in his writings; while others thought that everythingbeyond Channing bordered on the regions of darkness and death. Somelooked on the Scriptures as of divine authority, and declared theirreadiness to believe whatever they could be proved to teach: othersregarded the Scriptures as of no authority whatever, and declared theirdetermination to accept no views but such as could be proved to be trueindependent of the Bible. Some believed Jesus to be a supernaturalperson, commissioned by God to give a supernatural revelation of truthand duty, and empowered to prove the divinity of His mission anddoctrine by supernatural works. Others looked on Christ as the naturalresult of the moral development of our race, like Bacon, Shakespeare, orBaxter. They looked on miracles as impossible, and regarded all theBible accounts of supernatural events as fables. They were Deists. OneI found who declared his disbelief in a future life. There was a gradualincline from the almost Christian doctrine of Carpenter and Channing, down to the principles of Deism and Atheism. 

While in London I became acquainted with Dr. Bowring, afterwards SirJohn Bowring. He was one of my hearers at Stamford Street Chapel, andcomplimented me, after the sermon, by calling me the modern John Bunyan. He had been pleased with the simplicity of my style, and the familiarand striking character of my illustrations. He invited me to his house, showed me a multitude of curiosities, which he had collected in histravels round the world, made me a present of part of a skull which hehad taken from an Egyptian Pyramid--the skull of a prince, who, he said, had lived in the days of Joseph, --he also made me a present of hisworks, including five volumes of translations from the Poets of Russia, Hungary, and other countries, and some works connected with his owneventful history. Dr. Bowring was a member of Parliament, and he took meto the House of Commons, introduced me to a number of the members, gotme into the House of Lords, and did all in his power to make my stay inLondon as pleasant as possible. 

Another London gentleman who was very kind was Dr. Bateman, the Queen'sAssistant Solicitor of Excise. He took me to several assemblies, at oneof which, besides a number of the great ones of the land, I wasintroduced to a New Zealand chief, a strong-built, broad-set, large-headed, lion-looking man. It was hinted that he knew the taste ofhuman flesh, and was probably thinking at that moment, what richcontributions some of the youthful and well-fed parties who were payingtheir respects to him, would make to a New Zealand feast. At one ofthose assemblies there was a tremendous crowd, and I lost my hat, andsome body else must have lost his, for I got a magnificent andstrange-shaped head-cover, that might have distinguished, if notadorned, the greatest magnate of the land. 

Dr. Bateman and Dr. Bowring showed me kindness in other ways, obtainingfor me and my friends large grants of books, contributing to the fundfor the purchase of a steam press to be presented to me, and inducing anumber of their friends to contribute. I was also introduced to Dr. Hutton, minister of Carter Lane Chapel, and preached and lectured in hispulpit. And I visited the meeting-place of the Free-thinking Christians, was introduced to the leading members of the society, and was presentedwith their publications. I preached at Hackney Chapel, where I hadWilliam and Mary Howitt as hearers, who were introduced to me after thesermon, invited me to spend some time at their house, showed me thegreatest possible kindness, and did as much as good and kind peoplecould do to make my stay in London a pleasure never to be forgotten. 

A meeting was called in the Assembly room of the Crown and Anchor, orthe city of London Tavern, to give me a public welcome to London, and agreat number, the principal part, I suppose, of the London Unitariansmet me there, to give me a demonstration of their respect and goodwishes. I spoke, and my remarks were very favorably received; and somany and kind were the friends that gathered round me, and so strangeand gratifying the position in which I found myself, that I seemed inanother world. The contrast was so great between the treatment to whichI had so long been accustomed in the New Connexion, and thelong-continued and flattering ovation I was receiving from so large amultitude of the most highly cultivated people in the country, that if Ihad lost my senses amid the delightful excitement it could have been nomatter for wonder. 

But it was more than I was able to enjoy. I longed for quiet. I wantedto be at home with my wife and children, and in the society of my lessdistinguished, but older and more devoted friends. I fear I hardlyshowed myself thankful enough for the honor done me, or made the returnsto my new friends to which they were entitled. They must have thought merather cool in private; but they knew that I had been bred a Methodist, a plain Methodist, and had lived and moved among Methodists of theplainer kind, and never before been fairly outside the Methodist world. And some of them knew that I had not much time for pleasure-taking, sight-seeing, and the current kind of chat, or even the multiplicationof new friends and acquaintances. They knew too that I had a businesswhich required my attention, and a vast quantity of letters to answer, and parties calling for my help in almost every part of the country. 

I was happy at length to find myself at liberty to leave the metropolis, and my many new, agreeable and generous friends and acquaintances there, and return to quieter and calmer scenes, and more customary occupations, in the country. 

But I never was permitted to confine myself within my old circle ofacquaintances, and my old sphere of labor, after my visit to London. Accounts of my London meetings were given in the Unitarian newspapersand periodicals, and spread abroad through the whole country. The resultwas, I received invitations to preach and lecture from almost every townof importance throughout the kingdom, and from many places that were notof so much importance; and many of those invitations I was induced toaccept. I visited Bristol, and had a welcome there as gratifying andalmost as flattering as my London one. I was introduced to all theleading Unitarians there, and had a grand reception, and a course oflectures in the largest and most splendid hall in the city. And theplace was crowded. I visited Bridgewater, Plymouth, Exeter, andTavistock, with like results. And then I had calls to Yarmouth, Lynn, Bridport, Northampton, Taunton, Birmingham, Sheffield, Hull, Manchester, Liverpool, Bolton, Stockton, and other places without number. Andeverywhere I found myself in very agreeable society, and in every placeI met with real, hearty, and generous friends. It is true I met withsome who had little of religion but the name; but I met with others, andthat in considerable numbers, who really feared and loved God, and whowere heartily desirous to promote a living practical Christianity amongtheir neighbors. These were delighted to see and hear a man who, whilehe held to a great extent their own religious views, was full ofMethodistical zeal and energy, and who had power to attract, andinterest, and move the masses of the people. They regarded me as anApostle of their faith. They believed the millennium of enlightened andliberal Christianity was at hand. They hearkened to my counsels, and setto work to distribute tracts, to improve their schools, to establish newones, to organize city missions, to employ local preachers, and tocirculate books of a popular and rousing character. And both they and Ibelieved that a great and lasting revival of pure unadulterated religionwas at hand. And it took some time to dissipate these pleasant hopes, and throw the well disposed and more pious part of the Unitarians downinto the depths of despondency again. But the melancholy period arrivedat length. 

You cannot kindle a fire and keep it burning in the depths of the sea. And it is as hard to revive a dead or dying church, especially when itsministers and schools are supported by old endowments, and when many ofits most influential members have caught the infection of infidelity, and become mere selfish, flesh-pleasing worldlings. 

And this was the case with Unitarians. Many of the trustees, and aconsiderable portion of the wealthier members, cared nothing forreligion. Others had no regard for anything about Christianity but thename and a little of the form. Some had such a hatred of what theycalled Methodist fanaticism, that they shrank from any manifestation ofreligious life or earnestness. And they had such a horror of cant, thatthey canted on the other side. Their talk about religion was little elsebut cant. Their talk about cant itself was cant. They had quite adislike of any thing like religious zeal, and had a dread of any one whohad been a Methodist, especially if he retained any of his Methodisticalearnestness. The word unction was a term of reproach, and the rich, invaluable treasure for which it stood was an offence. They wished toenjoy themselves in a quiet, easy, self-indulgent, fashionable way, andhave just so much of the form and appearance of religion as wasrequisite to a first class worldly reputation. They had no desire to beregarded as skeptics or unbelievers; that would have been as bad as tohave been reputed Methodists; but they would have nothing to do with anyschemes or efforts for the revival of religious feeling in theirchurches, or with any interference with the customary habits or quietworldliness of their peaceable neighbors. Some, and in certain districtsmany, even of the poorer members, were utterly indifferent, and in somecases even opposed, to any religion. In some cases both rich and poorhad become grossly immoral. Their churches had degenerated into eatingand drinking clubs. The endowments were spent in periodical feasts. There were also cases in which the chapel and school endowments hadfallen into the hands of individuals or families, who looked on them andused them very much as private property. The schools and congregationshad disappeared, and even the chapels and school-houses were rapidlyhastening to ruin. 

And there was everywhere a tendency downward from the Christian to theinfidel level. If churches do not labor for the conversion of the world, and endeavor to become themselves more Christ-like and godly, degeneracy, and utter degradation and ruin are inevitable. And thetendency, at the time to which I refer, throughout the whole littleworld of Unitarianism was downwards to utter unbelief. In many mindsthere was as much impatience with old-fashioned moderate Unitarianism, as with old-fashioned Christianity or Methodism. They wanted preacherswho would openly assail the doctrine of the divine or specialinspiration of the Bible, and the supernatural origin of Christianity, and try to bring people down or up to the pagan or infidel level of meresense and reason. 

The Unitarians required no profession of faith; so that deists andatheists had the same title to membership as believers in Christ. Theyadministered the Lord's Supper, but they had no church discipline, sothat people defiled with the filthiest vices had the same right tocommunicate as people of the rarest virtues. Even the ministers were notrequired to make any profession of faith, so that deists and atheistswere admitted, not only into the churches, but into the pulpits. 

I was not aware of these things when I first became identified with theBody. It is possible that the Body was not so corrupt at that time as itwas after. Any way, at the time of my return from infidelity toChristianity, both deists and atheists were among the ministers. If anyfind it hard to believe these things, let them read my pamphlet onUnitarianism, where they will find testimony from leading Unitariansthemselves, to the truth of these statements. 

Whatever encouragement therefore certain portions of the Unitarian Bodymight give to a man like me, the influence of the Body generally wassure to render my labors of little or no avail. If the more religiousportion of the ministers and members had been willing to come out fromthe Body, and leave their old-fashioned buildings and endowments behindthem, they might have done some good; but this they were not prepared todo. Many even of the better class of Unitarian ministers were fond of aquiet literary life. They were students, scholars, and gentlemen, ratherthan preachers and apostles. They were too good to be where they were, and yet not robust, and daring, and energetic enough to make their wayinto more useful positions. And their style of preaching was notpopular. It never would have moved the masses. Indeed much of it wouldhave been unintelligible to the kind of people who crowded to mymeetings. They could not therefore have moved into my sphere withoutexposing themselves to want. If some one could have gone and helped themin their own work, in their own spheres, it might have answered forthem; but it would not have answered for them to come out and battlewith the rude, coarse, outside world. And even if good, earnestministers had gone to their aid, it would have caused a rupture anddivision in the church. 

My labors therefore could do little more than rouse the better portionof the Body to a temporary zeal and activity, and transfer a number ofmy friends to their communion. 

And I and my friends were out of our place, and out of our element, intheir society. The earnest words we spoke were not 'like fire among drystubble;' but like sparks falling into the water. Instead of us kindlingthem, they extinguished us. The 'strong man armed' who had gotpossession of the Unitarian House, was _too_ strong to be overpoweredand cast out by anything short of a miracle of Omnipotence. And that wasout of the question. Christ can save individuals, but not churches. Tomembers of a dead or depraved church his words are, 'Come out of her, mypeople. ' And there was, and there is, no revival, no salvation, forUnitarians, but by their abandonment of the Unitarian fellowship, andtheir return to Christ as individuals. So you may guess what followed. Ihad got where it was impossible for me to do others much good, even if Ihad been better myself, and where it was impossible for me to preventothers from doing me most serious harm. I was on an inclined plane, tending ever downward, with all surrounding influences calculated torender my descent every day more rapid. 

Down this inclined plane I gradually slid, till I reached at length theland of doubt and unbelief. My descent was very slow. It took me severalyears to pass from the more moderate to the more extravagant forms ofUnitarianism. 

When I first read the works of Dr. Channing, though I was delightedbeyond measure with many portions of his writings, I had a great dislikefor some of his remarks about Christ and the Atonement. And when I firstresolved to publish an edition of his works, I intended to add notes, with a view to neutralize the tendency of his objectionable views; butby the time I got his works into the press, those views appearedobjectionable no longer. 

I still however regarded portions of Theodore Parker's works withhorror. His rejection of miracles, and of the supernatural origin ofChristianity, seemed inexcusable. And many a time was I shocked whilereading his "_Discourse on Matters pertaining to Religion_, " by thecontemptuous manner in which he spoke of portions of the sacredScriptures. I was enchanted with many parts of the book; but how a manof so much learning, and with such amazing powers, and with so much loveand admiration of Christ, and God, and goodness, could go to suchextremes seemed a mystery. And I resolved, that if ever I published anedition of _his_ works, I would add a refutation of his revoltingextravagances. Yet time, and intercourse with the more advancedUnitarians, brought me, in a few years, to look on Parker as my modelman. 

When I first heard an Unitarian say, "Supernaturalism is superstition, "I gave him to understand that I did not feel easy in his company. "Youare right, " said Dr. Bateman, "Pay no regard to such extreme views:preach your own old-fashioned practical doctrines. " This made me feelmore at ease. Yet the gentleman who spoke to me thus, as I afterwardsfound, was himself on anti-supernaturalist. But he saw that I had to bedealt with carefully, --that I was not to be hurried or argued, but ledgently and unconsciously, into ultra views. This was the gentleman thatbusied himself more than any other in obtaining subscriptions towardsthe steam press. He professed to like my supernatural beliefs muchbetter than the anti-supernatural views of the extremer portion of hisbrethren. And perhaps he _did_ like them better, though he had lost thepower to believe them himself. But whether he liked them or not, he wonmy confidence, and gained an influence over me, which an honest avowalof his opinions, and especially an open attempt to induce me to acceptthem, would have rendered it impossible for him to gain. 

Strange as it may seem, I still retained many of my old methodisticalhabits, and tastes, and sensibilities. My mind was still imbued to aconsiderable extent with true religious feeling. My head had changedfaster than my heart. And I still took delight in reading a number of myold religious books. And I had no disposition to indulge myself inworldly amusements. I could not be induced to go to a theatre, or evento a concert. I would not play at draughts or chess. I hated cards. Andall this time I held myself prepared to defend, in public discussion, what I considered to be the substance of Christianity. An arrangementwas actually made for a public debate on Christianity about this time, between me and Mr. Holyoake. It was to take place at Halifax, and Iattended at the time, and stated my views in two lectures; but Mr. Holyoake did not attend. He was prevented from doing so by illness, itwas said. 

Some of the publications which I issued about this time, in reply to onesent forth by the Rev. W. Cooke, led to a public discussion between meand that gentleman, in the Lecture-room, Newcastle-on-Tyne. Mr. Cookewas a minister--the ablest minister--in the Body to which I myself hadformerly belonged. The list of subjects for debate included thefollowing:--"What is a Christian? What is the Scripture doctrine withregard to the Atonement? What is Saving Faith? What do the Scripturesteach with regard to Original Sin, or Natural Depravity, The Trinity, The Divinity of Christ, The Hired Ministry, and Future Punishment?"

The discussion lasted ten nights, and every night the room was crowdedto its utmost capacity. The excitement was intense. And it pervaded thewhole country. There were persons present from places nearly twohundred miles distant. Hugh Miller, the Scotch geologist, was there onenight. As usual, both parties considered themselves victorious. And bothwere right. Neither the truth nor the error was all on one side; nor wasthe argument. Christianity was something different from the creed ofeither party, and something more and better. It was more and better thanthe creeds of both parties put together. My opponent, though somethingof a Christian, was more of a theologian. He was committed to a system, and could not see beyond it, or dared not accept any views at variancewith its doctrines. Hence he went in direct opposition to the plainestteachings of the Scriptures, and the clearest dictates of common sense. He found it necessary also, to spend a portion of his time in foolishcriticisms on Greek and Hebrew words, and in efforts to make the worseappear the better reason. As for myself, I was committed to change. Iwas travelling downwards at the time, at a rather rapid rate, and wasnot to be turned back, or even made to slacken my pace. The ordinarykind of theological vanities I regarded with the utmost contempt, and Ihad come to look on some portions even of Christ's own teachings asnothing more than doubtful human opinions. I held to the greatfoundation truths of religion, and to the general principles ofChristian truth and duty, and, I will not say, defended them, for theyneeded no defence beyond their own manifest reasonableness andexcellence, --but stated them both with sufficient clearness and fulness. But neither party was in a state of mind to learn from the other. War, whether it be a war of words, or a war of deadlier weapons, tendsgenerally to widen the differences and increase the antipathies of thecombatants. And so it was here. And one party certainly went further andtravelled faster in the way of error after this exciting contest than hehad done before. 

And greater extremes produced more bitterness of feeling in myopponents. One man wished me dead, and said to a near relation of mine, "If there was a rope round his neck, and I had hold of it, I would hanghim myself. " And this was a man remarkable, in general, for his meeknessand gentleness. Another said he "should like to _stick_ me:" but _he_was a butcher. Another person, a woman, said, "Hanging would be toogood for him: hell is not bad enough for him. " There was one even amongmy relations that would not speak to me; a relation that before hadregarded me with pride. At some places where I was announced to lecture, men organized and plotted to do me bodily injury, and in some cases theythreatened me with death. On more than one occasion I had narrow escapeswith my life. Once I was struck on the head with a brick, which almosttook away my consciousness, and came near putting an end to my life. Onanother occasion I was hunted by a furious mob for hours, and hadrepeated hair-breadth escapes from their violence. One man advocated myassassination in a newspaper, and the editor inserted the article, andquietly gave it his sanction. 

All this was natural, but it was not Christian, nor was it wise. "Thewrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. " Hard bricks have notendency to soften a man's heart. These attempts to force me intosubmission made me more rebellious. They roused my indignation to thehighest pitch, and fearfully increased my hatred of the churches andtheir creeds, and made me feel as if I ought to wage against mypersecutors an unsparing and eternal war. 

CHAPTER XIV. 

THE BIBLE QUESTION. INSPIRATION, INFALLIBILITY. HISTORY OF MY VIEWS ONTHE SUBJECT. 

A PRAYER. 

Help me, O Thou Great Good Father of my spirit, in the work on which Iam now about to enter. Enable me, on the great and solemn subject onwhich I am now to speak, to separate the true from the false, thedoubtful from the certain, the important from the unimportant. And may Ibe enabled to make all plain. And save me, O my Father, from going toofar. Let me not run to any extreme. Yet enable me to go far enough. MayI not, through needless fear, or through any evil motive, be kept fromspeaking anything that ought to be said. I am Thine, O my God; use meaccording to Thy will, for the service of Thy Church, and for thewelfare of the world. I am every moment accountable to Thee; help me soto speak that I may be at peace with my own soul, and have a sweetassurance of Thy approbation. Fill my soul, O my Father, with the spiritof love, of truth, of tenderness, and of all goodness. Guide Thou mypen, and control my spirit. Grant that I may so write, that I may dosome good and no harm. May Thy people endeavor to do justice to what Isay. If any one, through error or evil disposition, should do me wrong, help me to bear the trial with Christian meekness and patience. And maythe time at length come, when the religion of Christ, so full of truthand love, shall be understood and embraced by all mankind, and when byits blessed and transforming power the earth shall become the abode ofpurity, and love, and bliss. AMEN. 

 * * * * *

It may not be amiss to state now, how far I had gone at this time, withregard to my views on the Bible. 

1. I remember a time, when I believed that the Bible in which my fatherread, came down direct from God out of heaven, just as it was. I lookedon it as simply and purely divine. 

2. I afterwards learnt that the Bible was printed on earth, and that itwas a translation from other books which had been written in Greek andHebrew. 

3. But I still supposed that the Greek and Hebrew Bible was whollydivine, and that the translation was as perfect as the original. 

4. I next learned that the translation was _not_ perfect, --that thetranslators were sometimes in doubt as to the meaning of the original, and put one meaning in the body of the page, and another in themargin, --that in other cases they had misunderstood the original, andgiven erroneous translations. I sometimes heard preachers correcting thetranslation of passages, and when I came to read commentaries and othertheological works, I found the authors doing the same thing. 

5. I then found that there were several translations of the Scriptures, one by Wesley, one by Campbell, and others by other men, and that theyall differed from each other, and that none of them could be regarded aswholly correct. When I read the Notes of Adam Clarke on the Bible, Ifound that he often differed from all the translators, and that in somecases he differed from them very widely. 

6. I still supposed that the originals were perfect; that in them we hadthe words of God just as they came from His own mind. 

7. But I afterwards found that there were several originals, --or atleast several Greek and Hebrew Bibles, --and that they also differed fromeach other to some extent, and that none of them could be said to beentirely free from error. 

8. I learnt from Adam Clarke and others that the printed Greek andHebrew Bibles had been compiled from _manuscripts_, --or from Bibles, orportions of the Bible, written by the hand, before the art of printingwas known. 

9. I also found that those manuscripts differed from each other, in agreat many places, and that in some cases they differed on pointssupposed to be of considerable importance, and that it was impossible totell which of the manuscripts were most correct. 

10. I also learnt, that all existing manuscripts were copies of othermanuscripts, and that the real original books, the books written byMoses and the Prophets, and by the Evangelists and Apostles, were alllost, so that it was impossible to tell, with absolute certainty, whether any of the manuscripts were absolutely correct, --that when thebest and ablest men on earth had done their utmost, there would still beroom for doubt as to the true reading, as well as to the correctmeaning, of various portions of Scripture. 

11. I next learned that there were differences of opinion among criticsand divines as to whether certain books ought to have a place in theBible or not. In my father's Bible there were several books called theApocrypha. Some of these were very interesting. I used to read them witha great deal of pleasure. And large portions of others, especially thosecalled _The Wisdom of Solomon_, and _Ecclesiasticus_, seemed as good, astrue, and as beautiful as anything in the Book of Proverbs. My parentshowever told me, that those books were not to be put on a level withthe other books of the Bible, --that there was some mystery about theirorigin, and that there was some doubt whether they were really a part ofthe word of God. 

12. I afterwards learnt though, that they were regarded as part of God'sword by the Catholics, and I continued to read large portions of themwith much satisfaction and profit. 

13. I also learnt from Adam Clarke and others, that there had beendoubts in the minds of some of the ancient Christians with regard to theright of some of the Epistles and of the Book of Revelation to beadmitted as parts of the Bible. And I afterwards found that the Book ofRevelation was excluded from the Bible by the Greek Church, and byLuther as well:--and that Luther had but little regard for the Epistleof James, one of the finest portions of the whole Bible as I thought. 

14. I further learnt that some had doubts as to the right of Solomon'sSong to a place in the Bible, and I found that even Adam Clarke did notbelieve that it had any spiritual meaning. 

All these were facts; and I learned them all from Christian authors ofthe highest repute for learning and piety. And so long as things went onsmoothly, they had not, so far as I can remember, any injurious effecton my mind. But when, after having been harassed for years by theintolerance of my brethren, I was expelled from the ministry and thechurch, and finally placed in a hostile position with regard to thegreat body of Christians and Christian ministers, I began to see, thatthose facts were incompatible with the views and theories of the divineinspiration and absolute perfection of the Bible held by my opponents. Icame very slowly to see this, and after I saw it I was slow to speak onthe subject in my publications; but the time to see and to speak arrivedat length. 

One of my New Connection opponents, by repeated charges of infidelity, and by statements about the Scriptures which I knew he could notmaintain, got me into controversy on the subject. Then I uttered allthat was in my mind. I showed that many of the things which he had saidabout the Bible were not true, --that they were inconsistent with plainunquestionable facts, --with facts acknowledged by all the divines onearth of any consequence, and known even to himself and his brethren. 

While engaged in this controversy I made discoveries of other factsinconsistent with the views of my persecutors, and pressed them upon myopponent without mercy. And the violent and resentful feeling excited byhis unfairness, dishonesty and malignity in defending the Bible, led meprobably to be less concerned for its claims than I otherwise shouldhave been. Suffice it to say, I came out of the debate with my savageopponent, not a disbeliever in the Bible or Christianity, but with viewsfarther removed from those which he contended for, and with feelingsmuch less hostile to heterodox extremes perhaps than those with which Ientered it. 

Among the views I was led to entertain and promulgate with regard to theBible about this time, were the following. 

1. We have no proof that the different portions of the Bible wereabsolutely perfect as they came from the hands of the writers. Theprobability is on the other side. For if an absolutely perfect book hadbeen necessary for man, it would have been as necessary to _keep_ itperfect, as to _make_ it perfect. And as God has not seen fit to _keep_it perfect, we have no reason to suppose that He made it so. 

2. But in truth, to write an absolutely perfect book in an imperfectlanguage, is impossible. And all human languages are imperfect. TheHebrew language, in which the greater part of the Bible was written, isvery imperfect. And it seems to have been much more imperfect in thosetimes when the Bible was written, than it is now. And the Greeklanguage, in which the remainder of the Bible was written, wasimperfect. And the Greek used in the New Testament is not the bestGreek;--it is not the Greek of the Classics. 

3. And both Greek and Hebrew now are _dead_ languages, and have been sofor many ages. This renders them more imperfect in some respects: itmakes it harder in many cases to ascertain the sense in which words, andparticular forms of expression, are used by the writers. With regard tothe Hebrew, we have no other books in that language, written in thoseearly ages when the different parts of the Bible were written, toassist us in ascertaining the sense in which words were used. 

4. The writers of Scripture differ very much from one another both instyle and matter, and their works differ greatly in worth andusefulness. Ezekiel is much more obscure than Jeremiah; and Jeremiah isless plain than Isaiah. Many of the figures, and some of the visions ofEzekiel, seem coarse, and some of them appear unintelligible. And thematter of many parts of Ezekiel's prophecies seems inferior to that ofthe prophecies of Jeremiah and Isaiah. Some portions of Ezekiel are veryvaluable; they are good and useful to the last degree. But otherportions, whatever value they might have for persons of former times andother lands, have none, that I can see, for us. 

5. Some portions of Jeremiah, and even of Isaiah, appear to have littlethat is calculated to be of use in the present day. Indeed some portionsseem unintelligible. But many portions of the writings of both thoseprophets abound in the most touching, startling, and useful lessons. 

6. And so with Daniel and the minor prophets. The darkness and thelight, and things more useful and things less useful, are mingled inthem all. 

7. It is the same with the New Testament. Some portions of Paul'swritings are as plain as they well can be; others are very obscure, perhaps quite unintelligible. Some passages in the controversialportions of his Epistles to the Romans and the Galatians, andconsiderable parts of the Epistle to the Hebrews, are dark as night tomany; and I fear that those who think they understand them, are under adelusion. And as portions of these Epistles were wrested by theunlearned and unconfirmed in Peter's time, so have they been mistakenfor lessons in moral laxity since. And still they are used by many asprops for immoral and blasphemous doctrines. 

8. And what shall we say of the Book of Revelation? Adam Clarke thoughthe understood it as well as any one, yet acknowledged that he did notunderstand it at all. And though there are several passages that areboth plain and practical, and many that are most wondrously andsublimely poetical, and some few that are rich both in truth andtenderness, yet, as a whole, the Book is exceedingly, if notimpenetrably, dark. 

9. Some portions of the Old Testament history are given twice over, asin the Books of Kings and Chronicles, and the two accounts, in somecases, seem to be irreconcilable with each other. The numbers oftendiffer, and some of them seem altogether too large. The accounts agreewell enough, and the statements are credible enough, as a rule, onmatters of great importance; but on smaller matters there are many plaindiscrepancies. 

Some other portions of the Bible, including two or three of the Psalms, are given twice over. 

10. Then who that reads the Proverbs attentively can help seeing, thatsome of them are much plainer, and calculated to be much more useful, than others. Many of them are rich in wisdom and goodness beyondmeasure; but others appear to have neither much of beauty, nor much ofutility. 

11. And the Psalms are not all of equal excellence. Some containterrible outpourings of hatred and vengeance. Many contain fierce andresentful expressions. And though these things were excusable in earlytimes, and were, in fact, not wicked, but only a lower form of virtue, we cannot but feel their great inferiority to the teachings and spiritof Jesus. But taken as a whole, the Psalms are miracles of beauty andsublimity, of tenderness and majesty, of purity and piety, of wisdom andrighteousness. They are a heaven of bright constellations; a world ofglory and blessedness. 

12. The Book of Job too is a mixture, and to some extent a mystery, butit would be a great loss to the world if it were to perish. Thetwenty-ninth and thirty-first chapters are worth the whole literature ofinfidel philosophy a hundred times over. And many other portions of thebook are 'gems of purest ray serene, ' and treasures of incalculablevalue. 

13. And even the Book of Ecclesiastes, while it contains many things ofa strange, a dark, and a doubtful character, has many oracles of wisdomand piety. It contains lessons of wonderful beauty, and of greatsolemnity and power. 

14. There is a vast amount of wisdom and goodness in the laws of Moses. I say nothing of the laws that are merely ceremonial: but there arelessons of great importance mixed up even with them at times. Take thoseabout the Nazarites. Most of them are beautiful, excellent; and wellwould it be if people even in our days would accept them as rules fortheir own conduct. 

Then take the laws which forbid the use of wine and strong drink to theministering priests. They are wonderfully wise. 

And even the laws about the different kinds of beasts, and birds, andfishes, that were allowed or forbidden as food, are, on the whole, remarkably philosophical. Considering the time when they were given, andthe people for whom they were intended, and the ends for which they weredesigned, the laws of Moses generally, are worthy of the highest praise. 

15. But Judaism is not Christianity. That which was the best for theJews three thousand years ago, was not the best for all mankind throughall the ages of time. Compared with the religions and laws ofsurrounding nations, and of preceding ages, Judaism was glorious, --butcompared with Christianity it is no longer glorious. Judaism comparedwith Paganism, was a wonder of wisdom, philosophy, and righteousness;but compared with Christianity it is a mass of rudiments, first lessons, beggarly elements. 

Hence several things contained in the law of Moses are repealed orforbidden by Christ; still more are quietly dropped and left behind;while other portions are developed, expanded, and exalted. 

All these things, and a multitude of other things, have to be taken intoaccount, if we would form a correct and proper estimate of the Bible. All these, and quite a multitude of other matters, should be borne inmind when we are considering in what terms to speak of the Book, and inwhat way to qualify our commendations of its contents. I do not believeit possible to praise the Bible too highly; but nothing is easier thanto praise it unwisely, untruly. You cannot love or prize the Bible toomuch; but you may err as to what constitutes its worth. You cannotover-estimate its beneficent power; but you may make mistakes as to theparts or properties of the book in which its strength lies. A child canhardly value gold or silver too highly, but he makes a great mistakewhen he fancies their great excellency to consist in the brightness oftheir colors. And so with regard to the Bible. Its best friends and itsablest eulogists can never think or speak of it beyond its real worth;but they may fancy its worth to consist in qualities of secondaryimportance, or in a kind or form of perfection which it does notpossess. 

The enemies of the Bible often speak evil of it ignorantly, from themere force of bad example, as parrots curse: and the friends of theBible often speak well of it ignorantly, as parrots pray. They know, they feel, they are sure, that the Bible is good, --that it does themgood, --that it purifies their souls, --that it improves theircharacters, --that it makes them cheerful, joyful, useful, happy. Yet allthe time they fancy, because they have been erroneously taught, that theblessed volume owes its comforting, transforming, and glorious power tosome metaphysical nicety, or to some unreal or impossible kind ofperfection. 

When Christians attribute the sanctifying, elevating, comforting powerof the Bible to the fact that it is divinely inspired, they are right. But many do not stop there. They suppose that divine inspiration hasgiven the Book certain grammatical, rhetorical, logical, historical, scientific and metaphysical qualities which it has _not_ given it, andthey even attribute its superior worth and saving power to thoseimaginary qualities. 

It was against the mistakes and mis-statements of my opponents that Ifirst wrote, and it was their ignorance, or their want of honesty andcandor, that gave me at times the advantage over them in our debates onthe subject. It was for want of seeing things in their proper light, andputting them in their proper shape before their hearers and readers, that made their efforts to keep people from doubt and unbeliefunavailing. They, in truth, made unbelief or infidelity to consist insomething in which it did not consist, and made people think they wereinfidels when they were no such thing. If they had given up all that waserroneous with regard to the Bible, and undertaken the defence ofnothing but what was true, they might both have convinced the honestskeptic, and strengthened the faith of Christians. But they undertook todefend the false, and to assail the true, and the consequence was, theywere beaten, and the cause which they sought to serve was injured. 

John Wesley says, that the way to drive the doctrine of Christianperfection, or 'true holiness, ' out of the world, is to place it toohigh, --to make it consist in something that is beyond man's power. Andthe way to drive the doctrine of the divine inspiration of theScriptures out of the world, is to give the doctrine a form which theScriptures themselves do not give it, --to change it from a truth into anerror, --to teach that divine inspiration produces effects which it doesnot produce, --that it imparts qualities which it does not impart, andwhich the Scriptures themselves do not exhibit. 

And this is what many defenders of the Bible do. And this is one greatcause both of the increase of infidelity, and of the confidence of itsdisciples. 

It is impossible to prove the doctrine of the divine inspiration of theBible, as that doctrine is defined by many religious writers. It is nottrue. And those who attempt to prove that the Bible is such a book, asthese false theological theories of divine inspiration would require itto be, must always be beaten, in a fair fight, with an able andwell-informed infidel opponent. The man who contends that the Bible isall that certain old theories of inspiration require it to be, fightsagainst plain facts, and even his friends will often see and feel thathe has not succeeded. He may say a many fine things, a many good things, a many great things, a many glorious things about the Bible, and theymay all be true: and he may say a many bad things, a many horriblethings against infidelity, and they too may be true. And his friends maysee and feel that, on the whole, he is substantially right, and that theinfidel is essentially wrong. They may see and feel that on theChristian side is all that is good, and true, and holy; and that on theinfidel side is a world of darkness and depravity, of horror anddespair. Still, on the one definite point, 'Is the Bible divinelyinspired according to the theory of divine inspiration laid down bycertain theologians, ' the Christian will be beaten out and out, --he willnot only be confuted, but confounded, dishonored, and utterly routed. The Bible and Christianity will receive an undeserved wound, andinfidelity will have an undeserved triumph; and many a poor young manwhose leanings were towards the Bible, and who would have liked itsadvocate to triumph, will be disheartened, distressed, embarrassed, distracted, and perhaps undone. 

The true doctrine of Scripture inspiration, or of Scripture authority, is about as applicable to the common version, and to honest Christiantranslations generally, and to all the manuscripts, and to all theprinted Greek and Hebrew Bibles, as it would be to the lost originals ifthey could be recovered. There is divine inspiration enough in thepoorest translation of the Scriptures, and in the most imperfect Greekand Hebrew transcript of them ever made, to place the Bible above allthe books on earth, as a means of enlightening, regenerating, comforting, and saving mankind. But in none of its forms is the Bible soinspired, as to make it what the unauthorized, fanciful, impossibletheories of certain dreamy, or proud, presumptuous, and overbearingtheologians require it to be. 

I have seen twenty or thirty definitions of ScriptureINSPIRATION all of which betray the Bible into the hands of itsadversaries. And it is no use expecting to convert skeptics, till thosedefinitions are set aside, and better, truer ones put in their place. Weourselves pay no regard to these definitions. They are merely humanfictions. They have no warrant from Scripture, and we cannot allowourselves to be hampered with them. 

The passage in the New Testament which speaks of the Holy Scriptures ofthe Old Testament as divinely inspired, gives us no definition of divineinspiration. It says, 'All Scripture given by inspiration of God isprofitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction inrighteousness, tending to make the man of God perfect, thoroughlyfurnished unto all good works:' but it goes no further. It does not saythat all Scripture given by inspiration of God will be written in asuperhuman language, or in a superhuman style. Nor does it say that allits allusions to natural things will be perfectly correct; that all thestories which it tells will be told in a superhuman way. Nor does it saythat all the precepts, and all the institutions, and all therevelations, and all the examples of the Book will be up to the levelof absolute perfection. What the passage _does_ say of such Scripturesas are given by inspiration of God, is true of the Old Testamentwritings as a whole, and still truer of the New Testament writings: they_are_ profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and forinstruction in righteousness; and they are adapted to make men perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. All this you can prove. Butyou cannot prove that they answer to the definitions of divineinspiration so often given in books of theology. 

There is another passage in the New Testament which says that'Whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for ourlearning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures mighthave hope. ' This too is true of the Old Testament writings as a whole;but it gives no countenance to the definitions of Scripture inspirationgiven by dreamy theologians. 

Peter says that 'holy men of old spake as they were moved by the HolySpirit;' but he does not say that everything spoken or written by holymen, when moved by the Holy Spirit, would answer to some human dream ofabsolute perfection. He does not say that the holy men, when moved tospeak by the Holy Spirit, would cease to be men, or even be free fromall the imperfections or misconceptions of their age and nation, andspeak as if they had become at once perfect in the knowledge of naturalphilosophy, or of common history, or even on every point pertaining toreligion. They might speak as moved by the Holy Spirit, and yet utterdivine oracles in an imperfect human language, and in a defective humanstyle, and even use illustrations based on erroneous conceptions ofnatural facts and historical events. 

A man moved to speak by the Holy Spirit would not exhort people to beidle or heedless; he would urge them to be industrious and prudent: butin enforcing his exhortation to those virtues by a reference to the ANT, he might give proof that his knowledge of the ANT was not perfect, --thathis ideas of its ways were not in every little point correct. 

A man full of the Holy Spirit, and especially a man who had received ofits influences without measure, would be sure to exhort men to be verywise and very harmless; but he might use a form of words in hisexhortation which had originated in the misconception that serpents werewiser than any other animals, and that doves were more harmless than anyother birds. Yet the exhortation would be good in substance; and eventhe form, being in accordance with the views prevailing in his times, would be unobjectionable; and both would be consistent with the fullestinspiration of the Holy Spirit. 

A great, good man, speaking under divine impulse, urging his son in theGospel to resist false and immoral teachers, might say, 'Now as Jannesand Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth; buttheir folly shall be made manifest unto all men, as theirs also was. 'Whether the men who withstood Moses were really called Jannes andJambres or not, I do not know. The Old Testament does not say they were. The probability is, that Paul rested his illustration on a Jewishtradition. But as the tradition was received as true by his people, hislesson was just as good as if it had rested on some unquestionable factstated in authentic history. 

And so with regard to illustrations and incidental statements andallusions generally. Though they may rest on misconceptions, the morallessons and spiritual revelations into the service of which they arepressed, may be God's own oracles, and the book in which they appearmay, as a whole, be given by divine inspiration, and be profitable forteaching, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction inrighteousness, and conducive to all the great and desirable ends so dearto God. 

There is no such thing as absolute perfection with regard to books. There is no authorized standard, no test, no measure of absoluteperfection for books; and if there were, no man could apply it. Of athousand different books each may be perfect in its way, yet none ofthem be absolutely perfect. Each may have some great good end in view, and be adapted to answer that end; and that is the only perfection ofwhich a book admits. And it is perfection enough. 

And this perfection the Bible has. It has the best, the highest, themost glorious objects in view, and it is adapted to accomplish thoseobjects; and that is sufficient. They that undertake to prove that ithas any other perfection, will fail, and both bring discredit onthemselves, and suspicion on the Bible. The Bible may be more grievouslywronged by unwise praise, than by unjust censure. 

Absolutely perfect books and teachers are not necessary to ourinstruction and welfare. We can learn all we need to know, and all weneed to do, from books and teachers that are _not_ perfect. We have noabsolutely perfect books on Grammar, Rhetoric, or Logic. Yet men learnthose sciences readily enough when they study them heartily anddiligently. We have no perfect systems of Arithmetic, Geometry, orAlgebra; of Geography, Astronomy, or Geology; of Anatomy, Physiology, orChemistry; of Botany, Natural History, or Physical Geography. Yet on allthose subjects men gather an immense amount of knowledge, make amultitude of new discoveries, and arrive at a wonderful degree ofcertainty. 

And so with arts and trades. We have no absolutely perfect teachers orbooks in music, or painting, or sculpture; in farming, or manufactures, or trade. Yet what wonderful proficients men become in those arts! Wehave no perfect teachers of languages: yet any man with a taste for thestudy of them, may learn twenty or thirty of them in a life-time. Evenindifferent books and teachers will enable a man who is bent onlearning, to master the most difficult language on earth. 

A man once asked me, 'Which is the best English Grammar?' My answer was, 'The first you come at. A poor one to-day is better than a good oneto-morrow. Begin your studies at once with the grammar you have; and youwill soon find out which is the best. ' And so I say with regard to bookson other subjects. Make the best use you can of the books you have, andyou will soon come across better. And when you do come across them, youwill be all the better prepared to profit by them, than if you were towaste your time in idleness till you can get hold of the best of all. Besides; the book that is best for others, may not be the best for you. 

And if a man should ask me, 'Which is the best translation of theBible?' I would say, 'The first you come at. Read any, till you meetwith others. Then read many, and, using your common sense, judge foryourself which is best. That which does most to make you a good, astrong, a useful and a happy man is the best. '

Some want books and teachers that will save them the trouble of study. And there are none such. It would be a pity if there were. They would dono good, but harm. Nothing strengthens and develops the mind like labor. But if you had the best books possible they would not enable you toacquire much useful knowledge, without close study, and vigorous mentaleffort. 

I learned Greek with the worst Greek Grammar I ever saw; but when I hadlearned the language tolerably, I found one of the best Greek Grammarsin the world, and went rapidly through it, and found that it had littleto add to the information I had gained already from the poorer one. 

And it is the same with regard to books on God, religion, and duty. Books with numbers of defects, --with defects of style, defects ofarrangement, and even defects in matter, may teach you many usefullessons, if you read and study them properly; and the best books onearth will not teach you much if you read them carelessly. 

A great deal, almost every thing, depends on the spirit or the objectwith which a man reads a good book. You may read the best books tolittle profit, and you may get great good from very inferior ones. 

The Bible is the best religious and moral book on earth; it is, in itsmost imperfect translations, able to make men wise, and good, anduseful, and happy to the last degree, if they will read and study itproperly. But there is not a better book on earth for making a man afool, if he comes to it with a vain mind, a proud spirit, a fulness ofself-conceit, or a wish to be a prophet. A desire to be a prater aboutthe millennium, the second coming of Christ, the personal reign, theorders of angels, the ranks of devils, the secrets of God's counsels, the hidden meaning of the badgers' skins, the shittim wood, the Urim andThummim, the Cherubim and Seraphim, the Teraphim and Anakim, and all theimaginary meanings of imaginary types, and the place where Paradise wassituated, and the mountain peak on which the Ark rested, and Behemoth, and Leviathan, and the spot at which the Israelites entered the Red Sea, and the compass of Adam's knowledge before he named the animals, and thefiery sword at the gate of Paradise, and the controversial parts ofPaul's epistles, and the mysteries of the Book of Revelation, and thespiritual meaning of Solomon's Song, and the place where Satan had hismeeting with the sons of God in the days of Job, and the exact way inwhich Job used the potsherd, when he scraped himself as he sat among theashes, &c. , &c. , --I say if this is what a man desires, the Bible willhelp him to his wish, and make him the laughing-stock, or the pity ofall sensible men. 

And if he employs the one hundred and fifty rules of Hartwell Horne formisinterpreting the plain portions of the Bible, and his one hundred andforty other rules for darkening his mind, and confounding his soul, theBible will ruin him still quicker. A better book for trying a man, andfor rewarding his honesty, and piety, and charity, if he has thosevirtues, and for making them ever more; or for punishing a man's vanity, and pride, and selfishness, and perversity, if he be the slave of suchpassions, God could hardly have given. And to try and to bless men arethe two great objects of all God's revelations. 

My opponent was fond of saying that the Bible was an infallible guide. The statement was not true in any strict and rigorous sense of thewords. And it was foolish for him to make it in an eager debate, for hecould never prove it. And he was not long in finding this out. A fewplain questions set him quite fast. The Bible is an infallible guide, you say. We ask, Which Bible? The common version? No. John Wesley'sversion? No. Dr. Conquest's? No. The Unitarian version? No. _Any_version? No. Is it some particular Greek or Hebrew Bible then? No. Is itthe manuscripts? No. But these are all the Bibles we have. 

The Bible is an infallible guide, you say. What to? Uniformity ofopinion? No. Uniformity of worship? No. Uniformity of life? No. Uniformity of feeling, of affection, of effort? No. It does not evenrequire uniformity in those matters. It supposes diversity. It asks onlyfor sincerity, honesty, fidelity. But it is an infallible guide to alltruth and duty, you say. Has it guided you to all truth and duty? No. Whom _has_ it guided to those blessed results? You cannot say. 

But it is an infallible guide to all that truth which is necessary to aman's salvation, you say. But there is no particular amount of truththat _is_ necessary to a man's salvation. The amount of truth necessaryto a man's salvation differs according to his powers and privileges. That which is necessary to my salvation may not be necessary to thesalvation of a Pagan. It is sincerity in the search of truth, andfidelity in reducing it to practice, which is necessary to a man'ssalvation, and not the acquisition of some particular quantity of truth. 

The Bible is an infallible guide. To whom? To the Catholics? No. To theUnitarians? No. To the Quakers? No. To the Church of England people? No. To Methodists and Calvinists? No. 

That the Bible is a trusty guide enough, I have no doubt, if we willfaithfully and prayerfully follow it; but to talk as if it would guideevery one infallibly to exactly the same views, or to the fulness of alltruth, is not wise. It is not warranted either by the Bible itself, orby facts. 

Besides, if a book is to guide a man infallibly, it must be madeperfectly plain; it must be infallibly interpreted. And where are theinfallible interpreters? We know of none that even profess to be suchoutside the Church of Rome; and none but themselves and their own Churchmembers believe their professions. _You_ do not believe them. As a rule, the claim of infallibility is taken as a proof that the man who makes itis not only fallible, but something worse. 

But if we had infallible interpreters, they would not be able to keep usfrom error, unless we had infallible hearts and infallibleunderstandings. And we have no such things. If we had, we should neitherneed infallible books nor infallible interpreters. 

That the Bible is all that it _needs_ to be, and all that it _ought_ tobe, I am satisfied; but that it is all that some of its zealousadvocates _say_ it is, plain and unquestionable facts make it impossiblefor any candid, unbiassed, and well-informed man to believe. 

We have all an infallible guide within us, if we be true Christians. Forthe Spirit of God dwells in the hearts of all true disciples of Christ. But the infallible guide does not make us all infallible followers. Theinfallible teacher does not make us all infallible learners. We areblessed with divine inspiration, but we are not converted into machines. Inspiration does not make us absolutely perfect either in knowledge orvirtue, still less does it make us perfect all at once. We shall learnenough, and we shall learn fast enough, if we are faithful; but we shallnever be perfect or infallible in our knowledge in this world. 

As the subject of Bible inspiration is one of great importance, and asit is at present exciting the greatest interest, it may not be amisshere to give a few quotations from writers who have been led to see thedoctrine in the same light as ourselves. I am unable to give the namesof some of the authors from whose works I quote, but they are allconnected with one or other of the great evangelical denominations ofthe day. 

The following is from "BASES OF BELIEF, " by Edward Miall, oneof the best books on the truth and divinity of Christianity I have hadthe happiness to read. Mr. Miall is a Congregational minister, editor ofthe Nonconformist Newspaper, and Member of Parliament. As his remarksare lengthy, we are obliged to abridge them in some cases. 

'It is not needed, in order to show satisfactorily that there is adivine revelation _in_ the record, to prove that the record is _itself_divine. To disprove that revelation, a man must do something more thanpoint out marks of imperfection in the Book containing it, such marks aswould not be expected in a book written directly by the hand of God. Ifit could be demonstrated that the penmen who have given us the life ofChrist, were indebted to no other aid than that supplied by the goodmental and moral qualifications which any others might possess, the mainstrength of Christianity as a communication of God's mind and will, would remain untouched. 

'The discrepancies between the statements of the four Evangelists, --theindications of individual or national peculiarities, --the modes ofdescribing occurrences, true because well understood in the locality ofthe speaker, but not strictly true in other places, --all matters whichserve to show that the same objects have been seen by different persons, but from different points of view, are to be allowed for as reconcilablewith a truthfulness that may be implicitly relied upon. One informantmay have blundered in geography, another may have been mistaken in anhistorical reference, a third may have misquoted or misapplied someprophetical allusion, and all may have given ample proof that they werenot free from the influence of the traditions generally received in theplaces to which they belonged; but unless these peculiarities andinfirmities show a want of competency as witnesses, or a lack ofintegrity, they may be dismissed, as having no bearing on the mainpoint. 

'The question whether the Gospel records are free from blemishes foundto attach to every other record, has nothing to do with the main issue. Our _theories_ may require them to be free from such harmlessimperfections; but our _reason_ makes no such demand. 

'The memoir of a great man does not lose its use and virtue, becausewritten by a biographer open to some censure: nor can the life of Christfail of its transcendent purpose, because the writers were not in allthings infallible. 

'Appearances of harmless human imperfections in the writers do notinvalidate the sacred records. For instance, if it should be found thatthose faithful witnesses have given their testimony in exceptionableGreek, --or that in some matters, not touching their main object, theyare not enlightened above the common standard of their times andstation, --or that they have habits of thought, or speech, or action, which, though perfectly innocent in themselves, show that they are notso far advanced in science as some, --if, in a word, it should appearthat the historic writers of the New Testament were really men of theage in which they lived, and men of the country in which they were bornand educated, subject to the then limitations of general knowledge, --menof individual tendencies, tastes, temperaments, passions, and evenprejudices, --wherein is the world worse for this, and in what respectcould our reason have wished it otherwise? We protest, we do not see. On the contrary, we feel it to be an advantage, that the divine lightemanating from the life of Jesus Christ, should reach us through anartless and thoroughly human medium. It is no misfortune, in ourjudgment, but quite the opposite, that 'we have this treasure in earthenvessels. ' Such traces on the pages of evangelic history as mark thewriters for men, --honest, faithful, competent, but yet verily and indeedmen, --bring their narrative much more closely home to our sympathies, and set us upon a more ardent search for the spirit in its severalportions, than if the story had been written by the faultless pen ofsome superior being. '

Mr. Miall then refers to the errors and discrepancies in the genealogiesprefixed to two of the lives of Christ, and says, 'They are accountedfor, in our view, by the humanity of the writers. We are not bound toregard the genealogies as infallibly accurate, any more than we arebound to regard the dialect of the writers as pure Greek. No essentialtruth is affected by either, and that is enough. '

Mr. Miall further argues that intellectual infallibility was notnecessary, and was not to be looked for, in Paul, the great expounder ofthe Gospel. And he adds, 'Taking the New Testament as a whole, we arenot disposed to deny, that it bears upon the face of it, manyindications that its several writers were not entirely exempt frommental imperfection, --but we contend that the mental imperfection whichtheir works exhibit, is perfectly compatible with the communication tomen of infallible knowledge respecting God, His moral relations to us, His purposes with regard to us, and the religious duties which thesethings enforce on all who would attain eternal life. And if this betrue, the record satisfies the spiritual need of man in its fullestextent. '

We have given Mr. Miall's views at greater length, because he occupiesso high a position, not only in one of the largest religiousdenominations in England, but in the country generally, and because wehave never seen any protest against his views from any writer ofinfluence, in any branch of the Church of Christ. Such protests may haveappeared, but we have never met with any. We may add, that while Mr. Miall gives up the idea of infallibility, he holds that the writers ofthe New Testament history were under divine _guidance_ in composingtheir several memoirs of Christ. 

Mr. Miall's views on the Old Testament writings we may have occasion tonotice further on. 

The Rev. Dr. Parker, author of ECCE DEUS, has some remarks of acharacter somewhat similar to those of Mr. Miall, but we have not hisworks at hand. 

Our next quotation is from a lecture on SCIENCE AND REVELATION, by the very reverend R. Payne Smith, D. D. , Dean of Canterbury. Thelecture was delivered at the request of the Christian Evidence Society, London, and is published by that society, in their volume, entitledMODERN SKEPTICISM. 

'Revelation has nothing to do with our physical state. Reason is quitesufficient to teach us all those sanitary laws by which our bodies willbe maintained in healthful vigor. Whatever we can attain by our mentalpowers, we are to attain by them. Physical and metaphysical sciencealike lie remote from the object matter of revelation. The Bible nevergives us any scientific knowledge in a scientific way. If it did, itwould be leaving its own proper domain. When it seems to give us anysuch knowledge, as in the first chapter of Genesis, what it says hasalways reference to man. The first chapter of Genesis does not tell ushow the earth was formed absolutely, but how it was prepared and fittedfor man. Look at the work of the fourth day. Does any man suppose thatthe stars were set in the expanse of heaven absolutely that men mightknow what time of the year it was? They _did_ render men this service, but this was not their great use. As the Bible speaks to all people, atall times, it must use popular language. '

This writer, like many others when they approach this subject, speakstimidly, and in consequence somewhat vaguely and obscurely; but hismeaning is, that we must expect the Bible, on scientific subjects, tospeak, not according to science, but according to the prevailing ideasof their times on scientific subjects; and that we are to regard theBible as our teacher, not on every subject to which it may allude, or onwhich it may speak, but only on matters of religious truth and duty. 

The following is from the Rev. H. W. Beecher. 

'Matthew says, that Jesus dwelt in Nazareth; that it might be fulfilledwhich was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. No suchline has ever been found in the prophets. 

'Infinite ingenuity of learning has been brought to bear upon thisdifficulty, without in the slightest degree solving it. 

'What would happen if it should be said that Matthew recorded thecurrent impression of his time in attributing this declaration to theOld Testament Prophets? Would a mere error of reference invalidate thetrustworthiness of the evangelist? We lean our whole weight [in othermatters] upon men who are fallible. Must a record be totally infalliblebefore it can be trusted at all? Navigators trust ship, cargo, and thelives of all on board, to calculations based on tables of logarithms, knowing that there never was a set [of logarithms] computed, withoutmachinery, that had not some error in it. The supposition, that to admitthat there are immaterial and incidental mistakes in Sacred Writ wouldbreak the confidence of men in it, is contradicted by the uniformexperience of life, and by the whole procedure of society. 

'On the contrary, the shifts and ingenuities to which critics areobliged to resort, either blunt the sense of truth, or disgust men withthe special pleading of critics, and tend powerfully to generalunbelief. 

'The theory of inspiration must be founded upon the grounds on which theScriptures themselves found it. "All Scripture is given by inspirationof God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, forinstruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. " (2 Tim. 3: 16, 17. )

'Under this declaration, no more can be claimed for the doctrine ofinspiration than that there shall have been such an influence exertedupon the formation of the record, that it shall be the truth respectingGod, and no falsity; that it shall so expound the duty of man underGod's moral government, as to secure, in all who will, a true holiness;that it shall contain no errors which can affect the essential truthstaught, or which shall cloud the reason or sully the moral sense. 

'But it is not right or prudent to infer from the Biblical statement ofinspiration, that it makes provision for the very words and sentences;that it shall raise the inspired penmen above the possibility ofliterary inaccuracy, or minor or immaterial mistakes. It is enough ifthe Bible be a sure and sufficient guide to spiritual morality andrational piety. To erect for it a claim to absolute literaryinfallibility, or to infallibility in things not directly pertaining tofaith, is to weaken its real authority, and to turn it aside from itsavowed purpose. The theory of verbal inspiration brings a strain uponthe Word of God which it cannot bear. If rigorously pressed, it tendspowerfully to bigotry on the one side, and to infallibility on theother. 

'The inspiration of holy men is to be construed, as we construe thedoctrine of an over-ruling and special Providence; of the divinesupervision and guidance of the church; of the faithfulness of God inanswering prayer. The truth of these doctrines is not inconsistent withthe existence of a thousand evils, mischiefs, and mistakes, and with theoccurrence of wanderings long and almost fatal. Yet the generalsupervision of a Divine Providence is rational. We might expect thatthere would be an analogy between God's care and education of the race, and His care of the Bible in its formation. 

'Around the central certainty of saving truth are wrapped theswaddling-clothes of human language. Neither the condition of the humanunderstanding, nor the nature of human speech, which is the vehicle ofthought, admits of more than a fragmentary and partial presentation oftruth. "For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. " (1 Cor. Xiii. 9. )Still less are we then to expect that there will be perfection in thisvehicle. And incidental errors, which do not reach the substance oftruth and duty, which touch only contingent and external elements, arenot to be regarded as inconsistent with the fact that the Scriptureswere _inspired of God_. Nor will our reverence for the Scriptures beimpaired if, in such cases, it be frankly said, '_There_ is an insolubledifficulty. ' Such a course is far less dangerous to the moral sense thanthat pernicious ingenuity which, assuming that there can be no literalerrors in Scripture, resorts to subtle arts of criticism, improbabilities of statement, and violence of construction, such as, ifmade use of in the intercourse of men in daily life, would break upsociety and destroy all faith of man in man. 

'We dwell at length on this topic now, that we may not be obliged torecur to it when, as will be the case, other instances arise in whichthere is no solution of unimportant, though real, literary difficulties. 

'There are a multitude of minute, and on the whole, as respects thesubstance of truth, not important questions and topics, which, like afastened door, refuse to be opened by any key which learning has broughtto them. It is better to let them stand closed than, like impatientmastiffs, after long barking in vain, to lie whining at the door, unableto enter, and unwilling to go away. _Life of Jesus, pp. 77-81. _

The Rev. G. Rawlinson, in an able lecture in defence of the Bible, published by the CHRISTIAN EVIDENCE SOCIETY of London, acknowledges thatthere are matters of uncertainty in some parts of the Old Testamenthistory, and says, 'The time allowed by the common version of the Biblefor all the events which took place from the days of Noah, to the birthof Christ, and for all the changes by which the various races of menwere formed, by which civilization and the arts were developed, etc. , isless than 2, 600 years. Now this is quite insufficient. How is thisdifficulty to be met? We answer; a special uncertainty attaches to thenumbers in this case. They are given differently in the differentancient versions. The Samaritan version extends the time 650 years. TheSeptuagint extends it eight or nine hundred years. If more time still bethought wanting for the development of government, art, science, language, diversities of races, etc. , I should not be afraid to grantthat the original record of Scripture on this point may have been lost, and that the true chronology cannot now be ascertained. Nothing inancient manuscripts is so liable to corruption as the numbers. Theoriginal mode of writing them was by signs not very different from oneanother, and thus it happens that in almost all ancient works, thenumbers are found to be deserving of very little reliance. '

But the errors and uncertainty with regard to numbers amount to nothing. They do not affect the Bible as the great religious instructor of theworld. 

The sun has its spots, dark ones and large ones too; and the face of themoon is not all of equal brightness; but are the sun and the moon lessuseful on that account? Do they not answer the ends for which they weremade, and are not those ends the most important and desirableimaginable? Cavillers might say, if the sun and moon were made to belights of the earth, why are they not _all_ light, and why is not theirlight of the greatest brilliancy possible? But we too have a right toask, Do they not give us light enough? And is not their light asbrilliant as is desirable? Will the caviller prove that the sun and moonwould be greater blessings if their light wore more intense, or moreabundant? Men may have too much light as well as too little. If lightexceeds a certain degree of intensity, it dazzles and blinds instead ofenlightening. It is well to have a little warmth, but if the heat beincreased beyond a certain point, it burns and consumes, instead ofcomforting and cheering. 

The disposition of the caviller is anything but enviable, and if Godwere to take him at his word, his lot would be anything but comfortable. Happy are they who accept God's gifts as He presents them, withthankfulness, and use them in His service faithfully, rejoicing andtrusting in His infinite wisdom and love. 

What a man wants in a book are instruction, impulse, strength, correction, regeneration, consolation, lessons fit to furnish him toevery good work, something to give pleasure, supply exercise for hisintellect, conscience, affections: and the Bible is all. 

If God may employ an imperfect and fallible man to preach for him, allowing a portion of his imperfections to mingle with his message, whymight He not employ an imperfect and fallible man to write for Him, allowing a portion of his imperfections to mingle with his writing?

The following is from the BISHOP OF LONDON. 

'The vindication of the supernatural and authoritative character of theBible has too often been embarrassed by speculative theories notauthorized by the statements of the Bible itself. '

'It is no reply to the essential claims of the Bible to be asupernatural revelation from God, to show that certain speculativetheories concerning the manner and degree of its inspiration areuntenable. '

From whose works the following quotation is made, we do not remember. 

'The watchword of the Reformation was, 'The sufficiency of theScriptures for salvation. '

'Definite theories of inspiration were seldom propounded till of lateyears. 

'The Bible is a revelation of spiritual truth communicated chiefly inillustrations and figurative language, and making use of the history, chronology, and other sciences of the age, as vehicles or helps. Thisprinciple will explain those seeming contradictions [to science] whichresult from the use of popular language, as when the sun and moon aresaid to stand still, or when the sun is said to go from one end of theheaven to the other, etc. It will also account for many actual errors inscience, chronology, and history, should such be found to exist. TheScriptures were not intended to teach men these things, but to revealwhat relates to our connection with moral law, and the spiritual world, and our salvation. In teaching these things, the writers availedthemselves of the _popular_ language, and the current science andliterature of the age in which they lived. As in the present day a manmay be well instructed in Christian doctrine, and have the unction fromthe Holy One, while ignorant of the teachings of modern science, solikewise it was possible to those who first received religious truth andwere commissioned to declare it. The presence of the Holy Spirit no morepreserved men from errors in science in the one case than in the other. One may as well seek to study surveying in a biography of Washington, asthe details of geology or chronology in Genesis. 

'The proper test to apply to the Gospels is, whether each gives us apicture of the life and ministry of Jesus that is self-consistent andconsistent with the others; such as would be suitable to the use ofbelievers. 

'Many of the apparent contradictions of the Bible may be explained bythe mistakes of transcribers, or in some other way equally natural; but, as the Bishop of London has well remarked, 'When laborious ingenuity hasexerted itself to collect a whole store of such difficulties, supposingthem to be real, what on earth does it signify? They may be left quietlyto float away without our being able to solve them, if we bear in mindthe acknowledged fact, that there is a human element in the Bible. '

'What if many of the numbers given in Exodus should, as Bishop Colensoasserts, be inaccurate? What is to be gained by assertions or denialsrelative to matters which have for ever passed out of the reach of ourverification? And what if, here and there, a law should seem to usstrange and unaccountable; an event difficult to comprehend; a statementto involve an apparent contradiction? What has all this to do with theessential _value_ of the Book. Absolutely nothing, unless thereby its[honesty] truthfulness can be set aside. 

'If error were _cunningly interspersed_ with truth in the Bible, thecase would be different. But it is _not_ so. The Book, as a whole, andas it stands, is wholesome and useful; each portion of it has its properplace, and is adequate to fulfil its appointed end. But everything inthe Book does not take hold alike on the heart and conscience. It may bevery interesting, as indeed it is, to trace on the map the variousjourneyings of St. Paul, or the wanderings of the children of Israel inthe wilderness; to note a hundred designed coincidences, etc. Yet allthis may be done without the slightest moral or spiritual benefit to theman who does it. And, of course, all this may be left undone by otherswithout the slightest spiritual loss or disadvantage. '

The following may be our own. 

The great thing is to use the Scriptures as a means of instruction inreligious truth and Christian duty, and as a means of improvement in allmoral excellence and Christian usefulness. 

Set the doctrine of Scripture inspiration too high, and people, findingthat the Scriptures do not come up to it, will conclude that thedoctrine is false, --that the Scriptures are not inspired, --that they donot differ from other books, --that divine revelation is a fiction, --thatreligion is a delusion, --and that the true philosophy of life and of theuniverse is infidelity. And the Scriptures do _not_ come up to thedoctrine of inspiration held by many. It is impossible they should. _No_book written in human language _can_ come up to it. What they say aninspired book _must_ be, no book on earth ever was, and no book everwill be. And infidels see it, and are confirmed in their infidelity. Andothers see it and become infidels. And Christians argue with them andare overcome. And others are perplexed and bewildered, and obliged toclose their eyes to facts, and though they cling to their belief, theyare troubled with fears and misgivings as long as they live. 

If men would be strong in the faith, and strong in its defence, theyshould accept nothing as part of their creed but what is strictly true. 

There are passages which speak of the sun smiting men by day, and thereis one at least which speaks of the moon smiting men by night, and both, for any thing I know, may be literally true. But suppose it were provedthat neither the sun nor the moon ever smites men, would my faith inChristianity, or in the divine inspiration of the Bible, be shakenthereby? Not at all. Nor would it destroy or weaken the effect of thepassages on my mind in which those allusions to the sun and moon occur. I should still believe in the substantial truth of the passages, namely, that, day and night, the good man is secure under the protection of God. 

A man says that he has lately been under 'disastrous influences. 'Literally, the words disastrous influences mean the influences ofunfriendly stars. But there are no unfriendly stars. Then why does heuse such an expression? Because, though it does not now in its currentmeaning refer to the stars at all, it means calamitous, unfavorable, influences. I do not believe that the sun like a strong man runs a race:I believe its motion is only apparent, --that the _real_ motion is in theearth. But do I therefore question the divine inspiration of the Biblewhich uses that expression? Not at all; for the words are substantiallytrue. And so in a hundred other cases. 

And so in passages of other kinds. It does not matter to me whether theaccount of creation in Genesis answers literally to the real processesrevealed by Geology, or whether the account of the flood answers exactlyto past facts. Both accounts are perfect as lessons of divine truth andduty, and that is enough. 

Those who undertake to prove that every passage of the Bible isliterally true, must fail. If they _were_ all literally true, they wouldnever have done. There are more difficult passages, and more apparentlittle contradictions, than any man could go through in a life-time. Iwould no more undertake such a task than I would undertake to prove thatevery leaf, and every flower, and every seed, of every plant on earth isperfect, and that each is exactly like its fellows. God's honor andman's welfare are as much concerned in the one as in the other. They areconcerned in neither. The leaves, the flowers, and the seeds of plantsare right enough, --they are as perfect as they need to be, --and I ask nomore. And the Bible is as perfect as it needs to be, and I am satisfied. 

The following is abridged from a work entitled CHRISTIANITY AND OURERA, by the Rev. G. Gilfillan of Scotland. 

Mr. Gilfillan speaks of it as a 'Generally admitted fact, that there isa human, as well as a divine element in Scripture, ' and adds, 'that thisshould modify our judgment in considering perplexing discrepancies andminor objections. There are spots in the sun; there are bogs on theearth; and why should the perplexities in a book, which is amultifarious collection of poetico-theological and historical tracts, written in various ages, and subject, in their history, to many humanvicissitudes, bewilder and appal us? The candid inquirer will besatisfied if, from the unity of spirit, the truth and simplicity ofmanner, the majesty of thought, the heavenliness of tone, and thevarious collateral and external proofs, he gathers a _general_inspiration in the Bible, and the general truth of Christianity. Logicalstrictness, perfect historic accuracy, systematic arrangement, etc. , could not be expected in a book of intuitions and bursts of inspiration;the authors of which seemed often the child-like organs of the powerwithin. It seemed enough that there should be no wilful mis-statements, and no errors but those arising from the inevitable conditions to whichall writings are liable. The skeptic who proceeds to peruse the Bible, expecting it everywhere to be conformable to the highest idealstandard--that there shall be nothing to perplex his understanding, totry his belief, or to offend his taste, will be disappointed, and willeither give up his task, or go on in weariness and hesitation. On theother hand, if he be told to prepare for historical discrepancies, forstaggering statements, for phrases more plain than elegant, and forsentences of inscrutable darkness, he will be far more likely to come toa satisfactory conclusion. And the apparent dark spots will only serveto increase the surrounding splendor. We therefore cry to the skepticwho purposes to explore the region of revelation; 'We promise you nopavement of gold; you will find your path an Alpine road, steep, rugged, with profound chasms below, and giddy precipices above, and thick mistsoften closing in around, but rewarding you by prospects of ineffableloveliness, by gleams of far-revealing light, and delighting you with athousand unearthly pleasures. _Try_ this pass, with a sincere desire tocome at truth, and with hope and courage in your hearts, and you will berichly rewarded, and the toils of the ascent will seem to you afterwardsonly a portion of your triumph. '

One writer gives the following definition of inspiration. 'Asupernatural, divine influence on the sacred writers, by which they werequalified to communicate moral and religious truth with authority. '

This is tolerable. 

Another writer says, 'It is a miraculous influence, by which men areenabled to receive and communicate divine truth. '

This too is tolerable, notwithstanding the word miraculous. 

Another writer says, 'There has been a great diversity of opinions amongthe best men of all ages, as to the nature and extent of Bibleinspiration. '

He might have added, that these opinions have generally been nothingmore than opinions, --mere fancies, theories, framed without regard tofacts. 

Another writer says, 'It should be remembered, that the inspirationwhich breathes through the Book is not of a scientific, critical, orhistorical character, but exclusively religious. '

He means, that while inspiration makes the Bible all that is desirableas a teacher on religious matters, it does not, on other subjects, raiseit above the views of the ages and places in which it was written. Forhe adds, 'The sacred record is not in every respect faultless. It is notfree from literary, typographical, and other defects. Nature herself, where no one can deny the finger of God, has imperfections. The Bookpresents the same characteristics as the best and highest of God's othergifts, namely, not the outward symmetry of a finite and mechanicalperfection, but the inward, elastic, and reproductive power of a divinelife!'

The meaning of this latter vague and wordy sentence seems to be, thatthe inspiration of the Bible is such as to make it a powerful means ofproducing spiritual life, --real religion; but not such as to preserve itfrom little ordinary human errors and imperfections. 

This writer represents Dr. Stowe as saying, 'Inspiration, according tothe Bible, is just that measure of extraordinary Divine influenceafforded to the sacred speakers and writers, which was necessary tosecure the purpose intended, and no more. '

This too we can accept. It does not authorize us to expect of the Bible, or require us to prove with regard to it, any thing more, than that itis adapted to be the religious and moral instructor of mankind. 

This same writer represents Dr. Robinson as saying, 'Whenever, and asfar as, divine assistance was necessary, it was always afforded. ' Thistoo is tolerable. 

One writer says, 'Divine inspiration cannot be claimed for thetranscribers or translators of the original Scriptures. '

We think it can. We see no reason to doubt, but that many of thetranscribers and translators of the Scriptures were as much under theinfluence of the Holy Spirit, --the spirit of love, and truth, and allgoodness, --as the original writers. Our impression is, that the commonversion is as truly the work of divine inspiration, as any book onearth. 

One writer says, 'The language of the whole Bible is that ofappearances. In drawing illustrations from nature, the writers could nothave been understood, unless they had used figures and forms of speechbased on nature as popularly understood. Hence the heavenly bodies arespoken of as revolving round the earth, the ant as storing up food insummer, and the earth as being immovable, all of which are now known tobe contrary to [strict] truth. '

This writer, like some others, feeling as if he had gone too far inuttering words so true, contradicts them a few pages after, and makes anumber of statements which remind one of what the Apostle says, abouthandling the word of God deceitfully. One would be tempted to charge himwith 'cunning craftiness, ' only his craft is not very cunning. Whenreligious teachers act so unfaithfully, they have no right to complainif people lose all confidence in their honesty. 

We grant, however, that the temptation to keep back the truth on thispoint is very strong, and we must not be hard on the timid ones. It isnot always a fear of personal loss or suffering that keeps men fromspeaking freely on religious subjects, but a dread of lessening theirusefulness, of hurting the minds of good though mistaken people, or ofdisturbing and injuring the Church. 

But it is no use trying to cheat unbelievers. You cannot do it. Theywill find you out, and be all the more suspicious and skeptical inconsequence. We must deal with them honestly; tell them nothing but whatis true, and use no arguments but what are sound and unanswerable. Advocates of Christianity have made numberless unbelievers by teachingerroneous doctrines, and by using weak and vicious arguments. TheChristian should so speak and act, that it shall be impossible for anyone ever to find him in the wrong. 

The following is probably our own. 

The historical difficulties of the Bible amount to little. They do notaffect its scope and tendency, as a moral and spiritual teacher. Nor arethey inconsistent with the doctrine that the Scriptures were given byinspiration of God, as that doctrine is presented in the Scripturesthemselves. They may be inconsistent with the views of Scriptureinspiration taught by certain Theologians; but all we have to do is toset the views of these Theologians aside, and content ourselves with thesimple teachings of Scripture. 

Now the doctrine of Scripture inspiration as taught by the Scripturesthemselves, gives me no authority to expect the Scriptures to be freefrom historical and scientific errors, or from any of those so-calledimperfections which are inseparable from human language or from humannature. It authorizes me to expect that the Scriptures shall aim at mymoral and spiritual instruction and salvation, and that they shall beadapted to answer that great end. It authorizes me to expect that thebody and substance of the Book shall be true and good, and that a spiritof wisdom and purity and love shall pervade the Book, giving it arousing and a sanctifying power. It authorizes me to expect in it allthat is necessary to bring me into harmony and fellowship with Christ, to fill me with His spirit, to change me into His likeness, to enable meto live as He lived, and to labor as He labored. It authorizes me toexpect in the Bible all that is necessary to comfort me in affliction, to give me patience, to sustain my hopes, and to support and cheer me inthe hour of death. And all this I find in infinite abundance. I find itin a multitude of forms, --forms the most touching and impressive. I findit presented in the plainest, simplest style. I find in the Bible aninfinite treasury of all that is holy, just and good, --of all that isbeautiful, sublime, and glorious, --of all that is quickening, renovating, strengthening, --of all that is cheering, exhilarating, transporting, --of all that I can wish for or enjoy, --of all that mypowers can comprehend, --of all that my soul can appropriate and use. Ifind in it, in short, riches unsearchable, beyond all that I could everhave asked, or thought. And what can I wish for more?

God has given us no perfect teachers, no perfect preachers, no perfectchurches; why should we suppose it necessary that He should give us aperfect book? He has not given us any perfect books on medicine, ondiet, on trades, on politics, on farming, on gardening, on education, oron poetry. Why should we expect Him to give us one on religion? As amatter of fact, He has not done so. Our common Bible is a translation. So are all the common Bibles in the world. And all translations areimperfect. The translations are made from Greek and Hebrew Bibles, andthose are all imperfect. The Greek and Hebrew Bibles are compiled orformed from Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. But these also are imperfect. They all differ from each other. And no one can tell which is nearest tothe originals, for the originals are lost. So that whether there was anabsolutely perfect Bible at first or not, there is no such Bible now. God Himself has so ordered things, that all the Bibles in the world, like all the preachers, churches, and teachers, share the innocentimperfections of our common humanity. 

Suppose the original Bible to have been perfect, and to have beenpreserved from destruction, only one person could have possessed it. Therest would have had to be content with imperfect human copies. God mightHimself have written perfect Bibles for all mankind, but He did notchoose to do it. Or He might have made perfect copies of the originalBible, but He did not choose to do even that. He might have employed afew legions of angels in making copies of the Bible; but _that_ He didnot do. He left the work to be done by men, and men have done it, asthey do all their work, imperfectly. 

Still, they have done it well enough. The poorest manuscript Bible inthe world is good enough. The most imperfect Greek and Hebrew Bible isgood enough. The poorest translation is good enough. It is so good, wemean, that those who are able to read it, may learn from it all that isnecessary to make them good, and useful, and happy on earth, and to fitthem for the blessedness of eternal life in heaven. 

There is a sense in which no translation of the Scriptures is goodenough, if we can make it better; and we have no desire to prevent menfrom doing their best to improve the translations in all languages asmuch as possible. But do not let them make the impression that a perfecttranslation is necessary or even possible; for it is not. God has causedthe Bible to be written in such a way, He has put all important mattersof truth and duty in such a variety of forms, that any translation, madewith a reasonable amount of learning and honesty, is sure to make thingsintelligible enough in some of the forms in which they are presented inthe Book. 

The Bible, like the Church and the Ministry, is a great mixture of thehuman and the divine. There is not a single book, nor a single passageperhaps, in the whole volume, in which the weaknesses of man and theperfections of God are not blended. Everywhere we have revelations ofthe divine glory, and everywhere we have manifestations of humanimperfection. We have human errors side by side with divine truths. Wehave neither a perfect teacher nor a perfect example in the whole Book, but one; and of that one we have not a perfect record, either of Histeachings or His life. We have nothing but brief, imperfect, fragmentaryrecords of either. They are perfect enough; but they are very imperfect. And Moses, and the Prophets, and the Apostles, are perfect enough; butthey are all imperfect. The Bible is perfect enough; but it is, according to the ordinary meaning of the word, still imperfect. 

We do not need perfection, we do not need infallibility, in anything;and we have it not. Imperfection is better, and that we have ineverything. 

And all this is in keeping with God's doings in other cases, 'Theinspiration of the Holy One giveth man understanding;' but does not makehis mind infallible. Christians 'have an unction, an inspiration, fromthe Holy One, and know all things:' and yet they do not know all things;but only those things which pertain to God and Christ: and even theirknowledge of these is acquired not all at once, or without the use ofmeans; but by degrees only, and by the faithful use of their naturalpowers. 

The Apostles were not machines. Their inspiration did not take awaytheir liberty, or suspend the use of their natural powers. Nor did itteach them natural science, or history; or lift them above ordinary, innocent errors. Nor did it cause them to learn all Christian truth atonce. They gained their knowledge by degrees. Some imagine, that themoment the Apostles received the Spirit on the day of Pentecost, theywere perfect and infallible; whereas it took them nearly ten years tolearn that they were to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles. They had thewords of Christ, 'Go ye into _all the world_, and preach the Gospel to_every creature_;' yet it required nearly ten years, and a specialvision, to make them understand that _every creature_ included theGentiles. 

Nor have we any proof that the Spirit ever made the Apostles infalliblein every little matter. Paul says, when speaking of the resurrection, 'That which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die. ' Now the truthis, that the seed from which the harvest springs, does not die. Itsimply expands and unfolds. His doctrine was right, but the notion onwhich he grounded his illustration of it was an error. But it answeredhis purpose. And there is a sense in which seed dies. It ceases to be aseed in becoming a plant. 

Bishop Watson says, 'a grain of wheat must become _rotten_ before it cansprout;' but that is not the case. It ceases to be a mere grain tobecome a plant; but it does not become rotten; it remains alive andsound. 

The Apostle is an able minister, a glorious interpreter of Christ andHis doctrine; and there is nothing seriously amiss in his illustrations;but several of them are based on prevailing misconceptions. 

Some say, 'If the Apostles were not infallible in everything, theirwritings would be of no use to us. If they might err in one thing, theymight err in others, and we could have no certainty of the truth ofanything. ' But that is not true. On one occasion, Paul says, 'I knew notthat it was God's high-priest. ' And on another, he says, 'I baptizednone of you but Crispus and Gaius. ' Afterwards he says 'I baptized alsothe house of Stephanas:' and he finishes by saying, 'I know not whetherI baptized any other. ' Will you say, 'If Paul could be ignorant ormistaken about the high-priest, or the number of persons he hadbaptized; he might be ignorant or mistaken on every subject?' The truthis, a man who was so much taken up with great things, would be sure tothink but little of small things. His determination to know nothing butChrist; would be sure to keep him from wasting his time or strength ontrifles. A man's ignorance on some points is often proportioned to hisknowledge on others. And Paul is all the more trustworthy on greatmatters of Christian truth and duty, because of his indifference tomatters of little or no importance. And say what we will, the Apostleswere not infallible on every point, and they never professed to be so. They professed to be inspired, and inspired they were, but they did notprofess to be wholly infallible, and it is certain they were not so. 

And the admission of the truth on this point, will _not_ destroy ourconfidence in them on others. We may believe that the Apostles werefallible on matters of little moment, and have the fullest assurancepossible that they were right on matters of great importance. 

The Apostles themselves were sufficiently assured of the truth of thoseimpressions which they had received about Christ through their eyes andears; yet neither the eyes nor the ears of man are always or absolutelyinfallible. I have myself mistaken blue for green, and yellow for white;and I recollect two occasions on which coal or jet, seemed, at adistance, in the sunlight, as white as snow. And I have often thoughtthings to be moving, which were at rest; and things to be at rest, whichwere moving. Yet I have the fullest confidence in my eyes. I havesometimes been mistaken with regard to sounds. I have thought a sound tobe near, when it was far off; and I have thought a sound to be far off, when it was near. And I have often mistaken one sound for another. Yet Ihave all the confidence I need to have in my ears. Both eyes and earsmay need the help of the mind at times; but the mind is always at handwith its help. In short, I know that all my senses are fallible; yet onevery point of moment I have all the assurance, with regard to thingssensible, that is needful to my welfare. 

And so with regard to religious matters. There is nothing likeomniscience, --nothing like infinite or absolutely perfect knowledge orinfallibility in any man: yet every one may have all the information andall the assurance on things moral and spiritual needful to his comfortand salvation. 

Our assurance of the truth and excellency of Christian doctrine rests onsomething better, surer, than theological and metaphysical niceties. Youwho fancy that your strong and heart-cheering faith rests on theologicaltheories, and that if those theories were exploded, it would perish, are, happily, under a great mistake. Your faith, and hope, and joy, rest on the harmony between Christianity and your souls. My faith andtrust in the outward world, and my infinite appreciation of itsarrangements, rest, not on any philosophical theory; but on thewonderful, the perfect adaptation of every thing to my nature, to mywants, to my comfort and welfare. Nature answers to me, fits into me, atevery point. I am just the kind of being nature was made for; and natureis just the kind of world my being requires. They match. They answer toeach other exactly, all round, and make one glorious and blessed whole. And this is the secret of my trust in nature. 

And so it is with regard to Christianity and my soul. They are made foreach other. They fit each other. My soul just wants what Christianitybrings; and Christianity just brings what my soul requires. It answersto my soul, as light and beauty answer to the eye, and as sound andmusic answer to the ear, and the whole of nature to the whole of man. There is neither want, nor superfluity, nor disagreement. Christianityand my soul, like nature and my physical being, are a glorious match. They are one: as I and my life are one. Christ is my life. Christ is myall. And He is all that my soul requires or desires. 

And this is the ground of the good Christian's faith. It is not externalor historical evidence; it is not metaphysical niceties or theories; itis not the endless mass of jarring evidences of any kind which lie inmisty, musty, dusty volumes on the shelves of dreamy, doting divines, that makes you feel at rest in Jesus; but Jesus Himself, whose fulnessjust answers to your wants, and whose life and love just make yourheaven. It is just that, and nothing more. 

There is a story of a judge who was celebrated for the wisdom andjustice of his judgments, but often censured for the weakness or follyof the reasons which he gave for them. Many Christians resemble thisjudge. They make a wise and worthy profession of faith; but when theyattempt to give reasons for their belief, they betray the mostlamentable ignorance. They _have_ good reasons, but they cannot put theminto words. They do not always know what their reasons for believingare. The reasons they assign are not their real reasons. They believed, and believed on good grounds, for sufficient reasons, years before theyheard of the reasons they give for their belief to those who questionthem on the subject. The reasons they assign did not at first convincethem, and they are not the kind of reasons likely to convince others. And it would be better if, instead of assigning them, they were to say:'Well; I do not know that I can tell you the reasons why I believe theBible; but I have reasons. I am satisfied my belief is right. I amsatisfied the Bible is the right thing for me. I meet with things in itthat make me feel very happy. I meet with things in it that will not letme do wrong; that will keep impelling me to do right, to do good. I meetwith things in it that support me in trouble; that make me thankful inprosperity; that fill me with good thoughts, good feelings, goodpurposes, good hopes, great peace, sweet rest, strong confidence, and ablessed prospect of a better life. I like the Bible God: He is a greatprotector, and a blessed comforter. I like the Bible story about Jesus, and all the glorious things it says about His love and salvation. Inshort, the Bible is a great part of my life, my soul, my joy, mystrength, my being, and I don't know what I could do without it. Icannot argue. I don't know the reasons why I believe. But the Bible justsuits my soul, and I am inclined to believe that the world would be adark place, and life a poor affair, without its blessed revelations andprecious promises. '

Now in speaking thus, most men would really, without knowing it, begiving the reasons or grounds of their faith. The great reason reallyis, the perfect adaptation of the Bible to their nature and wants. Theybelieve unconsciously and unthinkingly in the divinity of nature, onaccount of the wonderful adaptation of its provisions to their naturalwants. They believe in virtuous love, and honorable marriage, and familylife, and natural affections, and friendship, and society, andgovernment, and law, on similar grounds. The reasons of their faith arereal, and good, and strong; but like the roots of a tree, they are lowdown, out of sight, under the ground. They do not reflect on them, digthem up, bring them to the light, and give them a critical examination. 

This internal evidence is gaining favor day by day. It is preferred bythe ablest modern writers to all others. It was the evidence thatvanquished the infidel socialists of five and thirty years ago. It isthe evidence that makes our modern infidel advocates wince and waver. They hardly think it necessary to notice the historical evidences. Theyknow that they seldom get hold of men's hearts. But they cannot affordto despise the internal evidences. They are a real power. Thousands aretouched by a sight of Jesus as presented in the Gospels, for one that ismoved by arguments from miracles or prophecies. Even the miracles ofJesus owe their chief power to their benevolent character. 

The ablest American writer on the Evidences of Christianity, Rev. MarkHopkins, makes the moral and internal evidence almost everything, andthe external ones next to nothing. 

The Rev. F. C. Cooke, Canon of Exeter, in his lecture before theChristian Evidence Society of London, says, 'The one great evidence, themaster evidence, the evidence with which all other evidences will standor fall, is Christ Himself speaking by His own word. It is the characterof Jesus that makes men feel that He and His religion are divine. It isthis that warms men's hearts, and wins their love, and produces a faithfull of life and power. Other evidences apart from this leave men cold, and indifferent, or opposed to Christ. ' But more on this pointhereafter. 

CHAPTER XV. 

GOES INTO POLITICS. ARRESTED. LODGED IN PRISON. ELECTED TOWN COUNCILLOR, MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT, &C. 

In 1846, I began to dabble in politics. And my views of politicalsubjects were as much out of the ordinary way as my views on matterspertaining to religion. I was a republican. I would have no King, noQueen, no House of Lords, and no State Church. I would abolish the lawsof entail and primogeniture, and reduce land to a level with other kindsof property. The sale of land should be as untrammelled as that ofcommon merchandise, and it should be as liable to be taken for debt. Ibroached startling views with regard to the right of property in land, and urged that as it was naturally common property, it should beconsidered as belonging, in part, to the nation, or Government, and madeto bear the principal burden of taxation. I recommended that theproperty of the church should be used for the promotion of education. Iproposed to divide the country into equal electoral districts, and giveto every man who was not a criminal, a vote for members of Parliament. As a rule, I held up America as an example in matters of government, butobjected to a Senate and a four years' President, preferring to placeall power in the hands of one Body, the direct representatives of thepeople. A committee of that Body should be the _ministry_, and thechairman of that committee the President. 

I really believed that this would be the perfection of Government. Andif all men were naturally good, as Unitarianism taught, what could bewiser or better calculated to secure the happiness of a nation, than togive every one an equal share of the power? I believed with Paine, thata pure and unqualified democracy would secure the strictest economy, thegreatest purity, the best laws, and the most perfect administration ofthe laws. I also believed that a pure unmixed democracy would preventinsurrections, rebellions, and civil war, and that it would promotepeace with all the world. True, I believed the people would requireeducation, but I also believed that an ultra democracy would see to itthat the people _were_ educated, and educated in the best possible way. Were not the people educated in America? And were we not taught that theeducational system of America was the result of its democratic form ofGovernment? And were not Price and Priestley democrats? And were notChanning and Parker, the two great lights of Unitarianism in America, democrats? Democracy then was the remedy for the evils of the world; theone thing needful to the salvation of our race. 

More extravagant or groundless notions have seldom entered the mind ofman. Yet I accepted them as the true political gospel, and exertedmyself to the utmost to propagate them among the masses of mycountrymen. The Irish reformers demanded a repeal of the Union and theright of self-government. I advocated both repeal for Ireland andRepublicanism for England. And in all my speeches and publications Igave utterance to the bitterest reproaches against the aristocracy, andagainst all who took their part. I had suffered grievously in my earlydays. I had been subjected to all the hardships and miseries of extremepoverty. I had spent three years on the verge of starvation, neverknowing, more than twice or thrice during the whole of that dreadfulperiod, what it was to have the gnawings of hunger appeased by aplentiful meal. I had seen one near and dear to me perish for want offood, and had escaped the same sad fate myself by a kind of miracleonly. And all these sufferings I believed to have been caused by thecorn and provision laws, enacted and maintained by the selfishness ofthe aristocracy. I regarded the aristocracy therefore, and all who tooktheir part, as my personal enemies; as men who had robbed me of my dailybread, and all but sent me to an untimely grave. I regarded them as thegreatest of criminals, as the enemies of the human race. I consideredthem answerable for the horrors of the first great French Revolution, and for the miseries of the Irish famine. I gave them credit for nothinggood. True, they had allowed the Reform Bill of 1831 to pass, but nottill they saw that a refusal would cause a revolution. They had acceptedfree trade, but not till they saw that to reject it would be their ruin. I had not then learnt that in legislating with an eye to their owninterests they had done no more than other classes are accustomed to dowhen they get possession of power. I had not yet discovered that thegerms of selfish legislation and tyranny are sown in the hearts of all, and that the faults of the higher classes prevail among all classesunder different forms. I saw the misdoings of the parties in power, andlooked no further, and I heaped on them the bitterest invectives. Mypassionate hatred of the privileged classes, expressed in the plainestEnglish, and justified, apparently, by so much that was bad in thehistory of their doings, roused the indignation of my hearers andreaders to the highest pitch. I commenced a periodical, which at oncebecame a favorite with the ultra democrats, and speedily gained anextensive circulation. 

In 1847, in my _Companion to the Almanacs_, I foretold the FrenchRevolution of 1848. How it happened I do not exactly know; but I have, at times, made remarkable guesses, and this perhaps was one of them. When the Revolution took place it caused a tremendous excitement inevery nation in Europe. Kings and emperors found it necessary to promisetheir subjects constitutional governments. It turned the heads of manypeople in England. Numbers who had never been politicians before, becamepoliticians then. And many politicians who had previously been moderatein their views, became wild and revolutionary. The Chartists clamoredfor "the Charter, the whole Charter, and nothing but the Charter. "Meetings were held in almost every part of the country, and speecheswere delivered, and publications were circulated, of a most inflammatorycharacter. Monster demonstrations were got up, and many who did not takepart in them encouraged them, in hopes that they would frighten theGovernment into large concessions to the party of reform. A meeting ofthe leading reformers was called in London, and I was present. YoungStansfield, now member of Parliament, was there, and Sergeant Parry, andEdward Miall, and Henry Vincent, and a number of others. The Chartistsarranged for a convention in London, and I was sent as a member. Themeeting cut but a pitiful figure. It soon got into unspeakable disorder. The second day the question was, "What means should we recommend ourconstituents to use in order to obtain the reforms they desired?" I, extravagant as I had shown myself on many points, had always set myselfagainst resort to violence. My counsel therefore was for peaceful, legalmeasures. Ernest Jones and several others clamored for organization, with a view to an armed insurrection. By and by we got into confusionagain. Some one hinted that agents of the Government were present, andthat we were venturing on dangerous ground. Ernest Jones replied, "It isnot for us to be afraid of the Government, but for the Government to beafraid of us. " Confusion got worse confounded. I began to be ashamed ofmy position. Mad as I was, I was not insane enough for the leaders ofthe convention, so I started home. 

On Good Friday there was an immense meeting on Skircoat Moor, nearHalifax, and I was one of the speakers. It was the largest assembly Iever saw. The Speakers that preceded me talked about the uselessness oftalk, and called for action. I talked about the usefulness of talk, andcontended that resort to violence would be both folly and wickedness. While I was speaking, a man in the crowd on my left fired a pistol, asif to intimidate me, and encourage the party favorable to insurrection. I at once denounced him as a traitor, who had come to hurry the peopleinto crime, or a madman, whom no one ought for a moment to think ofimitating. The physical force men were terribly vexed at my remarks, butthe mass of the meeting applauded my counsels, and the immense concoursedispersed and went home, without either perpetrating a crime, or meetingwith an accident. 

My advocacy of peace was duly appreciated by some even of those wholamented the extravagance of my views on other subjects. Others lookedon me with unmitigated horror. And the feelings of the richer classesgenerally against me rose to such a pitch at length, that it was hardlysafe for me to go abroad after dark. My religious and politicalopponents joined their forces, and seemed bent on my destruction. Theybelieved I was undermining the foundations of society, and throwing allthings into confusion. They looked on me as little better than a madman, scattering abroad firebrands, arrows, and death. And many treated me asa kind of outlaw, as a man who had no rights that anybody was bound torespect; and rude boys and reckless men took liberties with my property, and even threatened me with death. Insurance companies would not insuremy property. Schoolmasters would not admit my sons into their schools, lest others should take their children away. Mothers would not allowtheir daughters to play with my little daughter, lest she should infectthem with her father's heresies. 

After the Summer Assizes in 1848, the judge at Liverpool issued Benchwarrants for the arrest of a number of political agitators, and in thelist of the names of those parties, published in the newspapers, minewas included. As I had always kept within the limits of the law, and asI had received no visit from the police, I supposed that my name hadbeen inserted in the list by mistake. And as I was allowed to remain atlarge for six weeks, I felt confident that it was either some otherJoseph Barker that was wanted, or that my name had been mentioned as oneof the parties to be arrested, in jest, or to frighten me into silence. 

And the probability is, that if I had kept at home and remained quiet, Ishould have been permitted to go on with my business undisturbed. But Ihad an engagement at the end of six weeks, to give two politicallectures at Bolton. Just about that time a vacancy occurred in therepresentation of that Borough, and my friends there, without consultingme, put me forward as a candidate for the vacant seat, and announced mylectures as a statement of my political views, urging the people to comeand hear me, and judge for themselves, whether I was not the fittest manto represent them in the National Legislature. 

I gave my first lecture on a Friday night, to a crowded and excitedaudience in the Town Hall, and when I had done, the people passed aresolution by acclamation, to the effect that I was just the man forthem, and that they would have no other. 

On the Saturday I went on into Wales, to fulfil an engagement which Ihad for the Sunday, and returned on Monday to give my second lecture. When I got near to Bolton, some friends met me, and told me that thepolice from Manchester were in the town looking for me, and that I hadbetter go right home. I said, "Nay, I never broke an engagement yet, andI won't do so now;" so I went on. As soon as I had rested myself alittle I went direct to the head of the Manchester police, and asked himif he would not allow me to deliver my lecture, promising, if he wishedit, to go with him quietly afterwards. He said, No, I could not beallowed to deliver my lecture, and added, that I must consider myselfhis prisoner. I, of course, offered no resistance, but at his requestwent with him at once to the railway station. The people had alreadycollected in the streets as I passed along, and there was soon anexcited crowd at the station, but I and my friends urged them to bepeaceful, and peaceful they were. We were soon at Manchester, and I wastaken at once to the City Jail, where lodgings had been procured for meat the public expense. I passed the night in an underground cell, of thekind provided for criminals of the baser sort. It was anything but cleanand sweet, and the conduct of the authorities in placing me in such ahole, when I was not even charged with any gross offence, was neitherwise nor just. There were some raised boards on one side, but no bed, nosheets, no blankets. 

It was not long before a number of friends who had heard of my arrest, called to see me, and were admitted to my dungeon. They brought somefood, some candles, and as they had been informed that I had not beenpermitted to wash myself before being locked up, one of them, a lady, brought me a moistened towel with which to wipe my face. While thesekind friends were trying to make things comfortable for me in my prison, others were running to and fro in search of bail, with a view to myspeedy release. One dear, good soul, Mr. Travers Madge, when he heardthat I was in jail, started at once for Mossley, a distance of ten oreleven miles, to see Mr. Robinson, a faithful friend, to request him tocome to my help. It was two o'clock in the morning when, weary and fullof anxiety, he knocked at Mr. Robinson's door. Mr. Robinson rose as soonas he heard his voice, and took him into the house, and requested him totake something to eat, and go to rest till daylight, promising to startwith him back to Manchester by the earliest conveyance. But poor Mr. Madge could neither eat nor sleep till his friend was out of prison. 

Early in the morning I was brought into court. Bail was offered at once, but the magistrates would not accept bail so early, though offered bywell-known and thoroughly respectable parties. The reason was, theelection was to take place at Bolton that day, and the magistrates wereafraid that if I were allowed to be present, there might be moreexcitement than would be consistent with the peace and safety of theBorough. So they kept me in prison till four o'clock, when they receivedintelligence that the election was over, and that all was peaceful. Theythen set me at liberty. I went at once to Bolton, and found, sureenough, that I had been elected, and that by an immense majority, ofmore than eight to one. And as no one else was elected at that time, either by show of hands or a poll, I was, in truth, the only legalrepresentative, though I never sat in Parliament. Explanations after. 

I was soon surrounded by a vast multitude of people, to whom I gave ashort address. As soon as I could get away from the excited crowd, Ihastened home. A friend had started for Wortley as soon as I was out ofprison, to inform my wife and children that I was safe and at liberty, and he was there when I arrived. It fortunately happened that my familyheard of my imprisonment and of my liberation at the same time, and fromthe same lips, so that the shock they received was not so severe as itmight have been. But they were terribly tried. It would be vain toattempt to describe their feelings when they saw me enter the house. Idid my best to comfort them, and assured them that I should take nohurt. 

I was bound over to appear to take my trial at the Winter Assizes on acharge of sedition and conspiracy, and I set to work to prepare for theevent. A good kind friend residing at Barnard Castle, George Brown, Esq. , who had helped me in my contests with my theological opponents, helped me in this new trial. He had studied the law all his life, andwas a most faithful and trustworthy adviser. He directed me what stepsto take, and all his instructions proved wise and good. 

My friends set on foot a subscription, to procure for me the ablestdefence, and raised, in the course of a few weeks, from two to threehundred pounds. I am amazed when I look back to those days, at thenumber and ardor of my friends, and at the eagerness with which theyhastened to my aid. 

Some friends from Holbeck, in the Borough of Leeds, requested me toallow myself to be put forward as a candidate for the Town Council atthe approaching election. Not thinking that I should have any chance ofbeing elected, I hesitated; but as they expressed a contrary opinion, and seemed exceedingly anxious that I should place myself in theirhands, I complied with their request. They elected me by the largestnumber of votes that had ever been given for a town councillor in anyborough in the kingdom up to that time. My neighbors chose this methodof testifying their regard for me, and of protesting against the conductof the Government in interfering with my liberty. 

At length the Assizes came. I made my appearance in court at the timeappointed, with more than thirty voluntary witnesses by my side, allprepared to testify, that in my lectures and public speeches I haduniformly advocated peaceful measures, and denounced everything in theshape of conspiracy, violence, or insurrection. I waited ten days for mytrial, attending in court all the time. I watched the trials of otherpolitical prisoners, and was not a little discouraged to find that theywere all convicted, and sentenced, generally, to lengthy terms ofimprisonment. The charge against one of the prisoners was, that he hadsold and circulated seditious publications. Copies of the works which hewas charged with circulating were brought into court. What were myfeelings when I found that the publications were my own _Companion tothe Almanacs_, and my weekly periodical _The People_. These works werehanded about the court, and placed in the hands of the judge. The manwas convicted, and sentenced to two years' imprisonment. What chance wasthere now for me? My solicitor advised me to plead guilty, telling me Ishould thus get off with a lighter punishment; but I refused. Some _did_plead guilty, and _did_ get off with lighter punishments than those whostood their trial; but I was determined to have a public trial, or elsebe honorably discharged. 

It was alarming enough to see a man convicted for selling mypublications: but something still more alarming happened the followingday. A most unprincipled and lying witness was brought forward by theAttorney-General. During the trial of one of the Chartist leaders heswore that he had himself formed one of a band of conspirators inManchester, who pledged themselves to burn the city, and who hadprepared the most destructive combustibles to secure the success oftheir horrible plot. When asked to name the parties composing themeeting at which he said he had been present, he named me as one. I washorrified. I had never seen the man before in all my life, and the ideathat I should be a party to such a plot as he had described, wasmonstrous; but what was to hinder a prejudiced or a frightened jury frombelieving his testimony? Fortunately for me, the Judge asked him if hesaw in court, and could point out, any of the persons he had named asparties to the conspiracy. I stood within two or three yards of him, andlooked him full in the face. It was plain from the way in which hiswandering eyes passed by me, that whatever other parties he might know, he did not know me. At length he pointed out a person that he said waspresent at the secret meeting. 'What is his name?' said the Judge. Thefellow gave a name. It was not the right one. He pointed out another. 'What is his name?' said the Judge again. The fellow gave a name. He waswrong again. The court got out of patience with the villain, and theJudge ordered him into custody to await his trial on a charge ofperjury. This was an unspeakable relief both to me and to my anxiouswife and friends, who had witnessed the dreadful affair with the mostintense anxiety and alarm. 

Some time after this horrible exhibition of baseness, my solicitor cameto me and told me that he had had an interview with theAttorney-General, and that he had authorized him to say, that if I wouldenter into bonds and give securities to keep the peace, he would not askme to plead guilty, but set me at liberty without more to do. He evenoffered, at last, to accept my own recognizances to the small amount offifty pounds, without any other security. I refused the offer. To givebonds to keep the peace seemed like an acknowledgment that I hadattempted or threatened to break it; and I had done no such thing. Mysolicitor said the offer was a very generous one, and pressed me veryearnestly to accept it: my counsel did the same; but without effect. Anumber of friends came round me and tried to remove my objections to themeasure: but all was vain. I was sorry to go against their advice, butmy feeling was, that to agree to the compromise proposed would be asacrifice of principle, and would entail dishonor on me, and be followedby self-reproach and shame. At last, to obtain a little respite, and toget out of the way of my importunate friends for a time, I told mysolicitor that I would lay the matter before my wife, and that whatevershe might advise, I would do. He agreed to this. He was satisfied thatthere was not a woman in the country that would not advise her husbandto make a concession like that required of me, rather than see him runthe risk of two or three years' imprisonment. 

My wife was at Southport just then, some eighteen miles away, and it wastoo late for me to get to her that evening, so I had to spend the nightalone in Liverpool. I went to bed, but found it impossible to sleep. Myanxious mind kept turning over and over the proposal of theAttorney-General, and trying to find some good reason for accepting it;but all in vain. I had promised to be guided by my wife; but suppose sheshould counsel me to give the required security, could I do so and behappy? It seemed impossible. It struck twelve, --it struckone--two--three, and I was still unsettled. At last I said, 'I willexplain my misgivings to my wife, --I will tell her that I feel as if Ishould never be happy to consent to the compromise, --that I cannot getrid of the feeling that it would be dishonorable. And I know she willnever advise me to do anything that I regard as dishonorable. ' As soonas I had fairly decided what to do, I fell asleep. 

I was at Southport in the morning by the earliest conveyance, and laidthe matter before my wife. 'Do nothing, ' said she, 'that you regard as asacrifice of principle, or an act of dishonor. Whatever you believe tobe your duty, do it; I am willing to take the consequences. ' I answered, 'I believe it my duty to insist on a trial, or on an honorabledischarge, ' 'Then insist on it, ' said she. That was enough. I returnedto Liverpool at once, and told my solicitor the result of my interviewwith my wife, and he communicated the intelligence to theAttorney-General. The Attorney-General was very much vexed, and, usingan expression which we cannot with propriety repeat, declared that hewould 'make me squeak. '

The result of my refusal was that the Attorney-General put off my caseto the very last. On the eleventh day of the Assizes I was placed in thedock with a number of prisoners who had agreed to plead guilty, andenter into bonds. My name was called at length, and I refused either toplead guilty, or to be bound to keep the peace. 'Can there be any manso foolish as not to accept the mercy of her Majesty?' said the Judge. My answer was, that I had committed no crime, and that it was justicethat I wanted, and not mercy. 'I demand a trial, ' said I, 'or anhonorable discharge. I have been arrested on a charge of sedition andconspiracy, and held up before the world as a criminal, and I claim theright of justifying myself before the public, unless I am honorablydischarged. ' The Judge said I had no need to concern myself about thepublic, --that the public did not concern itself about me. I answeredthat the public _did_ concern itself about me; and that I was right inconcerning myself about the public. At this point my Counsel rose, andspoke of my character and position, with a view to justify my demand fora trial, or an honorable discharge. The Attorney-General then appliedfor a postponement of my trial to the following Assizes, alleging that Iwas the author of a seditious and blasphemous publication. I said thestatement was false, and that the Attorney-General had no right to makesuch a charge against me, and added that to ask a postponement after Iand my witnesses had been waiting there eleven days, was mostunreasonable. The Judge then asked on what grounds a postponement wasdesired. When the Attorney-General stated his grounds, the Judgepronounced them insufficient. The Attorney-General then said he shouldenter a _nolle prosequi_. Some of my friends, when they heard this, weregreatly alarmed. They supposed it to be a threat of something veryterrible, and expected to see me carried away at once to prison. Andsome of the bystanders began to reproach me, and say I was rightlyserved for not accepting the generous offer of the Attorney-General. I, of course, knew that the Attorney-General's _nolle prosequi_ meant thathe would have nothing more to do with me, and that I was now free. Whiletherefore my friends were fearing and trembling, I stood calm andcomfortable. After a few moments the Judge said 'You are at liberty, andmay retire. '

When my friends found that I was free, they were wild with delight, andflocked round me, eager to shake me by the hand, and give me theircongratulations. They were now satisfied that in rejecting the proposalof the Attorney-General, I had done no more than my duty. Onegentleman, who had been bail for me, was extravagant enough to declarethat I occupied the proudest position of any man in the country. 'Youhave withstood the tyranny of the Government, ' said he, 'and havetriumphed. ' I hurried home as fast as I could with my happy wife and myexulting friends. When we got there the cannon were roaring and thebands playing. My workmen and neighbors had heard of my triumph, andwere celebrating it in the noisiest way they could. Then followedfeasting and public congratulations, both at home and in distant partsof the country, and for a time I was quite a hero. 

The interference of the authorities with my liberty, and the needlessannoyances to which they had subjected me, had roused my indignation toa high pitch, and after my liberation, I wrote and spoke more violentlyagainst the Government than I had done before. At length the greatexcitement in which I had so long lived, and the excessive labors inwhich I had been so long engaged, exhausted my strength; my health beganto fail; I thought my constitution was giving way, so I resolved on somechange of position and occupation. 

I had long suffered from dyspepsia. For twenty years I had spent so muchnervous energy in mental work, that I had not sufficient left to digestmy food. And I had suffered in consequence, not only from violentheart-burn, but from a more distressing pain at the pit of my stomach. Ihad continually, or almost continually, for months together, a feelingas if a red-hot bullet lay burning in my stomach, or as if some livingcreature was eating a hole through the bottom of it. I took medicine, but it gave me no relief. The disuse of intoxicating drinks had oncecured me for a time, --cured me for some years in fact, --but thetorturing, depressing sensation came again at last, and seemed moreobstinate than ever. 

In 1847, as I was leaving home one day in the train, I was seized with apain of a much more dreadful description. It seemed as if it would burstmy stomach, or tear it in pieces, and destroy my life at once. Itcontinued for nearly an hour. It returned repeatedly, and remainedsometimes for several hours. In some cases it tortured me all night. Vomiting took it away, so I frequently took warm water to producevomiting. I was advised to take more exercise in the open air, so Ibought a gun and went out shooting. I purchased a horse and carriagetoo, and went out riding. These did me good. But I found that when Itook certain kinds of food, such as rich cakes, rich pies, or richpuddings, the pain returned. So I began to deny myself of thoseluxuries. But even spare living seemed to lose its effect after a time, and first the gnawing, and then the stretching, tearing, rending painreturned. 

In 1849, I took a voyage to America. Vast numbers of my readers wantedto emigrate to America, and they looked to me for information respectingthe country. I had given them the best I could get, but they wanted moreand better. They wanted me to visit the country, and give them theresult of my observations and inquiries. I did so. To fit myself thebetter for giving them counsel, I crossed the ocean in a common emigrantsailing vessel, and saw how the poor creatures fared. We were nearlyeight weeks on the water. For much of the time the winds were idle. Theyrefused to blow. They might have struck for shorter hours or better pay. When they did blow, they blew with all their might, but almost always inthe wrong direction; as if they regarded us as their enemies, and werebent on giving us all the annoyance they could. Many were sick; morewere discontented; and all longed wearily for land. These eight weekswere the longest ones I ever lived. They looked like years. At length wegot a sight of land, and rejoiced exceedingly. For myself, I had otherfeelings as well as joy, when I first got sight of the great New Worldof which I had heard, and read, and thought so much, and so long, and ofwhich I had dreamt so often. For America had lived in my thoughts frommy early days; and the first faint glimpse of her wooded shores thrilledmy whole soul with unspeakable emotions. 

We landed. I examined the emigrant boarding houses. I sought informationabout work and wages, and about means of transport to the West. I calledon Horace Greeley and others, to whom I had letters of recommendation, who helped me to books about the West. I made my way through New York, and across Lake Erie to Cleveland. I had three brothers who weresettled in different parts of Ohio, and a number of old friends. Ivisited them. I explored Ohio. I went into Western Virginia, andexamined some lands there that had been advertised for sale in England. I passed on to Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Wisconsin. I spent somedays in Chicago. The city was awfully dull. The people were despondent. I almost think I could have bought the whole city for fifty thousandpounds. I had a farm offered me for seven dollars and a half an acre, onwhich now a great part of the city I suppose is built. I went toMilwaukie. There the people seemed more hopeful; though several wereleaving for warmer climes. It was autumn, and I treated myself freely tothe peaches and other rich fruits of the country. About the end ofOctober I started for England, in one of the Cunard Steamers, crossingthe ocean in nine days, about one-sixth of the time I spent in thevoyage out. 

I gave to my readers an account of all I had seen, and heard, and read, and thousands of them left the land of their birth in search of homes inthe domains of the Great Republic. Some got home-sick, and cursed me. Some got profitable work, or promising farms, and blessed me. And Ilearned two lessons; first, that a man must not look to men for thereward of his beneficent services, but to God and a good conscience;and, second, that some will be miserable, and that some will be happy, go where they may:--that it is not the land they live in, but thedispositions they cherish, and the life they live, that makes theirheaven or hell. 

I had already made up my mind to settle in America myself, and early in1851 I disposed of my business, and prepared to transport myself and myfamily to Central Ohio. I had suffered so long from pain, and weakness, and depression, and I was so utterly wearied with continual over-work, and so disgusted too with the government and institutions of thecountry, and with some of its inhabitants, that I felt it an infiniterelief to be freed from all further care and concern about business, andin the first rush of my new wild joy, I took my gun and blew off part ofthe top of the chimney of my printing establishment. No child could bewilder in his delight, when escaping from long confinement in a wearyschool, and starting for the longed-for society and pleasures of hishome. 

But preparing for a journey of four thousand miles, with wife andchildren, was itself work enough for a time. There were a hundred thingsto be bought, which you would need in your new and far off home. Andthere were a thousand things which you already had, to be packed, and asmany more to be set aside, to be destroyed, or sold, or given away. Andthere were a thousand letters and papers to be examined, and a judgmentformed, as to which should be preserved, and which should perish in theflames. And there were visits to be paid and repaid, and there werepartings, and regrets, and tears. But all was over at length, and wewere on our way to the world beyond the flood. 

It was pleasant to get away from one's religious and politicalopponents, but painful to part with so many devoted friends, who hadproved their affection for me and for my family by so many sacrifices, and their steadfastness in times of so much trial. But I had hopes ofkeeping up my intercourse with them through the Press, and ofministering to their gratification and improvement by sending themaccounts of all I saw or learnt of an interesting character in the landto which I was going. I had also hopes that a quiet home, in a retiredand peaceful part of a new country, might prove conducive to my ownimprovement and happiness. 

One of the objects I had in view in going to America was to obtain alittle quiet for calm reflection on the course I had so long beenpursuing, and a sober consideration of the position which I had reached. I was not satisfied that the changes which had taken place in my viewsand way of life, since my separation from the Church and the ministry, had all been changes for the better. I had had suspicions for some time, that amidst the whirl of perpetual excitement in which I had lived, andthe continual succession of angry contests in which I had been engaged, I had probably missed my way on some points, and I wished for afavorable opportunity of ascertaining whether these suspicions were wellgrounded or not. 

But when I got to America I found myself in a condition less friendly tocalm reflection and to a just and impartial review of my past history, than the one from which I had fled. The very day we landed in New Yorkwe fell in with the Hutchinson family. I had become acquainted with themin England, and had spent some time in their company, and had attendedsome of their concerts at Leeds. They were to sing that night in NewYork, and we attended the performance, and were delighted with theirsweet wild music, and with their wisdom and their wit. They were allreformers of the radical school, and though their songs and conversationwere not immoral or profane, they were advanced beyond the bounds ofreligion, into the neutral ground of Latitudinarianism. 

When we got to Akron, Ohio, we found a Woman's Rights Convention insession; and there we got introduced to a number of advanced spirits, both male and female, and in their society became acquainted with quitea multitude of strange and lawless speculations, of which, till then, wehad lived in happy or in woful ignorance. We reached at length theregion where we were to make our home, and now other matters engrossedmy mind. I had, in the first place, a farm to select, and then thepurchase to make. I had then my goods to look after, my house toarrange, and my food to provide. Then work wanted doing on the farm--ahundred kinds of work, all new, and many of them hard and veryperplexing. We wanted men to aid us; and men were not to be got; or, when got, were difficult to manage, and hard to please. And horses, andcows, and sheep, were wanted; and poultry, and pigs; and ploughs, andharrows, and wagons, and harness. And stoves and fuel were required. Andthe house had to be enlarged, and the barns rebuilt, and the gardenscultivated, and the orchard replanted. And a hundred lessons on farminghad to be learnt, and a hundred more to be unlearnt. And we were alwaysmaking mistakes, and sustaining losses. And our neighbors were not allthat we could wish; and we were not all that they could wish. It wasimpossible to avoid impositions, and difficult to take injusticequietly; so we remonstrated, and resisted, and made things worse. 

Before we had got ourselves fairly settled we began to be visited by anumber of friends. And many of those friends were wilder and moreextravagant, in their views on religion and politics, than myself; andinstead of helping me to quiet reflection, did much to render such athing impossible. They were mostly Garrisonian Abolitionists, with whomI had become acquainted while in England, or through the medium ofanti-slavery publications. Many of them had had an experience a gooddeal like my own. They had been members and ministers of churches, andhad got into trouble in consequence of their reforming tendencies, andhad at length been cast out, or obliged to withdraw. They had waged along and bitter war against the churches and ministers of their land, and had become skeptics and unbelievers of a somewhat extravagant kind. Henry C. Wright was an Atheist. So were some others of the party. My owndescent to skepticism was attributable in some measure to my intercoursewith them, and to a perusal of their works, while in England. The firstdeadly blow was struck at my belief in the supernatural inspiration ofthe Scriptures by Henry C. Wright. It was in conversation with him toothat my belief in the necessity of church organization was undermined, and that the way was smoothed to that state of utter lawlessness whichso naturally tends to infidelity and all ungodliness. My respect for thetalents of the abolitionists, and the interest I felt in the cause towhich they had devoted their lives, and the sympathy arising from thesimilar way in which we had all been treated by the churches andpriesthoods with which we had come in contact, disposed me, first, toregard their skeptical views with favor, and then to accept them astrue. 

And now they welcomed me to their native land, and embraced the earliestopportunity of visiting me in my new home. And all that passed betweenus tended to confirm us in our common unbelief. I afterwards found thatin some of the abolitionists, in nearly all, I fear, anti-christianviews had led to immoral habits, which rendered their antipathy toChristianity all the more bitter. In almost all of them infidelity hadproduced a lawlessness of speculation on moral matters, which couldhardly fail to produce in the end, if it had not already produced, greatlicentiousness of life. 

I had no sooner got things comfortably fixed at home, than I receivedan invitation from the American Anti-slavery Society, to attend theirAnnual Meeting, which was to be held in Rochester, New York. I went, andthere I met with S. S. Foster, Abby Kelly Foster, Parker Pillsbury, C. L. Remond, Henry C. Wright, Wendell Phillips, W. L. Garrison, LucyStone, Lucretia and Lydia Mott, and a number of other leadingAbolitionists. Here too I met with Frederick Douglas, the celebratedfugitive slave, who had settled in Rochester, and was publishing hispaper there. Some of the Anti-Slavery Leaders I had seen before inEngland, and had had the pleasure of having them as my guests, and ofenjoying their conversation. Henry C. Wright, W. L. Garrison, FrederickDouglas, and C. L. Remond, were old acquaintances. The rest I knew onlyby report: but I had read the story of their labors and sufferings inbehalf of the negro slave, and had longed for years to make theiracquaintance. They were, in my estimation, among the best and bravest oftheir race. I had read of them a thousand times with the greatestinterest, and a thousand times I had wished for the honor ofco-operating with them in their generous labors. And now I was in theirmidst, on American soil. And all seemed glad to make my acquaintance, and eager to testify their regard for me, and to welcome me to a sharein their benevolent labors. I was soon at home with them all, for theywere a free and hearty people. I attended both their public and theirprivate meetings. The anniversary lasted several days, and the time wasone continued Festival. There were people from almost every part of thecountry, and the house of every Anti-Slavery person in the city wasplaced at the service of the visitors. They were as one family, and hadall things in common. The public meetings were largely attended, and theaudiences seemed favorably impressed. In the intervals I visited theFalls on the Genesee River. More beautiful and enchanting scenes I neverbeheld. In all but terrible grandeur they equal, if they do not surpass, the Falls of Niagara. 

And there was an infinite abundance of strange and exciting conversationin many of the circles, not only on Slavery, but on the Bible andReligion, on the Church and the Priesthood, and on Woman's Rights, andthe Bloomer Costume, and Marriage Laws, and Free-love, and Education, and Solomon's Rod, and Non-resistance, and Human Government, andCommunism, and Individualism, and Unitarianism, and Theodore Parkerism, and Spiritualism, and Vegetarianism, and Teetotalism, and Deism, andAtheism, and Clairvoyance, and Andrew Jackson Davis, and the AmericanCongress, and Quakerism, and William Henry Channing, and his journey toEngland, and Free-soil, and the Public Lands, and the Common Right tothe Soil, and Rent, and Interest, and Capital, and Labor, andFourierism, and Congeniality of Spirit, and Natural Affinities, andDomestic Difficulties, and--the Good time Coming. All were full ofreform, and most were wild and fanatical. Some regarded marriage asunnatural, and pleaded for Free-love as the law of life. Some were forCommunism, but differed as to the form which it ought to assume. Onecontended that all should be perfectly free, --that each should be a lawunto himself, and should work, and rest, and eat, and drink, as his ownfree spirit should prompt him. Another said that the principle had beentried, and had failed, --that some were anxious to do all the eating, andsleeping, and loving, and left others to do all the working. JosephTreat was there, advocating Atheism, and defending the right of men andwomen, married or single, to give free play to native tendencies andsexual affinities. But Treat was indifferently clad, and not wellwashed, and he was evidently no great favorite. * * * Most were in favorof non-resistance, and full individual freedom. To acknowledge the rightof human government and of human laws, was treason to humanity. Man is alaw to himself. He is his own governor. The Protestant principle of theright of private judgment and liberty of conscience strikes at the rootof all the governments on earth. Each one's nature is his own sole law. The one principle of duty is, for every one to do that which is right inhis own eyes. The principle of the Anti-Slavery Society means that, andneither more nor less. And the Anti-Slavery Society will, afteremancipating the negro, destroy all the governments, remodel all thelaws and institutions, and emancipate all the nations of the earth. Ofcourse the laws of marriage will fall to the ground. Why not? Theyoriginated only with men, --with men who lived in darker times, and whowere less developed, than we. It would be strange if children could makelaws fit to govern men. And with the laws of marriage will go the lawsof property in land. Land was common property at first, and what righthad any one to make it private? The first man who appropriated land wasa thief. And those who inherited it from him were receivers of stolengoods. And the title that was vicious at first could never be made validby time. The continuance of a wrong can never make it right. Allow thatmen have a right to the land in consequence of long possession andinheritance, and you must allow that men may have a right to theirslaves. The right to land, and the right to slaves, are not so differentas some would suppose. What is man's right to his own body worth, if heis deprived of his right to the land? Man lives from the land, andunless he has a right to the land, he can have no right to life. A rightto life implies a right to the land. Men live _on_ the land as well as_from_ it; and if they have not a right to the land, they can have noright to live. And man has a right to perfect freedom. Life withoutfreedom is slavery; and slavery is the extinction of all rights, theright to life included. And woman has equal rights with man. Andchildren have equal rights with either. The idea that human beings haveno rights till they are twenty-one, is monstrous. What mighty change isit that takes place at the moment a person reaches the age oftwenty-one, that he should be a slave a moment before, and a free man amoment after? No change at all takes place. The rights of a human beingare the gift of Nature, and not the gift of the law. Who authorized mento make laws for one another? In making men different from each other, Nature has made it impossible for one man to legislate wisely foranother. The majority have a right to rule themselves, but they have nofight to rule the minority. All rights are the rights of individuals, and the rights of individuals composing a minority, are the same as therights of individuals composing a majority. A man may elect arepresentative; but he cannot be bound by a representative elected byothers. Children should be educated, not by force or authority, but byattraction. The assumption of authority over a child by a parent isusurpation; the use of authority over a child is tyranny. Theindividuality of a child is its life, and life is sacred. To destroyindividuality is murder. We have no right to take Nature's place, andmake a human being something different from what she has formed him. Solomon's rod and Paul's authority are alike immoral. All should begoverned by their attractions, like the orbs of heaven, and theconstituents of the earth. The law of Nature is one, both for living menand dead matter. Our sympathies and affinities are our only rulers. Theyare ourselves, --our best selves, --and to allow either law or ruler tointerfere with them, is self-destruction. We are no longer ourselveswhen we allow ourselves to be controlled by the will or power ofanother. Animals have equal rights with man. The poet was right when hesaid, "Take not away the life thou canst not give, For all things have an equal right to live. "

How _can_ man have a right to take away the life of an animal? The loweranimals occupied the world before man, and man, a later comer, could notabrogate the prior rights of his predecessors. The use of animal food isunnatural. It is unhealthy. In feeding on other living creatures mandegrades, corrupts, and then destroys himself. And vegetables, grains, and fruits should be taken in their natural state. The art of cooking isan unnatural innovation. The first of our race did not cook. Man is theonly cooking animal, and he is the only sickly one. He is the only onethat loses his teeth, or suffers from indigestion. Teetotalism isbinding on all. Alcohol is an unnatural product. Man is the only beingunnatural enough to drink it. Grapes are good, and so is grain; butwine, and beer, and spirits, are a trinity of devils, which destroy thebodies and torment the souls of unnatural men. "There is no God, " saidone. "Gods and devils are alike fantastic creatures of the erring mindof man. " "But there _must_ be a God, " said another. "All nature criesaloud there is a God. Our own hearts' instincts--our highestintuitions, --assure us there is. As well deny the universe, and theprimal intuitions of humanity, as the being of God. A God and a futurelife are necessities of human nature. And there is, _without_ us, asupply for every want _within_ us. As soon will you find a race ofbeings with appetites for food, for whom no food is provided, as a racewith longings for God and desires for immortality, while no God andimmortality exist to meet those longings, to satisfy those desires. ""But if there be a God to answer to our longings, and a blessedimmortality to satisfy our desires, why not a devil to answer to ourfears, and a hell to answer to our guilty terrors? And would a God leaveus without a revelation of his will. " "The instincts of our nature arethe revelation of God's will. To obey our instincts is to obey the lawof God. " "Then is the law of God as various as men's natural tendencies?Does the murderer, whose tendency is to kill, obey the law of God, aswell as the victim who struggles to escape his doom? And does the eagleobey the law of God in pouncing on the dove, and the dove in seeking toevade its talons? Is every tendency the law of God? If it be the will ofGod that the powerful tendencies of some should neutralize the feeblertendencies of others, is not might, right? And if might be right, whymurmur at anything that is? For everything that is, exists by virtue ofits might: and every thing that perishes, perishes in virtue of itsweakness. Are you not sanctioning the doctrine of the Optimist, andsaying with Pope, "In spite of sense, in erring reason's spite, One truth is clear--whatever _is_, is RIGHT. "

"Whatever is, _is_ right, " says another. "It is the result of eternalwisdom, of almighty power, and infinite love. God is all perfect, and Heis all in all. A perfect God could have nothing short of a perfectobject in all His works, a perfect motive prompting Him, a perfect ruleto guide Him; and, as the author of all existence, a perfect materialout of which to make the creatures of His love. All is perfect. It ismen's own imperfection that makes them think otherwise. " "All isperfect, " you say, "yet man is _imperfect_; and his imperfection makeshim think other things imperfect. All is perfect, yet something isimperfect; and that something is the most perfect or the least imperfectcreature in existence. " "Imperfection itself is a part of perfection, "says the Optimist. "As discords are necessary to the highest musicalcompositions; so imperfection is necessary to the highest perfection. "

"The most difficult point of all, " says a philosophical Unitarian, "isthat of necessity. Every thing must have a cause. Man's actions are theresult of physical causes; yet man is consciously free. " "Man is no morefree than the planets, " says an Atheist. "He _acts_ freely, as theplanets do, --that is, he acts in harmony with his tendencies, --inharmony with the causes of his actions, --the causes of his actions causethem by causing him to will them, by inclining him to do them; and thecauses of planetary action produce that action in the same way: but thefreedom and the necessity are the same in the one case as in the other. All is free, and all is bound. The chain is infinite, eternal, andalmighty. The difference between man and a planet is, that man isconscious of his acts, and the planet is not. " "Then duty is a dream, "said a third, "and conscience a delusion; and responsibility a fiction;and virtue and vice are alike unworthy of either praise or blame, rewardor punishment. " "A tree is not responsible, " said the Necessitarian, "yet we cut it down, if it bears no fruit; and we cut off the naturalbranches, and insert new scions, if its fruit is not to our liking. Amusquito is irresponsible, yet we kill it when it gives us pain. A horseis irresponsible, yet we caress it when it gives us pleasure. " "So manis no more than a tree, a musquito, or a horse! And selfishness is themeasure of our duty! We caress or kill as we are pleased or pained. " Andso the conversation ran on in one party. 

In another the Bible is the subject of conversation. But here all areagreed on the principal point. No one regards it as of supernaturalorigin, or of Divine authority. The question is, whether theAnti-Slavery Society shall acknowledge that the clergy are right insaying that the Bible sanctions Slavery. "That it does sanction Slaveryis certain, " says one. "Abraham was a slave-holder, a slave-trader, anda slave-breeder. Isaac inherited his slave property. Jacob had slaves, and had offspring by two of them. Moses allows the Jews to buy up thenations round about them, and to hold them as slaves, as a _possession_, and to transmit them as an inheritance to their children for ever. TheDecalogue recognizes slaves as property. Jesus never condemnsslave-holding, and Paul returns a fugitive, to his master. Take theclergy at their word. Acknowledge that their sacred book does sanctionSlavery. Acknowledge that it allows a master to flog his slave to death, on the ground that the slave is his money. Acknowledge too that itallows the slave-holder to make his female slaves his concubines. Acknowledge every thing. Take the preachers' side in the matter, and youwill shock the preachers, and you will shock the public, and cause themto give up the defence of Slavery. " "The slave-holders are not governedby the Bible, " says another. "Their appeal to it is only a pretence, --an_argumentum ad hominem_. They favor Slavery because it is profitable, and because they like it. Make it unprofitable, and they will soon finda different interpretation for the Bible. " "Show that the Bible is noauthority, --that it is merely a human book, --and you take away theirargument for Slavery, " said one. "Their argument is force, " saidanother, "and you will never abolish Slavery till you take up arms andcrush the tyrants. " "But the Bible is the question, " says a third. "Calla Convention to discuss the Bible, " said I, and the Convention wasaccordingly called. 

And thus the conversation ran in private circles, during the intervalsof the public meetings. 

I had supposed, that as the people of America had got a Democratic formof government, no further reforms were necessary, except the Abolitionof Slavery. I now found however that there were more Reformers, and agreater variety of Reformers, in the circle into which I had fallen, than in England. There was nothing right, --nothing as it ought to be. The family, the church, the school, the government, religion, morals, and even nature were all wrong. The world was full of prejudice. We wereheirs of all the mistakes of our forefathers for a thousand generations. "Every thing wants destroying, " said one, "that every thing may becreated anew. " The oracle of the universe cries, "Behold, I make allthings new;" and that oracle we ought to echo; and on that oracle weought to act. "'When I was a child, I thought as a child, I spoke as achild, I understood as a child; but when I became a man, I put awaychildish things. ' Such was the language of the great Reformer ofantiquity. The human race should adopt the same language, and follow thegreat example. The race should say, 'When _I_ was a child, _I_ thoughtas a child, _I_ spoke as a child, _I_ understood as a child; but now, having become a man, _I_ will put away childish things. ' I will put awaymy childish thoughts on religion, on science, on morals, on government, on education, on marriage, on slavery, on war, on every thing. The factthat they are old, is a proof they are wrong. The clothes which fit achild _cannot_ fit a man. The notions, the institutions, the laws, whichwere good for the world's infancy, cannot be good for its manhood. " "Andthey _shall_ be put away, so far as I am concerned, " said a lady. "Andthey shall be put away, so far as I am concerned, " answered another. "Yeare born again, " says a third. "That noble declaration proves you newcreatures. Old things are passed away; behold, all things _are_ becomenew. "

A thousand wild sentiments were uttered; a thousand extravagant thingswere said; and many unwise things were done. It was plain that a licenseof thought was preparing the way, had already prepared the way, for alicense of deed. This license produced a fearful amount of mischiefbefore long. It had produced no little then. Many a domesticschism, --many a disgraceful alliance, --many a broken heart, --were theresult of those lawless, wanton speculations. 

And some came to see their folly and repented in part. Lucy Stonedeclared she would never marry according to law; but she marriedaccording to law in the end, contenting herself with recording a vainand foolish protest. Harriet K. Hunt would never pay any more taxes tillshe was allowed to vote, and was eligible to the Presidency of theUnited States. Whether she has paid her tax or not we do not know; butshe has not yet got a vote, and is certainly not yet the President ofthe United States. Mrs. C. L. Made a declaration, the publication ofwhich covered her hard-working and excellent husband with shame; but shetoo has since seen her error, and endeavored to make all things right. 

It was rather amusing, but somewhat startling, --it was very bewildering, yet very instructive, --to listen to all the projects and theories of amultitude of thoughtful people, suddenly emancipated from religion andmoral obligation, and from law and custom, and to speculate on whatmight be the result of so much extravagance. It put humanity before onein a new light. It was a new revelation. And all those people wereeducated up to the American standard. And they were all in tolerablecircumstances. Some were rich, and most were owners of the lands onwhich they lived. Several of them had been ministers of the Gospel. Manyof them were authors. And their appearance and manners were often equalto those of the best. And some of them could hardly be excelled aspublic speakers. Some of the lady speakers were the best I ever heard. After mingling in such society, and witnessing such a strange breakingup of "the fountains of the great deep" of thought, and fancy, andanimal passion, it is hard to say what might not take place in theworld, if the spirit of infidel reform which is pervading the nationsshould become general. 

I returned to my home neither a better nor a wiser man. But I was fullof thought. I had been afraid that in the excitement of controversy, andunder the smart of persecution, I had gone too far. But here were peoplewho had gone immeasurably farther. I was afraid I had been too rash. Buthere were pleasant looking and educated people, compared with whom I wasthe perfection of sobriety. And the sense of my comparative moderationquieted my fears, prevented salutary investigation, and prepared me togo still farther in the way of doubt. New books were placed in my hands, all favorable to anti-christian views. I got new friends andacquaintances, and all were of the doubting, unbelieving class. Severalof them were atheists, and insinuated doubts with regard to thefoundation of all religious belief. Till my settlement in America I hadcontinued to believe, not only in God, and providence, and prayer, butin immortality; and to look on Atheism as the extreme of folly. But nowmy faith in those doctrines began to be shaken. Instead of drawing backfrom the gulf of utter unbelief, and retracing my steps toward Christ asI had partly hoped, I got farther astray; and though I did not plungeheadlong into Atheism, I came near to the dreadful abyss, and was not alittle bewildered with the horrible mists that floated round its brink. 

Thus my hopes of calm and quiet thought, and of a sober reconsiderationof the steps I had taken in the path of doubt and unbelief, were all, alas! exploded, and the last state of my soul was worse than the first. 

To make things worse, I got into trouble with my Christian neighbors. Myalienation from Christ had already produced in me a deterioration ofcharacter. I was not exactly aware of it at the time, and if I had beentold of it, I might not have been able to believe it; but such wasreally the case. The matter is clear to me now past doubt. I had becomeless courteous, less conciliatory, less agreeable. I had discarded, tosome extent, the Christian doctrines of meekness and humility. My temperhad suffered. I was sooner provoked, and was less forgiving, I was moreprompt in asserting my rights, and more prone perhaps to regard asrights what were no such things. And I made myself enemies inconsequence, and got into unhappy disputes and painful excitements. 

I imagined, I suppose, while in England, that the disturbers of my peacewere all outside me, and that when I went to America I should leave themall behind; but I see now that many of them were within me, and that Icarried them with me over the sea, to my far-off Western home. And theygave me as much trouble in my new abode as they had given me in my oldone. It is the state of our minds that determines the measure of ourbliss. As Burns says, "If happiness have not her seat And centre in the breast, We may be wise, or rich, or great, But never can be blest. No treasures, nor pleasures. Can make us happy long; The _heart_ ay's the part ay That makes us right or wrong. "

And my heart was out of tune, and tended to put everything around me outof tune. 

CHAPTER XVI. 

THE STORY OF MY DESCENT FROM THE FAITH OF MY CHILDHOOD, TO DOUBT ANDUNBELIEF. 

My parents were Methodists of the strictest kind, and they did theirutmost to make their children Methodists. And they were very successful. They had eleven children, ten of which became members of the MethodistSociety before they were twenty years of age; and even the odd one didnot escape the influence of religion altogether. 

I was a believer in God and Christ, in duty and immortality, from myearliest days. And my faith was strong. Things spiritual were as real tome as things natural. Things seen and things unseen, things temporal andthings eternal, formed one great whole, --one solemn and boundlessuniverse. I lived and breathed in a spiritual world. 

My parents were rigorously consistent. They were true Christians. Theynot only talked, but looked and lived as persons who felt themselves inthe presence of a great and holy God, and in the face of an awfuleternity; and the influence of their godly life, and daily prayers, andsolemn counsels fell on me with a power that was irresistible. 

If the doctrine taught me in my early days had been the doctrine ofChrist, and the doctrine of Christ alone, in a form adapted to myyouthful mind, the probability is, that I should have grown up tomanhood, and passed through life a happy, useful and consistentChristian. But I was taught other doctrines. Though my father and mothertaught me little but what was Christian, doctrines were taught me byothers that shocked both my reason and my sense of right. I was taught, among other things, that in consequence of the sin of Adam, God hadcaused me to come into the world utterly depraved, and incapable, till Iwas made over again, of thinking one good thought, of speaking one goodword, or of doing one good deed. I felt that I did think good thoughts, and that I had good feelings, and that I both said and did good things. But this I was told was a great delusion:--that nothing was good, andthat nothing was pleasing to God, unless it came from faith in Christ. But I _had_ faith in Christ. I believed in Him with all my heart. I hadbelieved in Him from the first. The answer was that I had believed witha _common_ kind of faith, but that it was another kind of faith that wasnecessary to salvation, and that whatsoever did not spring from thisother kind of faith, was sin. And I was given to understand, that if Ithought otherwise, it was because of the naughtiness of my heart, which, I was told, was deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked. Whatthis other kind of faith was, I did not know, and could not learn. I wasthen told that the natural man could not understand the things of theSpirit, and that before I could understand them, I must experience achange from nature to grace; all of which was past my comprehension. Iwas then informed that I must wait till God revealed those things untome by His Spirit. But this made the matter no plainer. 

I was further taught, that I was, in some way, answerable for Adam'ssin, --that God made Adam the federal head of all mankind, and that allwere bound by what he did;--that if he had done right, all would havecome into the world pure, and good, and happy, and sure of eternal life;but that through his sin, we wore all born, not only utterly depraved, but guilty and liable to eternal damnation. 

Then followed strange things about satisfaction to offended justice, trust in Christ's merits and righteousness, justification, regeneration, and sanctification, all mysteries as dark to me as night. 

Sometime after, I found in my Catechism the doctrine of God's absoluteand infinite fore-knowledge, --the doctrine that from eternity God knewwho should be saved and who should be lost. This gave me the mostterrible shock of all. It was plain that my doom was fixed forever. Forif it was certainly foreknown, it must he unchangeably fixed. 

These dreadful doctrines filled me with horror. They all but drove memad. For a time, when I was about eight or nine years old, they _did_drive me mad. They were more than my nature could bear. I felt that ifthings were as these doctrines represented them to be, the ways of Godwere horribly unjust. And as I could do no other than believe thedoctrines, my whole soul rose in rebellion against God. I supposed, as amatter of course, that I should be sent to hell for my rebelliousness;still I rebelled. It seemed a dreadful thing that God should hang one'seternal destiny on things that were not in one's own power. I thoughtthat if people could not do all that God required of them, He ought toallow them to fall back into their original nothingness. My mindespecially revolted against the arrangement which God was said to havemade with Adam, and the terrible consequences entailed thereby on hisposterity. To bring men into being, and force them to live on forever, and at the same time to hang their eternal destiny on another, or onsomething beyond their power, seemed dreadfully unjust. I felt thatevery man ought to be allowed a fair trial for himself, and to stand orfall by his own doings. And nothing could make me feel that I was reallyanswerable for the sin of Adam, any more than that Adam was answerablefor my sins. And how God could impute one man's sin to another, was pastall comprehension. And I felt, that if matters were managed as they wererepresented to be, the government of the universe was not right. 

But supposing that God had a right to do as He pleased, and not knowingthat He was so good that it was impossible that He should ever please todo wrong, I suffered in silence. But I often said to myself, 'God doesnot deal fairly with mankind, ' and my feelings towards Him were anythingbut those of love and gratitude. So far was I from feeling anyobligation to Him, that I looked on my existence as a tremendous curse, and I would gladly have consented to undergo any amount of torment, forany length of time short of eternity, for the privilege of being allowedto return to my original nothingness. The thought that even this was toomuch to be hoped for, --that it was fixed unchangeably that I must liveon forever, and that there was but one dark path, which I might never beable to find, by which I could escape the unbounded and unendingtorments of hell, darkened all the days of my early youth, and made meexceedingly miserable. Some kind of blind unbelief, or a partialspiritual slumber at length came over me, and made it possible for me tolive. But even then my life was anything but a happy one. 

I cannot give the story of my life at length; but I afterwards got overthe difficulties of my early creed, or exchanged the blasphemous horrorsof theology for the teachings of Christ, and became a cheerful, joyousChristian, and a happy and successful Christian minister. 

As I have said in Chapter fourteenth, I regarded the Bible as the Wordof God from my early childhood. I believed every word to be true, andevery command to be binding. My faith, at first, rested on the testimonyof my parents and teachers, and of those among whom I lived. Every one Iheard speak of the Book, spoke of it as divine, and the thought that itmight be otherwise did not, that I remember, ever enter my mind. This myhereditary faith in the Bible was strengthened by the instinctivetendencies of my mind to believe in God, and in all the great doctrineswhich the book inculcated. 

The first attempt to _prove_ the divinity of the Bible, of which I haveany recollection, was made by my mother, while I was yet a child. What_led_ her to make the attempt I do not remember. It might be someperplexing question that I had asked her; for I used to propose to herpuzzling questions sometimes. Her argument was, --'Bad men _could_ notwrite such a book, and good men _would_ not. It must therefore, havebeen written by God. ' Another argument that I remember to have heard inthose days was, --'No man would write the Bible who did not know it to betrue; because it tells liars that their portion will be in the lake offire and brimstone. ' There was also an impression among such people asmy parents, that the Bible was so good a book, and that it wrought withsuch a blessed power upon their souls, that it was impossible it shouldbe written by any one but God. The last had probably the greatest effectupon their minds. Then they found in the Bible so many things in harmonywith their best affections, their moral instincts, and their religiousfeelings, that they felt as if they had proof of its heavenly origin intheir own souls. I came, at one period of my life, to look on thesearguments with contempt. And it is certain, that to give them much forcewith men of logical habits, they would require qualification, andconsiderable illustration. But they are none of them so foolish as Ionce supposed. As for the last two, they are, when presented in a properway, unanswerable. 

There was another argument that was sometimes used, namely, --that thoughthe different portions of the Bible were written by persons of widelydistant ages, of different occupations and ranks, and of very differentdegrees of culture, they all aim at one end, all bear one way, and alltend to make men good and happy to the last degree. This is a greatfact, and when properly considered, may well be accepted as a proof thatthe Bible, as a whole, is from God. 

What effect these arguments had on my mind in my early days, I do notexactly remember, but the probability is, that they helped to strengthenmy instinctive and hereditary faith in the divine origin of the Bible. 

This my instinctive and hereditary faith was a great and beneficentpower, and would have proved an inestimable blessing, if it had beenpreserved unshaken through life. And I am sorry it was not. I have nosympathy with those who speak of doubt as a blessing, and who recommendpeople to demolish their first belief, that they may raise a betterstructure in its place. We do not destroy our first and lower life, toprepare the way for a higher spiritual life. Nor do we kill the body tosecure the development of the soul. Nor do we extinguish our naturalhome affections, in order to kindle the fires of friendship, patriotism, and philanthropy. The higher life grows out of the lower. The lowernourishes and sustains the higher. At first we are little more thanvegetables: then we become animals: then men; and last of all, sages, saints, and angels. But the vegetable nature lives through all, and isthe basis and strength of the animal; and the animal nature lives, andis the basis and strength of the human; and the human lives, and is thebasis and strength of the spiritual and divine. And the higher forms oflife are all the more perfect, for the vigor and fulness of those bywhich they are preceded. 

And so with faith. Instinctive faith is the proper basis for the faiththat comes from testimony. And the faith which rests on testimony is theproper basis for that which comes from reason, investigation, experience, and knowledge. And in no case ought the first to bedemolished to make way for the second, or the second discarded to makeway for the third. To kill a tree in order to graft on it new scions, would be madness; and to kill, or discard, or in any way to slight orinjure our first instinctive child-like faith, to graft on our souls ahigher one, would be equal madness. 

Our instincts are infallible. The faith to which they constrain us isalways substantially right and true, and no testimony, no reasonings, nophilosophy, ought to be allowed to set it aside. Testimony, and science, and experience, may be allowed to develop it, enlighten it, and modifyit, but not to displace or destroy it. It is a divine inspiration, andis essential to the life and vigor of the soul, to the beauty andperfection of the character, and to the fulness and enjoyment of life. If you lose it, you will have to find it again, or be wretched. If youkill it, you will have to bring it to life again, or perish. It is anecessary support of all other faith, and a needful part of allreligion, of all virtue, and of all philosophy. Skeptics may call itprejudice; but it is a kind of prejudice which, as Burke very trulysays, is wiser than all our reasonings. 

I did not fall out with my instinctive belief, though I did not know itsvalue; but I was so formed, that I longed for proofs or corroborating ofits truth. I wanted to be able to do something more, when questioned bydoubters or unbelievers as to the grounds of my faith, than to say, 'I_feel_ that it is true;' or to refer to the testimony of my parents andteachers; and I did not rest till I could do so. 

I had a dear, good friend, Mr. Hill, a schoolmaster, a local preacher, and a scholar, who, believing that I had talents to fit me for atravelling preacher, and desiring to prepare me for that high office, kindly undertook to aid me in my studies. After he had taught mesomething of English grammar, he began to teach me Latin. When he hadgot me through the elementary books, and exercised me well in one of theRoman historians, he lent me a copy of Grotius, on the truth of theChristian religion, and recommended me to translate it into English, andthen to translate it back again into Latin. 'It contains the bestarguments, ' said he, 'in favor of Christianity, and it is written inpure and elegant Latin; and by the course I recommend, you will bothimprove yourself greatly in Latin, and obtain a large amount of usefulreligious knowledge. '

I did as I was bid, and the result was truly delightful. I found in thebook proofs both of the existence of God, and of the truth ofChristianity, which seemed to me most decisive. When I had got throughthe book, I felt as if I could convince the whole infidel world. Bytranslating the work first into English and then back into Latin, andrepeating my translations to my teacher without manuscript, I got thewhole book, with all its train of reasoning, so fixed in mind, that Iwas able to produce the arguments whenever I found it necessary. Icould, in fact, repeat almost the whole work from beginning to end. 

I can hardly describe the pleasure I felt when I found that my faith hada solid foundation to rest upon, --that after having believedinstinctively, and on the testimony of my parents and teachers, I couldboth justify my faith to my own mind, and give sound reasons for it toany who might question me on the subject. 

I afterwards got Watson's Theological Institutes, which amplified someof the arguments of Grotius, and added fresh ones. Here too I foundlarge quotations from Howe's LIVING TEMPLE, an argument for theexistence of God drawn from the wonderful structure of the human body, and considerable portions of Paley's work on NATURAL THEOLOGY. About the same time I read the Lectures of Doddridge, which gave me amore comprehensive view than either Grotius or Watson, both of theevidences of the existence of God, and those of the truth ofChristianity. I afterwards met with Dwight's Theology, in which I founda number of things which interested me, though some of his reasoningsseemed mere metaphysical fallacies. 

I next read Adam Clarke's Commentary, where I found, besides hisarguments for the existence of God, abundance of quotations from Paley, Lardner, Michælis, and others, on the credibility of the New Testamenthistory, and the truth of Christianity. His _a priori_ argument for theexistence of God seemed only a play on words. His other arguments weremuch the same as Watson's. 

About this time I read Mosheim's History of the Church. This did meharm. It is a bad book. It is, in truth, no real history of the Churchat all, but a miserable chronicle of the heresies, inconsistencies andcrimes of the worldly and priestly party in the Church, who pervertedthe religion of Christ to worldly, selfish purposes. The whole tendencyof the book is to put the sweet image of Christ and the glories of Hisreligion, out of sight, and to present to you in their place, adistressing picture of human weakness and human wickedness. It is agreat pity that this wretched pretence to a church history was not longago displaced by a work calculated to do some justice, and to rendersome service, to the cause of Christ. 

I afterwards read works in favor of Christianity and against infidelity, by Robert Hall, Olinthus Gregory, Dr. Chalmers, Le Clerc, HartwellHorne, S. Thompson, Bishop Watson, Bishop Pearson, Bishop Porteus. Ialso read Leland's View of Deistical Writers, Leslie's Short and EasyMethod with Deists, Faber's Difficulties of Infidelity, Fuller's Gospelits Own Witness, Butler's Analogy, Baxter's Unreasonableness ofInfidelity, and his Evidences of Christianity, Simpson's Plea forReligion and the Sacred Writings, Ryan on the Beneficial Effects ofChristianity, Cave on the Early Christians, the Debate between R. Owenand A. Campbell, Scotch Lectures, G. Campbell on Miracles, Ray's Wisdomof God in Creation, Constable's History of Converts from Infidelity, Newton on the Prophecies, Locke on the Reasonableness of Christianity, Nelson on the Cause and Cure of Infidelity, Priestley's Institutes ofNatural and Revealed Religion, Jews' Letters to Voltaire, and works byBeattie, Soame Jenyns, West, Lyttleton, Ogilvie, Addison, GilbertWakefield and others. I also read sermons on different branches of theevidences, by Tillotson, Barrow, and others. One of the last and one ofthe best works I read on the Evidences of Christianity, were somesermons by Dr. Channing. These sermons presented the historical argumentin a simpler and more impressive form than any work I had ever read. 

This reading of works on the evidences did not prove an unmixedblessing. I am not certain that it did not prove a serious injury. 

1. In the first place, the works I read weakened, in time, and thendestroyed, my instinctive and hereditary faith, and gave me nothing sosatisfactory in its place. They filled my mind with thoughts of thingsoutside me, and even outside Christianity itself, which did not take afirm and lasting hold of my affections. They seemed to take me fromsolid ground and living realities, into regions of cold, thin air, andbewildering mists and clouds. 

2. In the second place, the writers disagreed among themselves. Theydiffered as to the value of different kinds of evidence. Some were allfor external evidences, and some were all for internal evidences. Somesaid there was no such thing as internal evidence. 'The very idea ofsuch a thing, ' said they, 'supposes that man is able to judge whatdoctrines are true, or rational, or worthy of God; and what precepts, laws, institutions, and examples are right and good; and man has no suchpower. Reason has no right to judge revelation. All that reason has aright to do is to judge as to the matter of fact whether the Bible andChristianity be really a revelation from God or not, and, if it be, whatis its purport. As to the reasonableness of the doctrines, and thegoodness of the precepts, reason has no right or power to judge at all. '

Others contended that miracles could never prove the truth or divinityof any system of doctrines or morals that did not commend itself to thejudgments and consciences of enlightened, candid, and virtuous men. These two parties, between them, condemned both kinds of evidence. 

3. Then thirdly; some used unsound arguments. They used argumentsfounded on mistakes with regard to matters of fact. Grotius, forinstance, based two of his arguments for the existence of God onmisconceptions of this kind. 'That there is a God, ' said Grotius, 'isevident from the fact, that water, which naturally runs downward to thelevel of the sea, is made to run upwards through subterranean channels, from the sea to the tops of the mountains, and thus supply springs andstreams to water the earth, and supply the wants of its inhabitants. 'But the waters are _not_ forced upwards from the sea to the mountains inthis way: they are carried to the hills in the form of vapors. 

True, the evidence for the existence of God supplied by the conversionof water into vapor, and by the many beneficent ends answered thereby, is as real and as convincing a proof of God's existence as any evidencethat could have been furnished by such an arrangement as that imaginedby Grotius. But I did not see this at the time; hence the discovery thatthe argument of Grotius was unsound, had an unfavorable effect on mymind. 

'Again, ' says Grotius, 'it is plain that the world must have had abeginning, from the existence of mountains. For if the earth had existedfrom eternity, the mountains, which the rains and floods are alwaysreducing, washing down particles into the valleys and plains, would longago have disappeared, and every part of the earth would long before thishave been quite level. ' Here was another error. Grotius was not aware, it would seem, that there are forces continually at work in the interiorof the earth making _new_ mountains, --that some portions of the earthare continually rising, and others gradually subsiding. 

4. Several of the arguments which I met with in Doddridge's great work Ifound to be unsound. And there were others which, if I did not discoverto be fallacious, I felt to be unsatisfactory. They were, in truth, as Iafterwards found, mere metaphysical puzzles. 

5. Among the most honest and earnest works on the evidences that came inmy way, were those of Richard Baxter. But many of his arguments wereunsatisfactory. Among other things of doubtful value, he gave a numberof ghost stories, and accounts of witches and their doings, and ofpersons possessed by evil spirits, and even of men and women who hadsold themselves to the devil, and who had been seized and carried awayby him bodily, in the presence of their neighbors and friends. Thensome of his arguments took for granted points of importance which I wasparticularly anxious to have proved. Much of his reasoning seemedconclusive enough, but when sound and unsound arguments are so blendedin the same book, the unsound ones seem to lessen the credit and theforce of the sound ones. 

On the subject of the evidences, Baxter, like Grotius, was behind thetimes. His works might be satisfactory enough to people of his own day, but they were not adapted to the minds of people of the present day. 

6. The works of Paley and Butler gave me the greatest satisfaction. Paley, both in his Natural Theology and in his evidences ofChristianity, seemed to be almost all that I could desire, and I restedin him for a length of time with great satisfaction. But I read him onlyonce, and I ought, for a time at least, to have made him my daily study, and imprinted his work on my mind, as I did the work of Grotius. 

7. Many writers on the Bible attempted to settle points which could notbe settled. They tried to make out the authors of all the books in theBible, and this was found impossible. Different writers ascribed booksto different authors. The Book of Job was ascribed by one writer to Jobhimself, by another to Moses, and by a third to Elihu. The Book ofEcclesiastes was ascribed by some to Solomon, by others to a writer of alater age. Writers differed with regard to the authorship of many of thePsalms and many of the Proverbs. They differed with regard to the authorof the Epistle to the Hebrews, and the Book of Revelation, and even withregard to some of the Gospels. They multiplied controversies instead ofending them, and in some cases made matters seem doubtful that were notso. 

8. The writers on evidences often attempted to prove points which werenot true, and which, if they had been true, would have been no credit tothe Bible or Christianity. Some of them spent more time in laboring toprove that Christianity taught doctrines which it did not teach, than inproving that the doctrines which it did teach were 'worthy of allacceptation. ' Some left the impression that Christianity was a mass ofvain, improbable, and incomprehensible doctrines, calculated neither tosatisfy man's intellect nor his conscience, neither to renovate hisheart, nor improve his life, nor increase his happiness. Such writersserved the cause of infidelity rather than the cause of Christ. 

9. Some, like Hartwell Horne, gave so many rules for interpreting theBible, and required such a multitude of rare qualifications to fit a manfor being a Bible student, that they left the impression on one's mindthat the Book must be utterly unintelligible to people at large. Andthey directed the attention of their readers so much to matters oflittle or no moment, that they lost sight of the matters which the Biblewas specially intended to teach and impress on men's minds and hearts. 

10. Many dwelt so much on things doubtful, that they left the impressionon the minds of their readers, that there was little or nothing but what_was_ doubtful. They busied themselves so much in answering objections, that they left the impression that there was little or nothing but whatwas open to objections. They had so little to say about what was true, and good, and glorious beyond all question, that they left people indoubt whether there was any thing past question or controversy inChristianity or not. 

11. And many treated the subject so coolly or carelessly, that theyabated rather than increased the interest of their readers in religiousmatters. 

12. And the great mass of writers followed one another soservilely, --they wrote so much by rote, and so little from experience orreal knowledge, that all seemed cold and formal, uninteresting andunprofitable. It was a rare thing to come across a writer that touchedthe heart, or even satisfied the judgment. 

13. And they often labored hard and long to prove points of little or noimportance, while points of greatest moment were left untouched, orhandled so unskillfully as to do harm rather than good. 

14. And almost all had unauthorized and unscriptural theories ofScripture inspiration, which it was impossible for them to prove, andwhich they so manifestly failed to prove, that a critical reader couldnot but see their failure. They tried to justify expressions and actionswhich could not be justified, and to reconcile differences which didnot admit of reconciliation. 

15. Even the historical arguments of Paley and Grotius consisted of somany particulars, and carried one so far back into regions with whichone was so imperfectly acquainted, and into states of society which itwas so difficult for one to realize, that it was impossible they shouldhave much power over the heart; and the little they had was soon lost, when their books were laid aside. Even when we remembered the facts, andcould run them over in our minds, we could not feel the force of theargument based on them, or use it so as to make it felt by others. 

The historical argument drawn from miracles never exerted muchsatisfying power on my mind for any length of time. I could rememberthat it _had_ satisfied me once, but that was not to feel its satisfyingpower then. And you could not go back to your books continually, andpore over the arguments forever. So that long before I became a doubter, I felt that the historical argument could never be useful to peoplegenerally, either in producing faith where it was not, or inperpetuating it where it was. I was sure that if mankind at large wereto be brought to receive and cherish Christianity, it must be by proofsof a simpler and more popular kind, which people could feel, and carryalong with them in their hearts as well as in their heads. And now I seemost clearly that I was right. Miracles had a use, and I may show whatit was by and by; but it was not the use to which they have been sooften and so vainly applied. 

16. The writers on prophecy were as unsatisfactory as those on miracles. They often handled the prophecies unfairly if not deceitfully. Theytreated as absolute prophecies, prophecies which were expresslyconditional. And they lost sight of the fact, so plainly stated inJeremiah xviii, that all prophetic promises and threatenings areconditional. Then they took one bit of a prophecy and left another: keptout of sight predictions which had not been fulfilled, and dweltexclusively on phrases which had been fulfilled. 

They dealt deceitfully with history as well as prophecy. They made ormodified facts. They gave fanciful interpretations to prophecies. Andthey tried to make prophecy prove what it could not prove, howeverunquestionable and miraculous the fulfilment might be. The manner inwhich Nelson and Keith dealt with prophecy was often childish, and evendishonest. A careful examination of their works left a most painfulimpression on my mind. 

What Albert Barnes says about much of the reasoning of preachers anddivines is applicable to this class of writers more than to some others. 'A great part of the reasoning founded upon prophecies is unsound. Muchof the reasoning employed by the early Christian Fathers, by theSchoolmen, and by the Reformers had no intrinsic force: it was based onignorance and error. Yet theologians are prone to cling to it. Theyforget the age in which they live. They linger, they live, among theshades of the past. Their thoughts, their dialect, their way ofreasoning are all of other days. 

'The quality of another kind of reasoning common among divines is, thatit is not understood by the mass of men, and that it does not seem to beunderstood by those who use it. '

17. In the following paragraph he speaks important words about theologyas well as about theological reasoning. 

'There is much theology, ' says he, 'that a good man cannot preach. Itwould shock his own feelings; it would contradict his prayers; it wouldbe fatal to all his efforts to do good; it would drive off the sinner toa hopeless distance, though he had begun to return to God; it would beat war with the elementary convictions which men have of what must betrue. Among the doctrines of this theology are those, --that Christ diedfor the salvation of only a part of mankind, --that we are to blame forAdam's sin, --condemned for an act done ages before we were born. 

'The theology that should be preached to make the pulpit what it shouldbe, should be based on obvious and honest principles of Scriptureinterpretation. The preacher is the interpreter of a book, and he shouldbe the voice, the organ, of its true and natural meaning. Nothing shouldbe misquoted; nothing should be perverted or misapplied. Hisinterpretation should be seen and felt to be in harmony with the scope, the drift, the spirit, the aim of the Bible. The success of preachinghas been greatly hindered by false principles of Biblicalinterpretation. In interpreting other books men have gone on rationalprinciples; but in interpreting the Bible they have gone on principlesquite irrational. They have sought for double senses, and mysticalmeanings, and used texts as proofs of doctrines, that had no referenceto the doctrines whatever. Metaphors and symbols have had all possiblemeanings forced on them. Infidels and men of the world are approachedwith arguments that are little less than insults to theirunderstandings. They are disgusted, instead of being convinced. They areled to look on the Bible with disdain. They are willing to remaininfidels, rather than become idiots. One is pained and sickened thatsuch a multitude of impertinent and inapplicable texts should be broughtas proofs of Christian doctrine;--texts applicable to anything elserather than the points under consideration. Even Dr. Edwards misusestexts of Scripture thus. The Bible is to be interpreted as other booksare. Men are not to hide themselves in the mist of a hidden meaning, andshock the common sense of the world. Preachers should go on thesupposition, that in every congregation there are shrewd and sagaciousmen, who can appreciate a good argument, and see the weakness of a badone; men who can appreciate a good sermon, if there be a good sermon tobe appreciated. For such, he may be assured, is the fact. '

All these unwise things had a tendency to shake my faith in writers onthe evidences, to lessen my interest in the subject, to abate myconfidence in the knowledge and integrity of the authors, and todiminish my faith in the supernatural origin of the Bible andChristianity. 

18. The evidences that had most weight with me were the internalevidences. But these were often handled in an unsatisfactory way. Thegreater part of Soame Jenyns' little work was good, as far as it went;but it went only a very short way. It took a step or two, in the mostdifficult, doubtful, and uninviting part of the road, but it left thevast paradise of internal evidences unexplored, and even unapproached. His work was rather an apology for Christianity, proving that it was notopen to censure, than a demonstration of its incalculable worth andpower. 

I did not myself see clearly at the time, that the adaptation ofChristianity to man's wants, to man's nature, and its tendency topromote man's temporal as well as his spiritual welfare, was really aproof of its divine origin. I saw that it was a valid answer to theinfidel objection that it was useless or mischievous; but not that itwas a decisive proof of its divinity. Hence though I employed it as arefutation of infidel charges against Christianity, I never pressed itfurther. 

And though I got at length much larger views of the excellency ofChristianity than those presented by Soame Jenyns, I saw not half, I sawnot a tenth of its worth and glory. I saw not a tenth even of what I seenow. I now see there are no limits to the excellency of Christianity, orto the power of the argument supplied by its glorious character, inproof of its divinity. 

And the worth and excellency of Christianity you can carry continuallyin your mind. They present themselves whenever you open the Gospels, orlook at Jesus. They move you whenever you think of the happy effectChristianity has had on your own hearts and lives. They come to yourminds whenever you look on the prevailing vices and miseries of society, which result from a want of Christianity. They touch your heart, as wellas convince your judgment. But I neither saw them in their true lightnor in their full extent before I fell into doubt; so that they wereunable to make up for the deficiency in the external evidences, and tocheck my growing tendency to unbelief. 

19. There were other influences that helped me down to unbelief. Negative criticism, pulling things to pieces with a view to find faults, to which our modern philosophers give the fine name of _Analysis_, tendsto cause doubt about every thing. It eats out of one the very soul oftruth, of love, and of faith. It tends naturally to kill all our goodinstincts and natural affections, and to render not only religion, butphilosophy, virtue and happiness impossible. The Cartesian system ofreasoning, which begins by calling in question every thing, and whichrefuses to believe anything without formal proof, is essentiallyvicious. The man who adopts it and carries it out thoroughly, mustnecessarily become an infidel, not only in religion, but in morals andphilosophy. And he must become intolerably miserable, and destroyhimself, unless, like John S. Mill, he can find out some method ofdeceiving himself. 

And this is the system of reasoning now in vogue. This vicious system Iadopted, and it hastened my fall into unbelief as a matter of course. Not one of all the most important things on earth admits of proof inthis formal way. You cannot prove your own existence in this way. Youcannot prove the existence of the universe. You cannot prove theexistence of God. You cannot prove that there are such things as viceand virtue, good and evil. You cannot prove that men ought to marry, rear families, form governments, live in society, tell the truth, behonest, restrain their appetites and passions, or abstain from treacheryand murder. All reasonings in favor of religion, virtue, society, philosophy, must rest on assumptions, --must take a number of things forgranted, --must take for granted the truth and goodness of thoseinstincts, sentiments, and natural affections which constrain us to bereligious, social, and moral, independent of argument. All reasoning, tobe of any use, must begin, not with doubt, but belief. The reasoningthat begins with doubting every thing, and accepting nothing till it isproved by formal argument, will end in doubt of every thing that oughtto be believed. It will end, not only in Atheism, but in boundlessimmorality, and in utter wretchedness and ruin. The man who would not beundone by his logic, must pity Descartes instead of admiring him, andinstead of following him go just the contrary way. Descartes made a foolof himself, or his method of reasoning made a fool of him, the veryfirst time he used it. His very first argument was a fallacy and afolly. He pretended, first, to doubt, and then to prove, his ownexistence. His argument was, 'I think; therefore I _exist_:' as if hecould be more sure that he _thought_, than he was that he existed. Hetook his existence for granted when he said 'I think. '

20. Other things helped on the horrible change that was taking place inmy soul. I got a taste for reading a different kind of works from thosewhich I had been accustomed to read. I turned away from works onreligion and duty, and began to read the works of the critical, destructive party. I turned away even from the best practical writers ofthe orthodox school, such as Baxter, Tillotson and Barrow, and readTheodore Parker, Martineau, W. F. Newman, W. J. Fox, and Froude. I alsoread Carlyle, Emerson, and W. Mackay, the metaphysical bore, and C. Mackay, the charming, fascinating, but not Christian poet. TheodoreParker became my favorite among the prose writers. His beautiful styleand practical lessons had already reconciled me to his harsh expressionsabout the Bible, and to his contemptuous treatment of miracles; and nowI had degenerated so far that I liked him for those very faults. 

I read the writings of the American Abolitionists, all of which tendedto draw me from the Church and the Bible, and to bring me more fullyunder skeptical influences. I began to look more freely and frequentlyinto works of science, and most of those waged covert war withsupernaturalism, and sought to bring down the Bible and Christianity tothe level of ordinary human thought. All ideas of authority in books andreligious systems, in ecclesiastical and social institutions, graduallyfaded away. All ideas of superhuman authority, or divine obligation, inmarriage, in home, and in family life vanished. All things lost theirsacredness, and came down to the vulgar level of mere human opinion, orof personal interest, convenience, or pleasure. 

21. There was a change in my companions. Those who had high and holythoughts of all things, and whose meat and drink it was to do good, withdrew from me; and men and women came around me who cared only forearth and self; whose talk was of gain, and fashion, andself-indulgence; and whose desire it was to silence conscience, and tostifle thoughts of duty. 

22. I ceased to pray. I had already given up family prayer. I now gaveup private prayer. I gave up prayer altogether. I had impulses toprayer, but I resisted them. Prayer was irrational, according to the newphilosophy, and must be discarded. 

23. And praise and thanksgiving went next. What reason could there befor telling an all-wise God what you thought of Him, or how you felttowards Him? And besides, it now began to appear that God had not beenso very bountiful as to deserve either high commendation, orenthusiastic thanksgiving. 

24. I had fresh work. Politics first got into partnership with myreligion, and then turned religion out of the concern. And politics, severed from religion, soon become selfish, and even devilish. So longas Christian philanthropy occupied my thoughts and feelings, it helpedreligiousness; but when it gave way to polities, my religiousnessdeclined, languished, and died. 

25. I began to indulge in amusements. Chess, drafts, cards, concerts, theatres, and feasting asked for a portion of my time and money, and Igave it to them. I began to think of pleasure more than of usefulness;to live for myself rather than for others; and the higher virtues andreligion went down together. 

26. My position improved. I passed from poverty to comparative wealth. This helped my degeneracy. I had more abundant means of self-indulgence, and I began, though slowly, timidly, and with misgivings, andself-reproaches, and occasional fits of remorse, to use them forselfish, worldly purposes. God had given me more, so I gave Him less. Jeshurun waxed fat and kicked. Jesus knew what He was saying when Hewarned people against the danger, the deceitfulness, of riches. 

27. I was often uneasy during the decline of religion in my soul, butphilosophy had its anodynes, its soothing syrups, its dreamy, delusive, spiritual drugs. It could flatter, it could cheat, in the most approvedfashion. It could bewitch, intoxicate, and take captive the wholesoul, --judgment, conscience, fancy, everything. 

Satan can put on the appearance of an 'angel of light. ' He can talkreligion. He can talk philanthropy. He can preach the most beautifuldoctrines. He can use the most charming words. At the very moment thathe is destroying religion and virtue, he can speak of them in thehighest terms, and even sing of them in the sweetest strains. He cantalk of liberty in the most swelling, high-sounding, and fascinatingstyle, while all the time he is making men the most degraded andmiserable slaves. He can lead people, singing and dancing, laughing andshouting, through a philosopher's paradise, to a purgatory of guilt andhorror. And all the time he will preach to them the finest doctrines;the most exalted sentiments. 'Religion!--everything is religion, thatis in accordance with the laws of our own nature, that is suitable toour position and relations, that helps our brothers or our families. Andall truth is religious truth. All science is divine revelation. All lawsare God's laws, except the arbitrary laws of men. All work is divinework, if it be according to nature. All useful work is religion. Farming, trade, government, are all religion. So are waking andsleeping. They are all divine ordinances; they are all divine service. All good work is worship. Singing foolish hymns, reading foolishlessons, preaching foolish sermons, offering foolish prayers, inunhealthy churches, half stifled with foul air, are not religion. Religion is the free and natural utterance of great, true thoughts, ofgood and generous feelings, of nature's own rich sentiments andinspirations. The flowery fields, the shadowy woods, the lofty mountainsare nobler places of worship than the dark and damp cathedral; and thefresh air of heaven is a diviner inspiration than carbonic acid gas. Andthe sun is a diviner light than waxen tapers, explosive lamps, oroxygen-consuming gas. And the gorgeous sun-tinted clouds are grander andmore beautiful than painted windows! God's temple is all space; Hisaltar; earth, air, skies! His ministers are sun, moon, stars; birds, beasts, and flowers. Nature is God's revelation; the true Bible; writtenin an universal language; speaking to all eyes; needing no translation;in danger of no interpolation, alteration, or mutilation. Man is thetrue Shekinah, --the veritable image, the real glory, the true revelationand manifestation of God. Man is the saviour of man: the teacher, theguide, the comforter of man. Every one, male or female, is a servant, aminister of God. All are priests. All are kings. The truth makes usfree: free from all authorities, but the authority of God, --God in thesoul. Christ is our brother, not our master. He is a helper, not aruler. And all are helpers of each other. All are saviours. All areChrists. Inspiration is not a matter of time, or place, or person. It iseternal and universal. It is in all, and it endures forever. Every goodbook is a Bible. Every good hymn or song is a holy psalm. Purity of bodyis holiness, as well as purity of mind. Every day is a sabbath, a holyday. Every place is holy ground. The Church of God is the human race. All are God's disciples, under training by nature's operations, and bythe events of daily life. The earth is God's great school-house; mankindare one great school; God is our chief Master; the universe is ourlesson book, and all we are ushers and under teachers. All things areour helpers, not masters;--our servants, not lords. They are made forus, not we for them; and must be used so as to make them answer theirends. The Sabbath was made for man; not man for the Sabbath. Bibles arefor men, not men for Bibles. Governments, churches, authorities, laws, institutions, customs, events, suns, moons, stars, systems, atoms, elements, all are made for man, and to man's interest and pleasure theymust be subordinated. All must be changed to meet man's changing wants. Nothing is entitled to be permanent, but that which answers beneficentlyto something permanent in man. Man is lord of the universe. Man is lordof himself. Man is his own rightful governor. Man is his own law. Hisnature is his law. Each individual man is his own law. Individualitiesare divine, and must be respected; respected by laws and governments. Law must yield to individuality; not individuality to law. Individualityis sacred. The individuality of the individual is his life, and must befostered. It is a new manifestation of God. As to means of grace, --allexpressions and interchanges of kind feeling are means of grace. Shakinghands is a means of grace. Free, friendly talk, a concert or a song, asocial ride, a family feast, a social gathering, a pleasant chat, a gameat whist, all are means of grace. All are holy to holy souls. All arepure to pure minds. Eating, drinking, sleeping are all divineordinances. Religion, in its higher and more enlightened form, raisesour views of all things; makes all things beautiful; all thingsglorious. It does not bring down the high and holy; but lifts up allthings to a divine level. It desecrates no temple; but consecrates theuniverse. It breaks no Sabbath; but makes every day a Sabbath, and alltime one lengthened holy day. It degrades no priest; but makes all menpriests. It does not bring down the high, but raises the low. It deniesnot heaven; but brings down heaven to earth. Everywhere is heaven. God's kingdom is an universal kingdom. His presence, His throne, Hisglory, are everywhere, and heaven is all around us and within us. Theuniverse is heaven. ' Thus spake the devil. 

And now came in his progressive poets to give those broad, those high, those rational, those philosophical principles, this theology andreligion of advanced humanity, this Church and worship of the future, the fascination of their ecstatic genius, and all the charms of numbers, rhyme, and melody. 'My religion is love, ' sings one, 'the richest andfairest. ' 'Abou Ben Adhem, ' sings another. 'He loves not God; but lovesGod's creature man. Give him a place, --the highest place, --in heaven. 'Another sings, 'The poor man's Sunday walk. ' The advanced religionist, addressing his wife, exclaims, The morning of our rest has come, The sun is shining clear; I see it on the steeple-top: Put on your shawl, my dear, And let us leave the smoky town, The dense and stagnant lane, And take our children by the hand To see the fields again. I've pined for air the livelong week; For the smell of new-mown hay; For a pleasant, quiet, country walk, On a sunny Sabbath day. 

 Our parish church is cold and damp; I need the air and sun; We'll sit together on the grass, And see the children run. We'll watch them gather butter-cups, Or cowslips in the dell, Or listen to the cheerful sounds Of the far-off village bell; And thank our God with grateful hearts, Though in the fields we pray; And bless the healthful breeze of heaven, On a sunny Sabbath day. 

 I'm weary of the stifling room, Where all the week we're pent; Of the alley fill'd with wretched life, And odors pestilent: And long once more to see the fields, And the grazing sheep and beeves; To hear the lark amid the clouds, And the wind among the leaves; And all the sounds that glad the air On green hills far away:-- The sounds that breathe of Peace and Love, On a sunny Sabbath day. 

 For somehow, though they call it wrong, In church I cannot kneel With half the natural thankfulness And piety I feel When out, on such a day as this, I lie upon the sod, And think that every leaf and flower Is grateful to its God; That I, who feel the blessing more, Should thank Him more than they, That I can elevate my soul On a sunny Sabbath day. 

 Put on your shawl, and let us go; For one day let us think Of something else than daily care, Or toil, and meat, and drink: For one day let our children sport And feel their limbs their own: For one day let us quite forget The grief that we have known:-- Let us forget that we are poor; And, basking in the ray, Thank God that we can still enjoy A sunny Sabbath day. 

What can be more natural, --what more plausible, --what morerational, --what more pious? Yet it means forgetfulness of God, forgetfulness of Christ, forgetfulness of duty, forgetfulness ofimmortality. It means self, and sin, and ruin. And so it is with amultitude of other sweet poems. One of the sweetest singers that everreceived a poetic soul from God, ignores Christ and Christianity. Hisworks are full of truth, but it is truth turned into a lie, and made todo the work of sin and death. It is Satan clad as an angel of light. 

Every day a Sabbath, means no day a Sabbath. All places holy, means noplace holy. All things worship, means nothing worship. All honest laborreligious, means no labor religious. Freedom means license, contempt forvirtue, enslavement to vice. Progress means falling back. Elevationmeans degradation. Liberality means leniency to error and evil, andseverity towards truth and goodness. In short, darkness means light, andlight means darkness; good means evil, and evil good; bitter meanssweet, and sweet bitter. Reform means revolution, and renovation meansdegradation, and all these charming things mean wretchedness and ruin. 

We must not be understood as condemning all the sentiments uttered bythe great deceiver. Many of them are true and good. They are Christian. Satan is too wise to preach unmitigated falsehood. He understands toowell the art of using truth so as to serve the ends of falsehood. It isenough for him if he can sever men's souls from Christ, and truth fromdivine authority, and religion from Christianity, the Church, and theBible. Allow him to do this, and he will discourse and sing to you aworld of sweet words and lofty sentiments. Truth is the ladder by whichmen climb to God, and goodness, and heaven. But Satan has found out thatthere is a way _down_ the ladder as well as _up_, and that to praise theladder to the descending crowd is the surest way to draw them everfurther downward, till they lose themselves amid the blinding smoke ofthe abyss beneath. We love, we cherish every sweet word of truth, but wevalue nothing apart from God, and Christ, and Religion. 

28. It is a bad thing when people are taught things in their youth thatare not true. They are sure, when they become students, if they arehonest and able, to find out the errors, and to lay them aside. And themere habit of detecting and laying aside errors, has a tendency to makemen skeptical. Now I had been taught a multitude of things in my youththat were not true, both with regard to the doctrines and the evidencesof Christianity. These things I detected and set aside in riper years. And I had so many things to set aside, that I came to look withsuspicion on almost all my creed. The skeptical tendency got too strongfor my habit of belief. I suspected where there was no good ground forsuspicion. I rejected truth as well as error. I held in doubt doctrinesthat I ought to have cherished as my life. Change became too easy;judgment too hasty; and error and unbelief were naturally the result. 

It is especially a bad thing when an earnest young student sees signs ofcarelessness in religious writers; a readiness to repeat what has beensaid before; to support what is popular, without endeavoring toascertain whether it be true or not. It is still worse when a studentdiscovers in religious writers signs of dishonesty and fraud. Idiscovered both. I saw cases in which false doctrines were passed onfrom generation to generation, and from writer to writer, without theleast attempt to ascertain their true character. I saw other cases inwhich dishonesty was manifest, in which fraud was used, in support ofdoctrines. Old creeds were allowed to remain unaltered, long afterportions of them had been found to be unscriptural; and error wassubscribed as a matter of course. The result was, a distrust ofeverything held by such parties, unless it was supported by the plainestand most decisive proofs. 

29. I was now in a state of mind to go down quietly and almostunconsciously into utter unbelief. And I _went_ down. I did not _reject_the doctrine of the divine origin of the Bible and Christianity, butgradually _lost_ it. My faith died a natural death. I was in the world, and became a worldly man. I mixed with unbelievers, and gradually camedown to their level. I had supposed that a man could be as religiousoutside the Church as inside; but I found it otherwise. It was a sad, anawful change I underwent; but I not only did not see it, at the time, inits true light, but was actually unconscious for a long time that it wastaking place. 

In November 1852, I attended a Bible convention at Salem, ColumbianaCounty, Ohio. It lasted three days. I spoke repeatedly, and atconsiderable length, at its meetings. My remarks wore directed chiefly, not against the Bible, but against what I regarded as unauthorizedtheories of Scripture inspiration. I contended that those theories wereinjurious to the interests of virtue and humanity. 

I also spoke about the darkness in which the human authorship ofportions of the Bible was wrapt. My remarks were a mixture of truth anderror, but in their general tenor they were unjust, and could hardlyfail to be injurious. 

Henry C. Wright spoke at this convention, contending that man had aninfallible rule of life engraven on his own nature, independent ofinstruction from without. He was often severe and extravagant in hisremarks. He was fierce, and said things which he could not make good. 

The Rev. Jonas Harzell and others spoke in defence of the Bible. 

On the last evening the hall in which the convention was held wasdensely crowded, and the audience was greatly excited. A Mr. Amblerspoke at great length, and seemed desirous to excite the people toviolence against the assailants of the Bible. When he closed, a largeportion of the audience seemed bent on mischief. I rose to reply to Mr. Ambler, and soon got the attention of the audience. Their rage quicklysubsided, and at the close of my address, the people separated in peace. 

In June 1853, I attended another Bible convention at Hartford, Connecticut. I was appointed President. A. J. Davis, the celebratedspiritualist, gave the first address. It was on the propriety of freediscussion on religious subjects. Henry C. Wright spoke next, makingstrong remarks on portions of the Old Testament. I followed, going overmuch the same ground as at Salem, but speaking with more severity offeeling. My heart was getting harder. 

The Rev. George Storrs replied. He set himself especially to answer H. C. Wright, and he spoke with much effect. 

In the afternoon of the second day, W. L. Garrison proposed sixresolutions, bearing partly on the Bible, and partly on the church andclergy. They were very strong. There was a considerable amount of truthin them, but their spirit and tendency were bad. Parker Pillsburyfollowed with a speech, in which he praised natural religion, butcondemned the religion of the church. 

In the evening Mr. Garrison spoke. He spoke with much power. He dweltchiefly on what was called the doctrine of _plenary inspiration_. Hisstrength was in the extreme views of the orthodox theologians, and inthe inconsistencies of the church and the clergy. 

Mr. Garrison made a second speech on the fourth evening, still dwellingon the theory of _plenary inspiration_. Before he got through his speechthe meeting was disturbed by a number of theological students, from acollege in the city. They threatened mischief. One displayed a dagger. Confusion followed. Some of the speakers fled, and others were alarmed. I kept my place, but soon found I had the platform to myself. I expectedmore courage from my skeptical friends. But they understood Judge Lynchbetter than I did, and their discretion, under the circumstances, mightbe the better part of valor. My rashness, however, ended in no mishap. And the only bad effect which the violence of our opponents had on mewas, to increase my hatred, perhaps, of the church and its theology. Itis not wise in professing Christians to resort to carnal weapons indefence of their views. 

In December 1853, I gave a course of lectures in Philadelphia. I wasbrought to the city by the Sunday Institute. The object of the lectureswas to show, that the Bible was of human origin, that its teachings werenot of divine authority, and that the doctrine of its absoluteperfection was injurious in its tendency. The room in which I lecturedwas crowded, and the audience was much excited. I stated, in opening, that I had nothing to say against anything that was true and good in theBible, --that virtue was essential to man's happiness, and that I had nosympathy with those who rejected the Bible because it rebuked theirvices. I was sincere in these remarks; but my older infidel friends, Ifound, regarded them as intended to deceive the unwary. Many of themwere grossly immoral, and hated the Bible for its hostility to theirevil ways. 

After each lecture discussion followed. But the ability of my opponentswas not equal to their zeal. They were often ignorant of both sides ofthe question, and injured the cause they sought to aid. 

These lectures led to a public discussion between me and Dr. McCalla, aPresbyterian clergyman. It was to continue five nights, but ended on thefourth. We met first in the Chinese Assembly Room; but the place provingtoo small for the crowds which were anxious to hear the debate, weadjourned to the large hall. 

Dr. McCalla was very abusive. He was so intent on calling me bad names, and on saying savage and provoking things, that he forgot his argument. I kept to the subject. I neither abused my opponent, nor spent my timein answering his abuse of me. I reproved him once or twice, telling himhow unseemly it was in an old man, professing to be a disciple and aminister of Jesus, to show such a spiteful disposition, and to uttersuch offensive words; and then went on with my argument. The third nightmy opponent seemed to be losing his reason. On the fourth night he wasliterally mad. Loss of sleep, rage, and mortification, seemed to havebrought on fever of the brain, and he was really insane. His friendswere terribly put about. Many of them were furious, and were plainlybent on violence. A policeman climbed up the back of the platform behindwhere I was sitting and said in my ear: 'There's mischief brewing: youhad better come with me. Step down now while they are looking the otherway. ' I looked for my overcoat and hat, but they were gone. Some one hadcarried them off, to prevent me from escaping. A gentleman who had seena person take them away, and place them in a distant corner of the room, seeing what was coming, went and brought them to me, and I at onceslipped over the back of the platform to the floor, and accompanied thepoliceman. The crowd, intent on getting towards the front of theplatform, had left a vacant space near the wall, and I and the policemangot nearly to the door of the hall before we were observed. But just aswe were passing out a cry arose, 'He's off! He's off!' and a maddenedcrowd prepared for pursuit. When we got into the street the policemansaid hurriedly, 'Which is the way to your lodgings?' 'That, ' said I, pointing south. 'Then come this way, ' said he, 'quick;' and he pulled menorth. This probably saved my life. The mob knew which way my lodgingslay, and as soon as they got out of the hall, they hurried south, like apack of hounds, roaring and furious. I was soon half a mile away in theother direction. 'Where shall I take you?' said the policeman. 'Do youknow any one hereabouts?' 'Take me to Mr. Mott's, ' said I, 'in ArchStreet. ' We were there in a few moments, and as the door opened toreceive me, the policeman received his gratuity, and hastened away. Infifteen minutes there was a noise in the street. Mr. Mott opened thedoor and looked out, when a brickbat passed just by his head, and brokeitself to pieces on the door-post, leaving its mark on the marble. Hehad a narrow escape. He closed the door, and after awhile the mobdispersed, and all was quiet. Thus ended the discussion with Dr. McCalla. 

One would have thought that after such an experience as this, I shouldhave taken care to keep out of debates on such an exciting subject. ButI was daring to madness. I was engaged again in discussion on the samesubject, in the same city, in less than a month. 

The clergy of Philadelphia, unwilling to leave the cause of the Bible inthis plight, demanded that I should discuss the question with Dr. Berg, a minister in whom they had great confidence. I yielded to the demand, and the discussion took place in Concert Hall, in January, 1854. 

The hall was crowded every night. One very wet and stormy night, thenumber present was only 2000, but every other night it was from 2250 to2400. A Philadelphia newspaper of that period says, "We cannot forbearto notice the contrast in the manner and bearing of the two disputants. Mr. Barker uniformly bore himself as a gentleman, courteously andrespectfully towards his opponent, and with the dignity becoming hisposition, and the solemnity and importance of the question. We regret wecannot say the same of Dr. Berg, who at times seemed to forget theobligations of the gentleman, in his zeal as a controversialist. He isan able and skilful debater, though less logical than Mr. Barker; but hewasted his time and strength too often on personalities and irrelevantmatters. His personal inuendoes and offensive epithets, his coarsewitticisms and arrogant bearing, may have suited the vulgar andintolerant among his party, but they won him no respect from the calmand thinking portion of the audience; while we know that they grievedand offended some intelligent and candid men who thoroughly agreed withhis views. It is time that Christians and clergymen had learned that menwhom they regard as heretics and infidels have not forfeited all claimsto the respect and courtesies of social life by their errors of opinion, and that insolence and arrogance, contemptuous sneers and impeachment ofmotives and character towards such men, are not effective means of gracefor their enlightenment and conversion. 

"There was a large number of men among the audience who lost theirself-control in their dislike of Mr. Barker's views, and he was ofteninterrupted, and sometimes checked in his argument, by hisses, groans, sneers, vulgar cries, and clamors, though through all these annoyancesand repeated provocations, he maintained his wonted composure of mannerand his clearness of thought. On the other hand, Dr. Berg was heard withgeneral quiet by his opponents, and greeted with clamorous applause byhis friends. "

I am afraid the above remarks were true. Still, Dr. Berg was almost agentleman compared with Dr. McCalla, and he was vastly more of a scholarand debater, far as he was from being a model disputant. 

Dr. Berg had the right side; he stood for the defence of all that wasgood, and true, and great, and glorious; but the way in which he wentabout his work was by no means the best one. He took a wrongposition, --a position which it was impossible for him to maintain. Hisdoctrine was that the Bible was absolutely perfect, --that theinspiration of the Book was such as not only to make it a fit and properinstrument for the religious instruction, and the moral and spiritualrenovation, of mankind, but such as to preserve it from all theinnocent, harmless, and unimportant weaknesses, imperfections, anderrors of regenerate and sanctified humanity. He even contended for akind or a degree of perfection which many of the most highly esteemedprofessors and theologians of orthodox churches had relinquished. Heheld to views about the creation and the universality of the deluge, which orthodox Christian Geologists like Professor Hitchcock of America, as well as Dr. Pye Smith of England, had given up as untenable. Hecontended for a perfection which, in fact, is physically impossible, andwhich, in truth, was inconsistent with his own acknowledgments in otherparts of the discussion. I have no wish to disparage my opponent; I hadrather do the contrary; but he did not properly and adequatelyunderstand the great question which he undertook to discuss. Hence hegot involved in inextricable difficulties, and, in spite of all he coulddo, his attempted defence of the Bible was, to a great extent, afailure. 

He said a many good things about the Bible. He proved a many things inits favor. He made the impression, at times, that there was something inits teachings of a most powerful and blessed tendency; that it was abook of infinite value, --that it was a wonderful teacher and a mightycomforter, --that it had done a vast amount of good, and was calculatedto do a vast amount more, --that it was a friend and patron of all thingsgood and glorious, --that it was the nurse of individual and nationalvirtue, and the source of personal, domestic, and national happiness. Hesaid many good things about the excellency of Christ's precepts, and thebeauty and glory of His example. A hundred good things he said, both infavor of the Bible, and in opposition to infidelity. But the one greatpoint which he had pledged himself to prove he did _not_ prove. It couldnot be proved. It was not true. So that though he won a substantialvictory; he sustained a logical defeat. And if he had been twenty timesmore learned, and twenty times more able than he was, he would have beendefeated. If a man attempts the impossible, failure is inevitable; andif he has a skilful, wary, and able opponent, his failure will be seenand felt, even by his most ardent friends, and greatest admirers. And soit was in the case of Dr. Berg. 

But the error was not his alone; it was the error of his friends; theerror of his patrons; the error of his times. What learning, and talent, and zeal, and skill in debate, considerably above the average of hisprofession, could do, he did; and that was a good deal: and his failurewas chargeable not on himself, so much as on the faulty theology of theschool in which he had been trained, and to which he still belonged. 

So far as the general merits of the Bible were concerned, I was in thewrong. But the fact was not made so plain, so palpable to the audience, as it should have been, and as it might have been, if I had had a wiser, a warier, and an abler opponent, and one who had no false theory ofBible inspiration or abstract perfection to defend. A man thoroughlyfurnished for the work, and free from foolish and unauthorized theories, would have been able to give proof of the substantial truth and divinityof the Scriptures, and of their transcendent moral and spiritualexcellence, absolutely overwhelming; and I do most heartily wish I hadhad the happiness to encounter such an advocate in my discussions. Itmight have proved an infinite advantage to me, and an incalculableblessing to my friends. As it was, the debate only tended to strengthenme in my unbelief, and to increase my confidence in future controversieswith the clergy. 

How I answered my own arguments, and got over my own objections, when onmy way back to Christianity, I may state hereafter. All I need say hereis, that I took a _qualified_ view of the divine authority of the Bible, and of the doctrine of its divine inspiration, --a view in accordancewith facts, and with the teachings of Scripture itself on the subject. This view did not require me to demand in a book of divine origin thekind of abstract or absolute perfection which Dr. Berg required, andwhich he so rashly undertook to prove. On the contrary, it taught me tolook for a thousand innocent and unimportant errors and imperfections inthe Bible. A thousand things which would, if proved, have been regardedby Dr. Berg as valid objections to the doctrine of its superhumanauthority and divine authority, were no objections at all to me. I couldacknowledge the truth of them all, and yet believe in the substantialtruth and divinity of the Book as a whole. The dust and mud of ourstreets and roads, and the decaying timbers and rotting grasses of ourforests and farms do not make me question the divine origin and thesubstantial perfection of the world: nor do the errors and imperfectionsof ancient transcribers or modern translators, or the want of absolutescientific, historical, chronological, literary, theological or moralperfection even in the original authors of the Bible, make me doubt itsdivine origin and inspiration, or its practical and substantialperfection. You may show me ten thousand things in the earth which, tomultitudes, would seem inconsistent with the doctrine that it is thework of an all-perfect Creator; but they would not be inconsistent withthat doctrine in _my_ view. They would probably seem, to my mind, proofsof its truth. Things which, to men who had not properly studied them, appeared serious defects, or results of Adam's sin, would be seen by meto be important excellencies; masterpieces of infinite wisdom andgoodness. Many of the things I said about the Bible in my debate withDr. Berg were true; but they amounted to nothing. Dr. Berg thought theywere serious charges, and that if they were not refuted, they woulddestroy the credit and power of the Book. He was mistaken. And he neverdid refute them. If I were in the place of Dr. Berg, and an opponentwere to bring forward those things in proof that the Bible was not ofGod, I should say, Your statements may be true, or they may be false, and I do not care much which they are; but they are good for nothing asdisproofs of the divine origin and practical perfection of the Bible. The Bible is all it professes to be, and it is more and better than itsgreatest admirers suppose it to be, notwithstanding its numberlesstraces of innocent human imperfections. The sun has spots, but theyneither disprove its value nor its divine origin. The probability is, that the spots in the sun have their use, and would be seen, if properlyunderstood, to be proofs of the wisdom and goodness of the Creator. Andit is certainly plain to me, that what you regard us defects in theBible, are proofs both of its divine origin, and of its real perfection. 

I said some things about the Bible in my debate with Dr. Berg, which, ifthey had been true, would have proved that the Bible was _not_ of divineorigin. But they were not true. All these things should have beenrefuted by Dr. Berg with great promptness, and refuted so thoroughlyand plainly, that every one should have been made to see and feel thatthey were refuted. But they were not. Some of them were left unnoticed. Others were handled unskilfully. The time and strength that should havebeen given to them were wasted on trifles, or unwisely spent inoffensive personalities, unseasonable witticisms, or attempts at finespeaking. 

The objections of this class, which my opponent failed to answer, oranswered unsatisfactorily, we may notice further on. 

In January, 1855, while over on business, I had a public debate atHalifax, England, with Brewin Grant, a congregational minister. This, sofar as its impression on my own mind was concerned, was the mostunfortunate discussion I ever had. My opponent was the meanest and mostunprincipled or ill-principled man I ever met. In a pamphlet which hehad published, giving instructions to those who were called to defendthe Bible and Christianity against unbelievers, he had laid it down as arule, that their first object should be to destroy the influence oftheir opponents, and that in order to do this, they should do theirutmost to damage their reputation, and make them odious. He acted onthis principle, in his debate with me, with the greatest fidelity. Heraked together, and gave forth in his speeches, all the foolish andwicked stories which my old persecutors had fabricated and spread abroadrespecting me, except those about my having committed suicide, and beingsmothered to death, and some others which were so notoriously false thatthey could no longer be used to my disadvantage. Those stories heimproved by making them worse. He made a number of new ones also. 

I had published a book, giving the story of my life up to the time of myexpulsion from the Methodist New Connexion. This work, like my otherworks, was written in the clearest and simplest style, so that no manwith ordinary abilities could fail to understand it, and no man withoutpowers of perversion bordering on the miraculous, could give to any partof it an objectionable meaning. This book he took, and read, andmisread, and interpreted, and misinterpreted, so as to make theimpression on persons unacquainted with it, that I had written andpublished the most foolish, ridiculous, and in some cases, reallydiscreditable things of myself, and even false and unwarrantablestatements about others. 

Before the discussion came on he gave a lecture on this book. I went tohear it. He spoke about an hour, and every quotation from the work, andevery reference he made to it, was false. There was not a word of truthin the whole lecture. There was not a sentence which was not as oppositeto truth and as full of falsehood as he could make it. And the ingenuityhe displayed in his task was marvellous. It was really devilish. Heenlarged my conception of the evil powers of wicked men, in the line ofturning good into evil, and truth into lies, beyond all that I couldotherwise have imagined. He did a hundred things, the least of which mypoor limited capacity would have deemed impossible. 

He pursued the same course in the debate. He went as far beyond poorMcCalla, as McCalla had gone beyond ordinary sinners. If I hadundertaken to correct his misrepresentations, and expose his fictions, Ishould not have had one moment to give to the subject we were met todiscuss. So I did as I did with McCalla, I rebuked the man with becomingseverity; I contradicted his statements in the plainest and strongestway I could; I also offered to arrange for a discussion of personalmatters, if he wished it, after we had gone through our discussion ofprinciples, and engaged to prove every discreditable story he told of meto be false, and then went on with the discussion. He accepted mychallenge to discuss personalities, but neither kept his engagement, norabated his efforts at misrepresentation during the remainder of thedebate. 

He was not content with sober, sad, deliberate falsehood; he resorted toridicule. He pulled comical and ugly faces; put out his tongue; put histhumb to his nose; threw orange peel at me; and said and did otherthings which it is not lawful for me to utter. 

He had thought, I suppose, to disgust me; to tire me out; to make mewithdraw from the debate, and give him the opportunity of saying he hadput me to flight. He was mistaken. I kept my ground. And I kept mytemper. And I kept my gravity. I rebuked him at times with becomingsternness, and then went on with my task. It is probable that I spokemore strongly against the Bible, and that I said harder things againstthe church and the ministry, than I should have done, if he hadconducted himself with any regard to truth and decency; but I did notraise my voice above its usual pitch, nor did I show any unusual signsof indignation, disgust, or irritation. My feelings became more intense, my language more cutting, and my style and logic more pointed andforcible; but my manner was calm, and my behaviour guarded. 

And I husbanded my strength. I let him explode, while I let off my steamquietly, and in just measure only, making every particle do its properwork. I wasted neither words, nor strength, nor time. In three or fourdays my wicked opponent began to get weak and weary. He had tired_himself_ instead of me. He had disgusted and put to shame many of hisfriends. He had driven away several of his supporters. He had weakenedhis party. He had strengthened his opponent. He had lost, he hadbetrayed, his cause. He dragged on heavily. He was all but helpless. Ihad every thing my own way. I had an easy fight, and a decisive victory. 

I had the last speech; and when the battle was over, I felt free to dealwith my unprincipled opponent rather severely, and I said: "My opponenthas acted, from beginning to end of this debate, in anything but a nobleand manly way. I refer not merely to his personal abuse, his use of foulnames, his insolence of manner, his malignity of spirit; but to the wayin which he has misconducted the argument. He was pledged to prove theBible of Divine origin and authority. He was bound to bring out, asearly as possible, what he thought his strongest arguments, and affordme an opportunity of meeting them. But he did not do this. To judge fromhis proceedings, you would conclude that he had no faith in any of thepopular arguments, such as those employed by Paley, Horne, &c. He satwatching, like an animal we need not name, for some stray thought topounce upon. He tried every device to draw me from the question, andshowed, not only the greatest reluctance, but a fixed determination, notto come any nearer to it himself than he could possibly help. He hasshown nothing like courage, nothing like confidence in the goodness ofhis cause, nothing like openness, candor, or generosity; nothing butcraft and cunning. He has never fought like a soldier, but dodged likean assassin. Honorable men _give up_ a cause that can't be honorablymaintained. For myself, ye are witnesses, I came out openly, boldly, andat once, and gave my opponent the best opportunity he could have ofgrappling fairly with my arguments. But he would not meet them. He slunkbehind his mud-battery, and instead of firing shot and shell, spurtedforth filth. By-and-by he took my old deserted battery, and began toplay upon me with my worn-out guns and wooden shot, till his friendscompelled him to give up. He complained that I had taken up my positionon Mount Horeb, and pattered him with grapeshot from the old Jewisharmory, and besought and urged me to plant myself on Mount Tabor, or theMount of Olives, and try what I could do with Christian ammunition. Idid so; but even that did not please him. He stared and squalled, as ifit had been raining red-hot shot, as thick as it once poured hailstonesand fire in Egypt, killing every beast that was out in the fields. Andthus he has gone on. He never seems to have been satisfied, either withhis own position or mine. I might have pleased him, no doubt, by givingin before the battle, and surrendering at discretion; but that is not mycustom. Well, now the battle draws near its close; and no one, I trust, has lost anything, but what is better lost than found. I am satisfiedwith my own position, and nearly so with my share of the fight. With amanlier foe, I should have had a pleasanter fight; but soldiers cannotalways choose their antagonists, nor can they keep, in all cases, totheir own best mode of warfare. The hunter cannot always find thenoblest game; and perhaps it is better for his neighbour, if not sopleasant to himself, that he should sometimes be obliged to employ hisdogs and rifles in destroying vermin. 

"I feel that an apology is due from me to you and the public, forentering the lists with my opponent. It is soon given. When I firstoffered to meet him in discussion on the Bible, I supposed him to be awell-informed and respectable man, and the representative of thehighest intellectual and moral culture, combined with superior talentand experience as a debater, that the orthodox world could boast. I soonfound out my mistake, but I did not feel at liberty to withdraw mychallenge. When I learned the infamous character of his personallectures, I declined all further correspondence with him till he shouldretract his slanders; but still I did not feel free to say I would notdebate with him, if his friends should bring him to reasonable terms. His friends in Halifax succeeded in doing so, and out of regard to thewishes of my friends, I submitted to the temporary degradation of beingplaced on the same platform with my unprincipled calumniator, and thecalumniator of the best, the wisest, and the greatest men of every ageand nation. I do not regret having done so. 

"He will leave this discussion a sadder and a wiser man. He has foundthat the power of insolence, and falsehood, and of vulgar, brutal wit, has its bounds; that there are those whom they cannot abash or cow; thatthe _might_ in moral encounters is with the _right_. 

"I part with my opponent without malice, though without regret. If hehas natural characteristics which others have not, and lacks some higherqualities which others have, the fault is not entirely his. He did notmake himself. Nor did he nurse, or rear, or train himself. He is theproduction, and his character may, to a great extent, be the production, of influences over which he had no control. I shall not therefore stateall I have felt while listening to the false and fierce personalitieswith which this discussion has been disgraced. I will rather acknowledgemy own errors, and lament that anything he has said or done should havebeen permitted, in any case, to affect my own style of advocacy, andrender me less gentle or guarded in my utterances than I otherwise mighthave been. I retract every expression of unkindness or resentment. Iapologize for everything harsh, offensive, or ungraceful in my manner;and I am sorry I could not declare and advocate my views, withoutshocking or distressing some of your minds. And now, with best andheartiest wishes for your welfare, and for the welfare of mankind atlarge, and in the fall and certain hope of the final, universal, andeternal triumph of the truth, and in the ultimate regeneration andsalvation of our race, I bid you all farewell. "

This man purchased the copyright of the debate, and pledged himself toissue a correct edition, in accordance with the notes of the reporter. Instead of doing so, besides making unlimited alterations in his ownspeeches, he altered every speech of mine. Some things he left out. Inone case, to prevent an exposure of one of his more recklessmis-statements, he left out two pages of one of my speeches. By a freeand artful use of _italics_, and an abuse of stops, he altered andperverted the meaning of quite a multitude of my statements. And when, after all, he found that the publication damaged him terribly in theestimation of his friends, he suppressed it altogether. 

The conduct of this opponent had a bad effect on my mind, and ifanything short of sound reason could have kept me in the ranks ofinfidelity, it would have been the shameless, the outrageous conduct ofsuch pretenders to Christianity as this bad man. But I thank God, suchhorrible and inexcusable inconsistency was not allowed to decide myfate. Better powers, sweeter and happier influences, were brought intoplay to counteract its deadly tendency. And even other opponents, of aworthier character and of a higher order, came in my way, who, by theirChristian temper, and high culture, and by their regard for my feelings, and their manifest desire for my welfare, obliterated the badimpressions produced by the unscrupulous and malignant conduct of BrewinGrant, and all but won me over to the cause of Christ. 

It happened that while I was yet in England, an arrangement was made fora public discussion between me and Colonel Michael Shaw, of BourtreePark, Ayr. Colonel Shaw was a kind of lay minister, who preached theGospel gratuitously, and spent his time and property in doing good. Hewas a Christian and a gentleman out and out; a Christian and a gentlemanof the highest order. Five such men might have saved Sodom and Gomorrah, and all the cities of the plain. He was as guileless as a little child, and as honest as the light, and about as pure, and good, and kind as aregenerated human soul could be. This, at least, was the impressionwhich his looks, and conversation, and behaviour, made on my mind. Henot only commanded my respect, but called forth my veneration; and hemade me love him, as I never did love more than two or three good men inall my life. 

Well, an arrangement was made for a public discussion on the divineauthority of the Bible between this good and godly man and me. 

The discussion took place in the City Hall, Glasgow. The Colonel was sokind and gentlemanly, that I found my task exceedingly difficult. It wasvery unpleasant to speak lightly of the faith of so good and true a man;or to say anything calculated to hurt the feelings of one so guilelessand so affectionate. And many a time I wished myself employed about someother business, or engaged in a contest with some other man. At the endof the second night's debate we were to rest two days, and the Colonelwas so kind as to invite me, and even to press me, to spend those dayswith him at his residence near Ayr. The Colonel had given his good ladyso favorable an account of my behaviour in the debate, that she wrote tome enforcing her good husband's invitation. I went. I could do no other. The Colonel and his venerable father met me at the station with acarriage, and I was soon in the midst of the Colonel's truly Christianand happy family. Neither the Colonel nor any of his household attemptedto draw me into controversy. Not a word was spoken that was calculatedto make me feel uneasy. There seemed no effort on the part of any one, yet every thing was said and done in such a way as to make me feelmyself perfectly at home. Love, true Christian love, under the guidanceof the highest culture, was the moving spirit in the Colonel's familycircle. A visit to the birthplace of Burns, and to the banks of BonnyDoon, was proposed, and a most delightful stroll we had, made all themore pleasant by the Colonel's remarks on the various objects ofinterest that came in view, and his apt quotation of passages from theworks of the poet, referring to the scenery amidst which we were moving. 

On our return home I was made to feel at ease again with regard to everything but myself. I felt sorry that I should be at variance with mykind and accomplished host on a subject of so much interest andimportance as religion and the Bible. The thought that on the evening ofthe coming day I should have to appear on the platform again as hisopponent, was really annoying. To talk with such a man privately, in afree and friendly way, seemed proper enough; but to appear in public ashis antagonist seemed too bad. When we started from Ayr to Glasgow inthe same train, and in the same carriage, I felt as if I would muchrather have travelled in some other direction, or on a different errand. But an agreement had been made, and it must be kept; so two more nightswere spent in discussion. But it _was_ discussion, --fair and friendlydiscussion, --and not quarrelling. Neither he nor I gave utterance to anunkind or reproachful word. When the discussion was over, the Colonelshook me by the hand in a most hearty manner in the presence of anexcited audience, and presented me with a book as an expression of hisrespect and good feeling. I made the best returns I could, unwilling tobe too much outdone by my gallant and Christian friend. The audience, divided as they were on matters of religion, after gazing some time onthe spectacle presented on the platform, as if at loss what to do, orwhich of the disputants they should applaud, dropped their differences, and all united in applauding both, and the disputants and the audienceseparated with the heartiest demonstrations of satisfaction and mutualgood-will. The events of those days, and the impression I received of myopponent's exalted character, never faded from my memory. And thoughthey had not all the effect they ought to have had, their influence onmy mind was truly salutary. I have never thought of Colonel Shaw and hisgood, kind, Christian family, without affection, gratitude, and delight. He wrote to me repeatedly after my return to America, and his letters, which reached us when we were living among the wilds of Nebraska, wereamong our pleasantest visitants, and must be reckoned among the means ofmy recovery from the horrors of unbelief. 

I cannot doubt but that my encounter with this blessed man did muchtowards winning back my soul to God, and Christ, and the Church. Thisgracious man, --this child of light and love, --is still living, and hecontinues, when I give him the opportunity, to testify his love for me, and his good wishes for my health and welfare. God bless his soul; andbless his household; and, after having given them a long and happy lifeon earth, receive them to His kingdom, to share together the riches ofHis love for ever and ever. 

CHAPTER XVII. 

CONTINUATION OF MY STORY. FRESH TROUBLES. A CHANGE FOR THE BETTER. HOWBROUGHT ABOUT. INCIDENTS. THE CHANGE COMPLETE AT LENGTH. ITS RESULTS. 

In compliance with the request of some skeptical neighbours, I lecturedagainst the Divine authority of the Bible in my first settlement inOhio. Mr. Spofforth, a Methodist minister was induced to hold a publicdiscussion with me on the subject, and as he was not well acquaintedeither with his own side of the question or the other, he was soonembarrassed and confounded, and obliged to retire from the contest. Notcontent with the retirement of my opponent, I announced another courseof lectures on the Bible, resolved not to relinquish my hold of thepeople's attention, till I had laid before them my thoughts on theexciting subject at greater length. The company listened to me for atime with great patience, but while I was giving my last lecture, someyoung men set to work outside to pull down the log school-house in whichI was speaking, and I and my friends had to make haste out before thelecture was over, to avoid being buried before we were dead. 

The young men had provided themselves plentifully with rotten eggs, thinking to pelt me on my way home; but the night was very dark, and theway led through a tall, dense, shadowy forest, and somehow they mistooktheir own father for me, and gave _him_ the eggs. When he got home hewas as slimy and odoriferous as a man need to be; while I was perfectlyclean and sweet. 

But I was not to be permitted to escape in this way. During the nightthey pulled down the fences of my farm, and gave me other hints, that Imust leave, or do worse. So I sold my farm for what I could get, andbought another some seventy miles away, near Salem, Columbiana County, aregion occupied chiefly by what, in America, were called"_Come-outers_"--people who had left the churches and the ministry, andeven separated themselves from civil organizations, resolved to besubject to no authority but their own wills or their own whims. Amongpeople so free as those, I thought I should have liberty plenty; but Isoon found that they were so fond of freedom, that they wanted _my_share as well as their own, and I got into trouble once more. And then Isaw that the greatest brawlers about liberty, when they come to betried, are often the most arrant despots and tyrants on the face of theearth. 

Then the people in the district were not _all_ Come-outers. Some wereChristians. And these I provoked by my disregard of the Sabbath, and bymy advocacy of views unfriendly to religion and the divine authority ofthe Bible. I worked in my garden or on my farm on a Sunday, in sight ofmy neighbors as they went to church. I had previously called a Bibleconvention in the place, and taken the leading part in its proceedings. I took the skeptical side in a public discussion on Christianity in thetown, and gave utterance to sentiments which pained the hearts of thereligious portion of my neighbors beyond endurance. The consequence was, I got into trouble again, and had to move once more, or be undone. 

So I moved once more. This time I resolved to make sure of a quiet home, so I went right away beyond the limits of the States, into the unpeopledterritory of Nebraska, a country at that period ten or twelve times aslarge as Pennsylvania or England, and containing less than five thousandwhite inhabitants--an immense wilderness, occupied chiefly by tribes ofred Indians, herds of buffalo and deer, countless multitudes of wolves, with here and there a bear, a panther, or a catamount, and heaps ofrattlesnakes. And here I thought I should be safe. And so I was. TheIndians gave me no trouble. I always treated them kindly, and they werekind to me in return. As for the wild beasts, God has "put the fear anddread of man upon every beast of the earth;" and as he approaches, theyretire. As a rule, the fiercest beasts of the forest will turn aside tomake way for man. I have lived in the midst of multitudes of wolves, andtaken no harm. I have slept on the open prairie in regions swarming withwolves, and never been disturbed. I have travelled by night in otherparts of the country, over the wildest mountains, the homes of panthers, bears, and catamounts, and never been molested. The rattlesnakes werethe most dangerous creatures. Yet even from them I took no harm, I havewalked among them time after time in slippers or low shoes, yet I neverwas bitten. I slept once for three nights with a rattlesnake within twoor three inches of my breast, yet escaped unhurt. God took care of me, when I neither took due care of myself, nor cared as I ought for Him. 

The parties I feared the most were the white people. They had heard ofme, and as they passed me in the street, they looked at me askance, regarding me apparently as a mystery or a monster. But I never shockedthem by skeptical lectures, or by any other act of hostility toreligion, so they bore with me, and came at length to treat me withrespect and confidence. My wife and family were regarded with favor fromthe first. And I shall never forget the kindness of one of our Christianneighbors to my wife, in a time of affliction and sorrow. 

And it is from my settlement in this desolate and far-off region, that Idate the commencement of a change for the better in the state of mymind. I do not say that my opinions began to change, but the state of my_feelings_ got better, which rendered possible a change for the betterin my sentiments. 

But I had reached a sad extreme. I had lost all trust in a Fatherly God, and all good hope of a better life. I had come near to the horrors ofutter Atheism. And the universe had become an appalling and inexplicablemystery. And the world had come to be a dreary habitation; and life aweary affair; and many a time I wished I had never been born. And therewere occasions when the dark suggestion came, "Life is a burden; throwit down. " But I said; "Nay; there are my wife and children: I will livefor their sakes if for nothing else. " And for their sakes I did live, thank God, till I had something else to live for. 

If I were asked what first gave a check to my skepticism, and led me toturn my face once more towards Christ and Christianity, I should say, "The answer is supplied by my story. " As I have shown, it was thetroubled state of my mind, --the tempest of unhappy feeling, and thewhirlwind of excitement in which I had lived so long, --that had most todo in carrying me away from Christ; and now my mind was allowed to be atrest. The whirlwind of excitement had spent its fury. The tempest in mysoul had subsided, so that the principal hindrance to my return wasgone. There were other causes that had contributed to the destruction ofmy faith in Christ and Christianity, but this was the first and chiefone, and the one which gave the principal part of their force to therest. As I have shown, I had been taught things about the Scripturesthat were not correct. I had found a number of the arguments used bydivines in support of the divinity of the Scriptures to be unsound. Ihad detected pious frauds in the writings of some of the advocates ofthe Bible and Christianity. I had met with untenable views on theinspiration and infallibility of the Scriptures. I had, besides, adopteda defective method of reasoning on religious matters, which exerted aninjurious influence on my mind. All these things, and many others whichI cannot at present mention, had proved occasions of doubt and unbelief. But the probability is, that none of these things would have destroyedmy faith in Christ, if I had been in a proper state of mind. There wasnothing in them to justify unbelief to a mind unprejudiced, undistempered, calm. There was attractiveness enough in Christ, if themists which passion had thrown around Him, to hide His worth and gloryfrom my view, could be cleared away. And there was truth and goodnessenough in Christianity, and there were evidences sufficient of itsdivinity, if one could have the films removed from one's eyes, and bepermitted to behold it in its own sweet light. The great difficulty wasin the disordered state of my mind, and the trying nature of mysituation. What was wanted, therefore, to make it possible for me toreturn to my former faith, was not so much an explanation of particulardifficulties, as a better, happier, calmer state of mind. Explanationsof difficulties _were_ desirable, but they were not the first orprincipal things required. The great, the _one_ thing needful, at theoutset, was a fitting state of mind, --a mind sufficiently free fromirritation, painful excitement, and consequent unhappy bias, to enableme to do justice to the religion of Christ. And the circumstances inwhich I was placed in Nebraska were calculated to bring me to thisdesirable state of mind; and many things which befel me there werecalculated to stimulate my return to Christ. 

1. In the first place, I was in a region favorable to calm and seriousthought. True, we were infected for a time with the fever of speculationso prevalent in new countries; and we shared the hardships and toils, the cares and anxieties, of a border life: but there were seasons whenserious thought and salutary reflection were inevitable. I was oftenalone amid the quiet and solemnity of a boundless wilderness. The busyworld of men was far away. There was no one near to foster doubt orunbelief, or to reopen or irritate afresh the closing wounds inflictedby bigotry and intolerance in days gone by. And the loneliness of mycondition seemed to bring me nearer to God. It allowed the revival ofthose Godward-tending instincts implanted in man's heart by the hand ofthe Creator. It favored the resurrection to life of the naturalreligious affections, and the revival of those holy longings andaspirations after a higher life and a grander destiny than earth cangive, which arise so spontaneously in the breasts of men. It allowed thebetter self to rise and assert its power, while it shamed the evil selfinto the shade. And often, when away beyond the sight of man or of humanhabitation, amidst the eternal silence and the boundless solitude, I hadstrange thoughts and strange feelings; and there were times when, if Ihad yielded to the impulses from within, I should have cast myself downupon the ground, and adored the Great Mysterious Infinite. 

On one occasion I went, in company with my youngest son and a friend, some distance into the interior of the country. At one point we cameupon a deserted and decaying Indian village, and then upon an Indiantrack across the desert. A little further on we struck a Mormon track, along which a company of the Latter-day saints had groped their waytowards their promised Paradise in the Salt Lake Valley. As we followedthe track we came upon a mound, and then upon another, marking the spotswhere worn-out travellers had ended their weary pilgrimages, and beenconsigned, amid the desolate wilds, to their final resting places. Intoone of these unprotected graves the wolves had made their way, to feedupon the fallen victim of the new faith. When night came on it found usin these dreary and desolate wilds, and there we had to prepare to passthe night under the open sky, with multitudes of wolves around us. Wehad hardly spread our blankets when the sky was covered with black andheavy clouds, and lightnings flashed, and thunders roared, andeverything betokened a night of storm and rain. We protected ourselvesagainst the threatening elements as well as we could, and preparedourselves for cold and drenching showers, and for a sleepless andtroubled night, when, happily for us, the wind suddenly changed, anddissipated the clouds. The stars came out in all their glory, and thenight was calm and bright, and all we had to try our patience was alittle frost. And there I slept; and there I often awoke; and in myintervals of wakefulness I gazed on the magnificence of the outspreadskies, and mused on the dreariness of the surrounding wilderness, andthought of the stirring scenes through which I had passed in days goneby, and of the strange and death-like silent one in which I then wasplaced. "And what will the future be?" said I. "And here is my son; inthe spring of life; on adventures so strange; in a universe so vast andso mysterious; what will be his destiny? And what will be the destiny ofthe dear ones we have left behind?" And then I lost myself in a world ofstrange imaginings. When wearied with my restless musings, I sank torest again, and passed from waking into sleeping dreams. 

Morning broke at length, and we arose, and started on our journey. Thedeer were skipping gaily over the plains. The wolves were hiding intheir holes. We came at length to a stream. It was skirted by a grove, into which we made our way, and there we kindled a fire, and preparedour breakfast. We filled our coffee kettle from the brook. A hazel twigserved us for a toasting fork; and we were soon engaged in one of thepleasantest parts of a hungry traveller's work. We relished our breadand ham and coffee amazingly. The wolves might be snuffing the odor ofour viands, and coveting our repast; but they remained within theirhiding-places, and kept silent; and we finished our meal in peace. 

We rested next on the outskirts of a grove on the banks of the Elkhornriver. Here I was left to take care of the stuff, to prepare a bed, andto gather wood for a fire to cook our supper, and to frighten away thewolves, and keep us warm through the night, I gathered a quantity of dryand withered grass, and spread it on the ground, and covered it with ablanket, for a bed. I then looked around for wood. I saw some down in adark deep gully, and went to fetch it; when I found myself all alone andunarmed in front of a hideous wolf-hole. I retreated with all the hasteI could, and was soon on the top of the bank again, panting andtrembling, and endeavoring to increase the distance between myself andthe horrible den as rapidly as I could. I next looked round for wood onsafer ground, and having collected a quantity, I waited with anxiety forthe return of my companions. We slept that night in a half-built anddeserted log cabin, without doors or windows, put up by some adventurousborder-man to secure a claim to a portion of the surrounding land. Aconsiderable part of the cabin was without roof. And there were largespaces between the layers of logs through which the frosty winds hadfree admission. For a time we deliberated whether we should be colderinside the cabin or outside. At length we decided in favor of theinterior. We then took the wagon body off the frame and carried it intothe cabin, and raised it on one side to screen us from the wind whichcame through the cabin walls. Against the wall at our head we fixed uprugs. At our feet, between our bed and the open doorway, we had ourblazing fire. And there we slept. We had prickly sensations in our eyesin the morning, but they soon passed away. We took no cold, or none thatproved serious at all. And the wolves seemed to keep at a respectabledistance. 

As soon as we had got through our breakfast, and put our wagon and teamin order, we started homewards. At one point, as we passed along, a wolflooked quietly down upon us from the side of a hill just by. A biggerone had passed us as we stood in front of the half-built cabin in whichwe had passed the night. The region abounded with them, on every side. 

While crossing a tract of rich bottom land, where the dry and witheredgrass of the previous summer lay thick, I struck a light, and for anexperiment, set the prairie on fire. The flames blazed forth at oncelike gunpowder. They spread and roared. The wind rose, and blew theflames in the direction of our wagon. It was all we could do to get tothe wagon and jump in and flee. We had no sooner started the horses thanwe found that the traces of one of them were loose, and we had to jumpout again to fasten them; and before we could retake our places theflames were almost at our ears. The horses fled, however, at a goodquick pace, and speedily carried us beyond the reach of danger, and wegot safe home. 

2. There were many things in my new situation and in my strange way oflife, besides the silence and the solitude of a boundless desert, thatwere calculated to awaken within me solemn feeling, and to rouse me toserious thoughtfulness on things pertaining to God and religion. Andwhen once my mind had begun to awake to such matters, it was neverpermitted to sink again, for any length of time, into its formerdeath-like slumber. And many things befel me that tended to make mefeel, and feel most painfully at times, the helplessness andcheerlessness, the gloom and wretchedness, of the man who has lost histrust in God, and his hope of a blessed immortality. There is nothing inutter doubt and unbelief to satisfy a man with a heart. A man with aheart wants a Father in whose bosom he can repose, a Saviour in whosecare and sympathy he can trust, and a better world to which he can lookforward as his final home and resting-place, and as the eternal home andresting-place of those who are dear to him. And I _had_ a heart. I wasnot made for infidelity. I never submitted to it willingly, and I neversat easy under its power. I had affections, cravings, wants, whichnothing but religion could satisfy. 

3. Then trouble came. Infidelity is a wretched affair even inprosperity; but in adversity it is still worse. And adversity overtookme. In the spring of 1857 we had a reasonable income, from propertywhich we supposed to be of considerable value. A few weeks later a paniccame, and our income fell to nothing; our property was valueless;instead of a support it became a burden, and we had to set to work toget a living by our labor, at a time when work was hard to be got, andwhen wages were down at the lowest point. This was a time of greatdistress and grievous trial, and I felt the want of consolation mostkeenly. I could once have said, "Although the fig tree shall notblossom, neither shall fruit be on the vines; the labor of the oliveshall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cutoff from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls; yet will Irejoice in the Lord, I will joy in the God of my salvation. " But now I_had_ no God. The universe had no great Fatherly Ruler. The affairs ofman were governed by chance, or by a harsh and grinding necessity; andall good ground of hope and cheerful trust had given place to doubt, andgloom, and cruel uncertainty. 

4. Trials of other kinds came. Sickness and pain entered our dwelling, and seized upon one of my family. My youngest son was taken ill. He wasracked with excruciating pain. It seemed as if the agony would drive himto distraction, or cut short his days. And there I stood, watching hisagony, and distracted with his cries, unable to utter a whisper about agracious Providence, or to offer up a prayer for help or deliverance. 

5. Another dear one was afflicted; and again my heart was torn, andagain my lips were sealed. I could not even say to the suffering one, "God bless you. "

6. I was called to attend the funeral of a child. The parents were ingreat distress, and I was anxious to speak to them a word of comfort;but doubt and unbelief had left me no such word to speak. I rememberedthe day when I could have said, "Of such is the kingdom of heaven. "

 "They rest in Jesus, and are blest, How sweet their slumbers are. "

But the happy day was gone, and I was dumb in the presence of themourners. 

7. I was called, on another occasion, to visit a friend, a brotherskeptic, who was sick and likely to die. I had often visited him when hewas well, and we had managed, on those occasions, to interest or amuseeach other; but now we were helpless. Both were in sorrow, and neithercould console his brother. And there we were, looking mournfully on eachother in the face of death, speechless and comfortless. I am horrifiedwhen I think of the dreadful position in which I was placed on thosesolemn occasions. It seemed to me as if I had been enchanted all thosedreary days by some malignant demon, and made the sport of his infernalcruelty. My friend, like myself, had been a Christian in his earlierdays, and had rejoiced in the assurance of God's love and favor, and inhopes of future and eternal blessedness; and now he was passing away inutter cheerlessness and hopelessness. He died, and I followed hisremains to the grave. I spoke; but I had no great comforting truths withwhich to cheer the sad hearts of his weeping kindred. I looked down, with his disconsolate widow, and his sorrowing children, into the darkcold vault, but could say not a single word of a better life. Wesorrowed as those who have no hope. 

8. While I was in Nebraska my mother died. Like my father, who had diedsome years before, she had been a Christian from her early days; a veryhappy one; and she continued a Christian to the last. She was one of themost affectionate and devoted mothers that ever lived. She had elevenchildren. The eldest one died when he was twenty-one, after having spenta number of years, young as he was, as an able and useful minister ofChrist. He died a happy death. The remaining ten were all permitted togrow up to manhood and womanhood, and my mother had the happiness at onetime, an unspeakable happiness to her, to see them all, with oneexception, devoted to the service of God, and several of them engagedas preachers of the Gospel. They were joyful days to her when she couldget them all together, as she sometimes did, to sing with her the sweethymns of praise and gratitude, of hope and rapture, which had cheeredher so often during the years of her pilgrimage. And now she was gone. Ihad seen her some years before when on a visit to my native land. Sheknow of my skeptical tendencies, and though she had faith in my desireto be right, she was afraid lest I should miss my way, and entreated mewith all the affectionate tenderness of an anxious mother, not to allowmyself to be carried away from the faith and hope of the Gospel. "Dopray, my dear son, " she said, --"Do pray that God may lead you in theright path. I want to meet you all in heaven. It would be a dreadfulthing if any of you should be found wanting at last. Don't forsake God. Don't leave Christ. Religion is a reality; a blessed reality. I know it, I feel it, my dear son. It is the pearl of great price. " These were thelast words I heard from her lips. I listened to them in silence. ThoughI was too far gone to be able to sympathize with her remarks as much asI ought, I was wishful that she should enjoy all the comfort that herfaith could give her. She wept; she prayed for me; she kissed me; and Ileft her, to see her face no more on earth. I returned to my home inAmerica, and the next thing I heard of the dear good creature was, thatshe had finished her course. I kept the sad intelligence to myself, formy heart was too full to allow me to speak of my loss, even to those whowere nearest and dearest to me. I thought of all her love for me from myearliest days; and of all her labors and sacrifices for my comfort andwelfare. I remembered her counsels and her warnings. I remembered herlast kind words, her kiss, her prayers, her tears. It seems dreadful;but unbelief had so chilled my soul, that I could no longer indulge thesweet thought of an immortal life even for the soul of my dear goodChristian mother. I had once had visions of a land of rest, a paradiseof bliss, and countless crowds of happy souls, and rapturous songs, andshouts of praise, and joyous meetings of loving and long parted friendsin realms of endless life and boundless blessedness; but all were gone. A sullen gloom, a deathlike stupor, a horrible and unnatural paralysisof hope had come in place of those sweet visions of celestial glories. My only comfort was, that though I had ceased to believe in the divinityof Christianity myself, _she_ had retained her faith, and had lived anddied in the enjoyment of its consolations. 

9. We had a young woman that had lived with us, with the exception oftwo short intervals, all the time we had been in America. She had cometo regard us as her natural guardians, and we had come to look on her asone of our family. The second time she left us she caught a fever, andreturned to us in hopes that in her old and quiet home she would soon bewell again. We procured her medical aid, but the fever got worse. Thedoctor lost hopes, and it soon began to be evident, that she was doomedto a speedy death. I attended her during the last sad night of hersufferings. I heard her moanings as her life drew slowly towards aclose. I wanted to comfort her, but I had lost the power. I could oncehave spoken to her of a Father in heaven, and of a better world; but Icould speak on those subjects no longer. I could once have kneeled byher side and prayed; but I could pray no more. I could neither comfortmyself nor my dying charge. She passed away without a word ofconsolation or a whisper of hope to cheer her as she trod the darkvalley of the shadow of death. I stood by, afflicted and comfortless, when her lifeless form was committed to its final resting-place, unableto speak a word of hope or consolation to the sorrowing minds that weregathered around her grave. She was interred on the slope of the hill, onthe opposite side of the stream over against my farm, within view of thefield and the garden in which I often worked, and the lonely dwelling inwhich I frequently slept. And there she lay, far from her kindred andher native land, the wild winds moaning over her solitary grave, and nosweet word about God, or Christ, or a better life, to mark the spotwhere she slept. And there, on that quiet farm, and in that solitarydwelling, with that one melancholy grave in view, I passed at times thelong sad days, and the still and solemn nights, in utter loneliness, gazing on the desolate scenes around, or feeding on saddening thoughtswithin, "without hope and without God in the world. " I sought forcomfort in a Godless and Christless philosophy, but sought in vain. Itried to extort from nature some word of consolation, but not a whispercould I obtain. I tried to forge some theory of my own that might lessenthe gloom in which I was wrapt; but my efforts were fruitless. The lightof life was quenched; the joy, the bliss of being was no more. I had"forsaken the fountain of living waters, " and nothing remained butbroken cisterns that could hold no water. I was wretched; and, apartfrom God, and Christ, and immortality, my wretchedness was incurable;and the sense of my wretchedness prepared me, and ultimately constrainedme, to look once more in the direction of the religion that had cheeredme in my earlier days. 

10. I had a great and grievous trial of another kind while in Nebraska. When we removed to that far-off country, we left our eldest son in Ohioto look after our interests there, and to send off to us what goods wemight require in our new home. The river Ohio, down which our goods hadto be sent, was low at the time, and the steamer on which they wereplaced, while racing recklessly with another steamer, struck on a rockand was wrecked. There were over a thousand volumes of my books onboard, the best and principal part of my library; nearly all mymanuscripts too were on board, and much other property, amounting invalue to twelve or thirteen hundred pounds; over $6, 000; and nearly allwas lost, or irreparably damaged. 

This however was but a light part of the trial. As soon as my eldest songot news of the wreck, he hastened to the spot, to save what portions ofour property he could. The weather was hot by day, and cold by night. Both the season and the place were unhealthy, and by his great anxiety, and excessive labors, and continual exposure, he brought on a violentfever. The first information we received about the matter was that hewas dying. When the dreadful tidings reached us we were more than athousand miles away. I started at once for Ohio, and made what haste Icould to reach my son; but go what way I would, I must be four or fivelong days on the road, and four or five long nights. I took my way downthe river. For four long days and four long dreary nights I travelled, in doubt all the time whether my child was dead or alive. And all thattime I was unable to offer up a prayer, either for my son, myself, orthe anxious and sorrowing ones I had left behind. Nor could I apply tomyself a single consolatory promise of Scripture. My mad antichristianphilosophy had robbed me of all. God and His Providence, Christ and Hissympathy, heaven and its blessedness, were all gone, and nothing wasleft but the hard blank horrors of inexorable fate. My soul was shut upas in a dungeon, unable to help itself. It was stretched on a rack, andtortured with excruciating pain. Those four long dreary days and nightswere the darkest and most miserable I ever passed. But God was merciful. I lived to reach the end of my dreadful journey, and He had spared myson. We embraced, --we wept. We were spared--the whole of our family werespared, thank God--for better days, and for a happier lot. 

11. There were other events which befell me while I was in Nebraska, that had a salutary influence on my mind. I was frequently in thegreatest danger, and was as frequently preserved from harm. As I havesaid, I slept three nights with a rattlesnake within three inches of mybreast. My eldest son slept repeatedly in the same terrible position;yet we both escaped unhurt. Once I was within an inch--within a hair'sbreadth, I may say--of being killed by the kick of a horse. On anotheroccasion, when my eldest son was forking hay in the field, and I waspiling it on the wagon, he heard a rattlesnake, and looked all roundupon the ground to find it, with a view to kill it, but looked in vain. At length, turning his eyes upwards, he saw it writhing and wriggling onone of the prongs of his hayfork, which he was holding up in the air. Hehad pierced the deadly creature while forking the hay, and I had takenthe hay from the fork with my naked hands, and escaped unbitten. I hadquite a multitude of escapes from deadly peril, some more remarkablethan those I have described. And there were times when the thoughts ofthose wonderful deliverances made me feel, that there were far moreincredible doctrines than that of a watchful and gracious Providence. 

12. Again. When I commenced my career of religious exploration, Iexpected I should get rid of all difficulties, and that I should reach aregion at last where all would be light; where there would be no moreharassing or perplexing mysteries. For a time my hopes appeared to getrealized. The doctrines of Calvinism I threw away in mass, and thus gotrid of the difficulties connected with predestination, election andreprobation. The difficulties connected with infinite and absolutefore-knowledge I got rid of by modifying and limiting the doctrine. Manytheological difficulties appeared to arise, not from the doctrines ofScripture, but from anti-christian fictions, and false theories ofScripture doctrines. These I set aside without much ceremony. But whenone difficulty was disposed of, another made its appearance, and in somecases several. And when I got outside the religion of Christ, moredifficulties than ever made their appearance, and difficulties often ofa more appalling character. The doctrine of predestination came back inthe shape of fate or necessity. All the great difficulties of theologyhad ugly likenesses in infidel philosophy. Instead of reaching a regionof unsullied light, I got into one of clouds and darkness. And thefurther I wandered, the blacker the clouds became, and the thicker thedarkness. The difficulties, the perplexities, on the side of unbelief, were more distressing and embarrassing than those I had encountered onthe side of Christianity. 

13. Again. I was frequently tried by the characters of unbelievers. Ihad read and believed that many of the older unbelievers had beenimmoral; but I supposed that modern unbelievers were a better class. Ihad seen a number of statements to that effect in books and newspapers, some of them proceeding from Christians, and even from Christianministers. I was disposed to believe that even the older infidels hadnot been so bad as represented. I knew that _I_ had been belied, and Iconsidered it probable that all who had had quarrels or controversieswith members of the priesthood, had been belied in like manner. Ibelieved for a long time, that the loss of faith in the supernaturalorigin of Christianity and the Bible, had made me better, in somerespects, instead of worse. I thought no changes had taken place in mycharacter, but what, on the whole, were improvements. For years after Ibecame an unbeliever, I endeavored to practise all the unquestionablevirtues inculcated in the Bible, and I was disposed to believe thatmodern unbelievers generally did the same. And when I lectured againstthe Divine authority of the Bible, I disclaimed, as I have already said, all sympathy with those who rejected the Bible because itdiscountenanced vice. And such was the violence of my anti-religiousfanaticism, that I had actually come at one time to believe thatinfidelity, in connection with natural science, was more friendly tovirtue than Christianity. 

But my faith in this view met with many rude shocks after I had beensome time in America. Often when I came to be acquainted with the menwho invited me to lecture, I was ashamed to be seen standing with themin the streets; and I shrank from the touch of their hand as frompollution. And many a time when I had associated with persons for alength of time, thinking them above suspicion, I was amazed to find, atlength, that they looked on vicious indulgence as harmless, and wereastonished that any man who had lost his faith in Christianity, shouldhave scruples with regard to fornication or adultery. Though thesepainful discoveries did not at once convince me that infidelity waswrong, and Christianity right, they were not without effect. Theylessened my respect for the infidel philosophy, and prepared the way formy return to Christ. In England, where I expected on my return, to findunbelievers better, I found them worse. I supposed that the Seculariststhought as I did with regard to virtue. I thought their object was toadvance the temporal interests of mankind, and never dreamt but thatthey regarded virtue as the greatest of those interests. And when Ifound first one and then another to be dishonest, drunken, licentious, Iwas disposed to regard them as exceptions to the general rule. To thelast; nay, for some time after my entire separation from the party, Isupposed the profligate, unprincipled, abandoned ones to be the few, andthe honest and virtuous ones to be the many. And when at length I wasconvinced past doubt of my mistake, the effect was terribly painful. Butit was salutary. It went far towards convincing me, that whetherreligion was founded in truth or not, it was necessary to the virtue andhappiness of mankind. It prepared me and inclined me still further toreturn to Christ, and brought me a step or two nearer to His side. 

14. Then again, the influences of my family were strongly in my favor. Ihad a wife that always loved me, and that never ceased to pray. And Ihad children that grew up believers, to a great extent, under the shadowof my unbelief. They had suffered, as I have already said, from thecruel treatment to which they had seen their father subjected: they hadbeen awfully prejudiced against certain classes of ministers, if notagainst ministers generally; but now their prejudices were well nighgone. And they had never been embittered against Christianity. And nowthey had come to feel strongly in its favor, and to look on skepticismboth as a great error, and a terrible calamity. My youngest son wassomething of a genius. He was a clever mathematician, and an acutelogician. And he would say to me sometimes, when he heard me utteringantichristian sentiments, "Father, I think you are wrong. I am sure youare wrong on that point; and if you will listen to me I think I canconvince you that you are. " And I did listen. I had long been accustomedto regard my children more as friends and companions, than as inferiors, and to encourage them to speak to me with all freedom. And they werekind and considerate enough as a rule to use the liberty I gave themwithout abusing it; so I hearkened to their remarks and remonstrances. And there were occasions on which the logic of the child proved mightierthan the logic of the father--there were cases in which the fatherlearned lessons of truth, from those whom he ought to have instructed. My eldest son, if not so powerful in logic, was surpassed by none ingoodness and tenderness; and if his brother excelled him in acutenessand caution, no one could excel him in devout and passionate longingsfor his father's return to Christ. And both these sons, and the whole ofmy family, exerted an influence, which tended first to check theextravagances of my skepticism, and then to help and hasten my return tothe truth as it is in Jesus. 

My sons assisted me in more ways than one. They were more observant ofmen than I was, and they were better judges of character. And they hadbetter opportunities than I had, of learning what the infidels with whomthey came in contact, really were, both in their principles and way oflife. And they were readier to receive the truth on the subject than I. The consequence was, that both in America and in England, they gatheredup a multitude of facts that I should have passed unnoticed; and wereprepared to use them for my benefit, when the proper time should come. And the proper time did come at length. I could believe nothing againstparties with whom I was connected, on any one's testimony, till I hadbegun myself to detect their misdoings. My wife and children knew this, so they never troubled me with _their_ discoveries, till I had myselfbegun to make similar discoveries. As soon as they found I had seenenough to shake my confidence in a number of the unbelievers--as soon asthey found that I had got rid of my mad prejudices in favor of theparties, and had so far come to myself as to have obtained the use of myeyes and understanding, they knew that the time for making known to me_their_ discoveries had come. And they made them known. And they agreedso perfectly with what I myself had seen and proved, that I could nolonger discredit their statements. And they explained a multitude ofother matters. Thus another blow was struck, both at my faith inskeptics, and my faith in skepticism. 

And both my wife and children had, on the whole, wonderful patience withme in my tardy movements towards the truth. When I consider how much ofevil they saw in connexion with infidelity, and how strong their feelingwas of the truth and necessity of religion, I wonder at theirforbearance. At times their patience was well-nigh exhausted, but theyseldom betrayed the fact by their behavior. But my eldest son informedme, after my return to Christ, that at one time, doubting whether Ishould ever be cured of my insanity, he made up his mind to forswear allother occupations, and give himself exclusively to the Christianministry, that he might spend his life and powers in a ceaseless warfareagainst the horrible delusions to which I seemed so irretrievablywedded. 

15. In the year 1857, towards the close of the summer, I left my home inNebraska for a time, and went eastward on a lecturing tour. My firstappointment was at East Liverpool, in Ohio. There I met with my good, old friend John Donaldson, of Byker, near Newcastle-on-Tyne, England. Hespoke of days long past, when we worked together in the cause of Christ. He was kind, as he had always been; but it troubled him to find me sochanged--so far estranged from the views of former times. Though glad tosee my friend, the memories which his presence revived, of the days whenI was a happy and a useful minister of Christ, and the partialre-awakening of old religious thoughts and feelings which it occasioned, made me feel, for a moment, an indescribable sensation, as of one whohad got an unlooked-for glimpse of some fearful loss he had sustained, or of some tremendous mistake he had committed. My infidel logic, however, hastened to my aid, and assured me I was right; but the deepand deathless instincts of my soul were not entirely at rest. 

I reached Philadelphia at length. There I was engaged by Dr. W. Wrightfor eight months. I lectured every Sunday, sometimes on theological, sometimes on moral, and sometimes on scientific and general subjects. Ialways urged on my hearers a virtuous life, and did what I could toescape the society of persons of immoral habits. And I thought, for atime, I had succeeded. But I was grievously mistaken. One of the actingmen in my congregation was a Plymouth man. He, as I afterwards found, had deserted his wife and family, and was living with another woman. Another, a more important member of my congregation, whom I supposed tobe an example of propriety, turned out to be an advocate of unlimitedlicense. And another, a man of great wealth, who had often invited me tohis house, and shown me kindness in other ways, I found, after hisdeath, had never been married to the person with whom he had lived ashis wife. I also found that he had another family in another part of thecity. I mention these unpleasant matters to show, that facts were notwanting to shake my faith in the moral influence of infidel principles. The gentleman by whom I was employed, treated me with great respect andkindness, and some of my congregation did what they could to make mecomfortable; but the longer I remained in my position, the lessencouragement I saw to expect infidelity or skepticism to produce avirtuous and honorable life. 

The gentleman by whom I was employed had thought of expending some fiftythousand dollars in building a hall, and endowing a lecture, &c. , forthe propagation of infidel principles; but the conduct of the skepticsthat gathered round him, soon cured him of his anti-christian zeal. 

16. Before my term was quite expired, I was engaged by another gentlemanfor eight months. But I had seen so much to shake my faith in thebeneficent tendency of infidelity, that this time I left myself free, both to lecture on what subjects I thought best, and to leave mysituation on two months' notice. As my new engagement did not commencefor three months or more, I had the happiness of spending some time inthe bosom of my family. As usual, the influences to which I was subjectthere were all calculated to abate my faith in irreligious principles, and to dispose me to look with less disfavor and prejudice onChristianity. In August I started again for Philadelphia. I left myfamily with sadness and tears, and I proceeded on my journey with afeeling that it would not be long before my labors in Philadelphia wouldcome to an end. And the feeling grew stronger every week. The Hebrewshad a hard task when they were required to make bricks without straw;but he who undertakes to make people good without religion, has to makebricks without clay--and that is a vast deal harder. I felt my positionwas not the right one, and I longed and sighed for something more inaccordance with my gradually changing views and better feelings; butknew not exactly what it was I needed, or where it was to be found. Ifrequently attended the ministry of Dr. Furness, the Unitarian minister;and though his preaching was far from being all it should be, hissermons had a salutary effect on my mind. His words about God and duty, about Christ and immortality, fell on my soul at times like refreshingdew. I also went to hear the Rev. Albert Barnes, and was both pleasedand surprised with the truth and excellence of many of his remarks. Iheard several other ministers; but the irrational and anti-christiandoctrines set forth by some of them, exerted an influence on my mindwhich was the opposite of salutary. 

At the end of two months I gave notice to my committee that I shouldgive up my situation as lecturer. I had come to the conclusion, that towar with Christianity was not the way to promote the virtue andhappiness of mankind, and I told my congregation so. I added, that if wewere even sure that the sentiments entertained by Christians wereerroneous, it would be well to refrain from assailing them, till we hadsomething better to put in their place. And I also advised them, nowthey were about to be left without a lecturer, to go to some place ofworship; and if they could not hear exactly what they could like, tomake the best of what they did hear, and by all means to live avirtuous, honorable, and useful life. I gave similar advice tocongregations in other places, and by many it was well received. 

When I gave up my situation in Philadelphia, my intention was to returnto England. I was anxious to free myself, as far as possible, from menof extreme views, whether in religion or politics, and to place myselfin a position in which I should be perfectly free to pursue whatevercourse a regard to truth and duty might require. I made up my mind, therefore, that on my arrival in England, I would stand alone, apartfrom all societies and public men, and have a paper of my own, andpublish from time to time whatever might commend itself to my judgmentas true and good. I knew I had changed during the last two years, thoughI did not know how much; and I believed I was changing, though I couldnot tell in what the change which was taking place would end. I had noidea that I could ever become a Christian again, though the tendency ofthe change which was taking place in me was in that direction. 

Having taken leave of my friends, I hastened to Boston, and prepared formy voyage across the deep. I was to sail by the Royal Mail Steamship_Canada_, on the eleventh of January, 1860. Just as I was stepping onboard the packet, I received a letter from my youngest son. Among anumber of other kind things, it contained words like the following:"Father, dear, when you get to England, don't dream that by any breathof yours, or by any paper balls that you can fire, you can ever shatteror shake the eternal foundations on which Christianity rests. " Wordslike those from a dear good son could not but have a powerful effect onmy mind. 

And now I started on my voyage. I had never ventured on the sea beforewithout dread of shipwreck and drowning. This time I had no such fear. On the contrary, as the vessel threaded her way among the rocks andislands of Boston Harbor, I experienced a strange and unaccountableelevation of soul. I had not felt so cheerful, so hopeful, so happy, formany years. And this delightful joyousness of soul continued during thewhole of the voyage. Yet I had never gone to sea at so dangerous aseason. And I never encountered such fearful and long-continued storms. Before we had fairly lost sight of the last point of land, the winds, which were already raging with unusual violence, began to blow morefuriously. They fell on us in the most fearful blasts, and roared aroundus in a deafening howl. The sea was thrown into the wildest uproar. Thevessel was tossed and tumbled about in the most merciless manner. Onemoment she was plunging head foremost into the deep; the next she wasclimbing the most stupendous waves. Now her right wheel was vainlylaboring deep in the water, while her left was spinning uselessly in theair; then her right wheel was whirling in the air, while her left wassplurging in the deep. Sometimes the waves swept over the vessel, whileat other times they would strike her so rudely on the side, that shestaggered through all her timbers. After the storm had raged for two orthree days, there came what are called white squalls. A light grey cloudappears in the distance, and as it approaches you, it sends forthlightnings, accompanied with hurried bursts of thunder. A furious stormof hail or snow immediately follows. The howl of the tempest rises to ayell, and the squall, as it sweeps along in its fury, cuts off the topsof the waves, and scatters them in foam over the surface of the deeplike a mantle of snow. The first of those squalls went right through ourlarge square sail, tearing it to shreds. Another sent a wave on boardwhich snapped in pieces stanchions of wrought iron thicker than my arms, and carried away one of our best boats. And this unspeakable uproar ofthe elements continued for several days. At times I crept on deck for afew moments, and, holding by the rigging, gazed on the wild magnificenceof the appalling scene. And all this time my heart, instead of beingtortured with its customary fears, was full of a cheerful joyousconfidence. It was as if some spirit of heaven had taken possession ofmy soul to give me sweet presentiments of the approach of better days. And so perhaps it was. I was moving onwards, though I knew it not, to ahappier destiny, and the peace and joy I felt were as the dawn ortwilight of the coming day of my redemption. 

We reached Liverpool at length, and I was soon at Betley, the nativeplace of my wife, which was to be my temporary home. And now, if I hadfallen into good hands, or if the better thoughts and tendencies of mysoul had been sufficiently strong, I might have entered at once on ahappier course. But I encountered an unlooked-for difficulty. As I havesaid, my intention was, on landing in England, to begin a periodical, and to keep apart from persons of extravagant views. I was not aChristian, nor did I, at the time, suppose I should ever become one; butI was an earnest moralist, and I had become more moderate in my ideasboth on religious and political subjects. And I was, to some extent, prepared to receive fresh light. I had got an impression, --I had had itfor some time before I left America, --that my mind was not in athoroughly healthy state, --that it was not exactly itself, --that it wasso much biassed in favor of irreligion, that it was incapable of doingjustice to arguments for a God and Providence, for a spiritual world anda future life. I partly believed, and now I know, that facts andarguments in favor of the great fundamental doctrines of religion, didnot affect and influence me so much as they ought, --that my doubts anddisbeliefs were stronger than facts or the nature of things warranted. Isuspected, what now I regard as past doubt, that erroneous principles, and a defective method of reasoning, and long practice in searching outflaws in arguments, and detecting and exposing errors and pious frauds, had disposed me too strongly to distrust and disbelief, --that I was infact a slave to bad habits of thought and reasoning, as really as theinveterate drunkard is the slave to his irrational appetite for strongdrink. What I should believe in case the freedom of my mind and the justand harmonious action of its powers were fully restored, I could nottell; but I had a strong impression, amounting to something like anassurance, that I should believe more than I did with respect to God anda spiritual world. Had I, on arriving in England, found myself infavorable circumstances, my mind might quickly have recovered itsfreedom, and returned, in part at least, to the faith of its earlierdays. But this was not my lot. I was beset with new temptations, and wasdoomed to further disappointments. 

The Secularists had got out a prospectus of a new paper, and I was urgedto become one of the editors; and thinking that it would seem mean andselfish to begin a paper of my own under such circumstances, Ireluctantly consented. I however stipulated for full control over onehalf of the paper, and when I found that articles of a disgraceful andmischievous tendency were published in the other half, I published aspecial notice in mine, every week, that I was not answerable for thosearticles. 

In August 1860 my wife and children arrived in England. They were sorryto find me in connection with that paper and with the party which itrepresented; and they set themselves at once to work to bring about achange; and it was not long before they succeeded. A book, written by aleading Secularist, was sent to me for review. When I read it, I foundthat its object was to undermine marriage and bring it into disrepute, and to induce men and women to abandon honorable wedlock, and tosubstitute for it unbounded sensual license. It was the filthiest, themost horrible and revolting production I had ever read. This loathsomebook had already been advertised in the paper of which I was one of theeditors, and in the part of the paper over which I had no control, ithad been strongly recommended. I found, too, that it had been veryextensively circulated among the readers of the paper, and that theSecularist leaders were adopting measures to promote its still moreextensive circulation. I at once exposed the villainous production in myportion of the paper. As far as a respect for decency would permit, Ilaid its loathsome and horrible abominations before my readers. This ledto an instant, a total, and final separation between me and the friendsof the licentious book. 

I now commenced a Paper of my own, and I said to myself, and I said tomy children: "I will now re-read the Bible; I will examine Christianity;I will review the history of the Church; I will examine the characterand workings of the various religious organizations of the day; andwhatever I find in them that is true or good, I will lay before myreaders. I am not a Christian, " said I; "and I never expect to be one;but I will do justice to the Christian cause to the best of my ability. I have said and written enough on the skeptical side: I will see whatthere is to be said on the Christian side. "

I had no idea of the greatness of the task I was undertaking. I supposedthat ten or a dozen articles would be sufficient to set forth all thatwas true and good in the Bible. But when I came to examine the Book, with my somewhat altered views, and enlarged experience, and chastenedfeelings, I found in it treasures of truth and goodness, of beauty andblessedness, of which, even in my better days, I seemed to have had buta very inadequate conception. I was touched with a hundred precepts ofmercy and tenderness in the laws of Moses. I was startled and delightedwith many Old Testament stories. The character of Job, as portrayed inthe twenty-ninth and thirty-first chapters of the book that goes underhis name, melted me to tears. I was delighted with the purity andtenderness, the beauty and sublimity of the Psalms. I was amazed at thedepth and vastness of the wisdom of the Book of Proverbs. I was pleasedwith the stern fidelity with which the prophets rebuked the vices andthe crimes, the selfishness and cruelty, of the sinners of their days, and the tenderness and devotion with which they pleaded the cause of thepoor, the fatherless, and the widow. When I came to the Gospels, andread again the wonderful story of the Man of Nazareth, my whole soulgave way. The beauty, the tenderness, the glory of His characteroverpowered me. I was ashamed, that I should ever have so fearfullymisconceived it, and done it such grievous injustice. The tears rolledfrom my eyes, moistening the book in which I was reading, and the paperon which I was writing. But I proceeded with my task. I pondered everyword He uttered, and was delighted with His glorious revelations of God, and truth, and duty. I gazed on all His wondrous works. I marked, Istudied, every trait in his character. I read the sad story of Histrials. I traced him through all His sufferings. I saw the indignitiesand cruelties to which He was subjected, and I saw the meekness, thepatience, and the fortitude with which He suffered. I saw Him on thecross. I heard the prayer which He offered in the midst of His agoniesin behalf of His murderers, 'Father, forgive them; they know not whatthey do. ' And still I read, and still I gazed, and still I listened. Iwas entranced. I had thought to stand at a distance; to look at Jesuswith the eye of a philosopher and moralist only, and calmly and coollyto take His portrait; but I was overpowered. The strange, the touchingsight drew me nearer. The loving one got hold of me. His infinitetenderness, His transcendent goodness, the glory of His whole character, and life, and doctrine took me captive; and I was no way loth to be heldby such charms. He had won me entirely. I loved Him with all my heartand soul. I was His, --His disciple, His servant, entirely, and forever. And I wanted no other treasure but to share His love, and no otheremployment but to share His work. I was, though but very imperfectlyenlightened on many things, and exceedingly weak and imperfect in manyrespects, most blessedly and indissolubly wedded to Christ and Hiscause. 

I drew the portrait of the Saviour to the best of my ability, and sentthe articles to the press. It fell to the lot of my children, incorrecting the press, to read those articles. And when they read them, they too wept, and one said to another, "Father is coming right; he willbe himself again by and by. " And they were right in thinking so. I hadcome in contact with the Great Healer. I had got a sight of One on whomit is impossible to look steadfastly and long without experiencing athorough transformation of soul. And so it was with me. From my firstlook I became less and less of a skeptic, and more and more of abeliever in Christianity, till my transformation was complete. 

The more I read the Bible with my altered feelings and change ofpurpose, the more was I impressed with its transcendent worth, and themore was I influenced by its renovating power. I saw that whatever mightbe said with regard to particular portions of the Book, it was, as awhole, the grandest revelation of truth and duty that the mind of mancould conceive. I could no longer find in my heart to talk or writeabout what appeared to be its imperfections. There were passages thatseemed dark or doubtful: there were some that seemed erroneous orcontradictory; but they amounted to nothing. They did not affect thescope, the drift, the aim, the tendency of the Book as a whole. Theymight not be consistent with certain erroneous theories of inspiration, or with certain unguarded statements of extravagant theologians; butthey were consistent with the belief that the book, as a whole, wasworthy of the Great Good being from whom it was said to have come, andadapted to the illumination and salvation of the race to which it hadbeen given. Christianity began to present itself to my mind as thetruest philosophy; as the perfection of all wisdom and goodness. Whileit met man's spiritual wants, and cheered him with the promise ofeternal bliss, it was manifestly its tendency to promote his highestinterests even in the present world. As the clouds that had darkened mymind passed away, it become plain as the light, that if mankind could bebrought to receive its teachings, and to live in accordance with itsprinciples, the world would become a paradise. 

2. I reviewed Church History. While under the influence ofanti-Christian views and feelings, I had read the history of the Churchand Christianity with a view to justify my unbelief, rather than with adesire to know the simple truth. I had looked more for facts which couldbe used to damage the Church, than for fair full views of things. Mymind had dwelt particularly on the Church's quarrels, its divisions, itsintolerance, and its wars;--on the favor which the clergy had sometimesshown to slavery and to despotism;--on their asceticisms, fanaticisms, and follies; and on cases of fraud, and selfishness, and impurity. I hadread as an advocate retained to plead the cause of unbelief, rather thanas a candid judge, or an unbiassed student, anxious to know and teachthe whole truth. I was not conscious of my unfairness at the time, but Inow began to see that I had been influenced by my irreligious passionsand prejudices. I saw, on looking over my Guizot for instance, that Ihad marked the passages which contained matters not creditable to theclergy, and passed unnoticed those portions of the work which set forththe services which the Church and Christianity had rendered tocivilization. I also remembered how eagerly I had swallowed the unfairrepresentations and fallacious reasonings of Buckle with regard toChristianity and skepticism, and how impatiently I had hurried over whatreviewers friendly to Christianity said on the other side of thesubject. The balance of my mind was at length restored. I now saw thatChristianity had proved itself the friend of peace and freedom, oflearning and science, of trade and agriculture, of temperance andpurity, of justice and charity, of domestic comfort and nationalprosperity. The history of Christianity was the history of our superiorlaws, of our improved manners, of our beneficent institutions, of ourschools of learning, of our boundless wealth, of our constitutionalgovernments, of our unequalled literature, of our world-wide influence, of our domestic happiness, and of all that goes to make up our highestforms of civilization. Imperfectly as it had been understood, anddefectively as it had been reduced to practice, Christianity had placedthe nations of Europe at the head of the human race. Christian nationswere the most enlightened and virtuous, the most prosperous andpowerful, the most free and happy of all the nations of the earth. Thepious frauds, the intolerance and persecutions, the oppressions andwrongs, the selfishness and sin, which were found in the history of theChurch, were not the effects of Christianity, but the effects ofpassions and principles directly opposed to its spirit and teachings. 

3. I looked at the Churches of the day. I found them all at work for theeducation of the young, and for the instruction and salvation of theworld. I saw them building schools and chapels, and supplying them withteachers and preachers. I saw them printing books, and tracts, andBibles, and spreading them abroad in all directions. I saw them foundinglibraries and reading-rooms, and young men's Christian associations, andladies' sewing societies. I saw them sending out missionaries abroad, and carrying on a multitude of beneficent operations at home. I askedfor the schools and libraries, the books and periodicals, the halls ofscience and the missionary operations of the enemies of Christianity;but they were nowhere to be found. They _talked_ about education, butinstructed no one. They talked about science, but did nothing for itsspread or its advancement. They abused Christians for neglecting men'stemporal interests, but did nothing to promote men's earthly happinessthemselves. They found fault with Sunday-schools, and talked of thefaults of Christians, but never corrected their own. They talked ofliberty, and practised tyranny. They complained of intolerance, yetfollowed such as renounced their society, or questioned their views, with the bitterest reproaches, and the most heartless persecution. Theytalked of reform, but sowed the seeds of rebellion, anarchy, andunbounded licentiousness. 

The Christians had the advantage over their adversaries even in outwardappearance. They were cleaner and better clad, and were more orderly intheir deportment. There was quite a contrast between the crowds ofChristians that passed along the streets to their places of worship, andthe knots of Godless, Christless men who strolled along, or sat in theirdoors, in their dirty clothes, with their unwashed faces, smoking theirpipes, or reading their filthy papers. There was a contrast betweenChristian congregations and infidel meetings. One had the appearance ofpurity and elevation; while the other had the stamp of pollution anddegradation. Irreligion seemed the nurse of coarseness and barbarism. Some of the secularists actually argued against civilization, asRousseau had done before them. One of them reprinted Burke's ironicalwork in favor of the savage state, and sent it to me for review, and wasgreatly offended because I refused to recommend it as a sober, serious, philosophical treatise to my readers. 

It was plain that there was something wrong in infidelity; that itstendency was to vice and depravity; while Christianity, whether it wasdivine in its origin or not, was evidently the friend and benefactor ofour race. 

In 1862, some friends of mine at Burnley, who had built a public hallthere, engaged me as their lecturer. The parties were unbelievers, butthey were opposed to the advocates of unbounded license. They werefavorable to morality, and wished to have an association that shouldembody what they thought good in the Church, without being decidedlyreligious. They wished to have music and singing at the Sunday meetings, and to limit public discussion to the week-night meetings. They alsowished to have Sunday-schools, day-schools, reading-rooms, andlibraries. We had come to the conclusion that the Christians were righton the whole in their way of conducting their public meetings, and wewere resolved to imitate them as far as we honestly could. And here Ilived and labored for more than a year. We did not succeed however sowell as we had expected. Our singers, and musicians, and Sunday-schoolteachers had no high and powerful motive to keep them regularly at theirposts, so that whenever a strong temptation came to lure them away, theyran from their tasks, and left me and another or two to toil alone. Wethen formed a Church, and made laws, thinking to keep our associates totheir duty in that way. But this made matters worse. Their fancies andpleasures were their laws, and they would obey no other. Most of ourteachers left, and I and a friend or two had to teach the schoolourselves. My friends established a day-school, and hired a teacher; buthe turned out to be an unbounded license man; he brought with him, infact, an unmarried woman instead of his wife, and they found itnecessary to get rid of him as soon as they could. 

All the time I was at Burnley my heart first, and then my head, werecoming nearer and nearer to Christ and Christianity. I gradually gave upmy opposition both to religion and to the churches. The last lecture inwhich I gave utterance to anything unfavorable to the Bible was one onNoah's flood. I spoke on the subject by request, and against myinclination, and before I had got half through I began to feelunutterably dissatisfied with myself. I was really unhappy. From thattime forward I dwelt chiefly on moral subjects, and often took occasionto speak favorably of the Bible and Christianity. I tried to explainwhat was dark, and to set forth what was manifestly true and good intheir teachings. 

I lectured on the wisdom of the Book of Proverbs, on the beauty ofChrist's character, and on the excellency of many of His doctrines, onthe advantages of faith in Christ, and on the follies and vices ofinfidel secularism, and on quite a number of other Christian subjects. 

My younger son came to reside at Burnley while I was there, and we hadfrequent talks as we walked together along the fields and lanes, andover the neighboring hills; and this also helped to bring me nearer toChrist and His Church. I read the works of Epictetus at this time, andmy faith in God and immortality, and my love of virtue too, werestrengthened by his reasonings. 

About the same time a person wrote to me to go and lecture at Goole. Iwent. No subject had been named to me, and I resolved to speak in favorof the leading practical principles of Christianity. When I got toGoole, I found that the man who had invited me had put up a bill, calling on his neighbors and fellow-townsmen to come and hear thetriumphant opponent of Christianity demolish their religion. I told himhe should not have put forth a bill like that, --that I was not anopponent of Christianity, --that I was not an enemy of thechurches, --that I had no desire to demolish religion, --that I wished tobring people to cherish and practise the leading principles ofChristianity. This rather puzzled and distressed him; butnotwithstanding his disappointment, he would have me lecture. Themeeting was out of doors. I soon had a large audience. I quicklyundeceived such as had come expecting to hear me vilify the Bible, thechurches, or religion. I spoke in the highest terms of Christ and Histeachings. I showed that many of them were the perfection of wisdom andgoodness. I spoke of the causes of human wretchedness, and showed thatobedience to the teachings of Christ and His Apostles would remove themall. Many things that I said, and especially some remarks I made ondomestic duties and domestic happiness, went home to the hearts of myhearers. Not a murmur was heard from any quarter. Men nudged each other, and women looked in each others' faces, and all gave signs that theyfelt the truth of my remarks, and the wisdom of my counsels, and themeeting ended as satisfactorily as could be desired. 

It was while I was living at Burnley that I began again to pray. A youngatheist died, and I was invited to his funeral, and requested to speakat his grave. When we got to the cemetery the little chapel was occupiedby another company, and we had to wait some time for our turn. My mindwas in a sad and solemn mood, and I left my party and wandered to thefarther end of the cemetery. It was a bright and beautiful day in April. The grass was springing fresh and green, and the hawthorn buds wereopening, and everything seemed full of life, and big with promise. Thesun was shining in all his glory. The thrushes and the blackbirds weresinging in the surrounding groves and thickets, and the larks werepouring forth their melody in the air. Yet all was dark and sorrowfulwithin. I felt the misery of unbelief, yet felt myself unable to freemyself from its horrible and tormenting power. I had a growingconviction that I was the slave of a vicious method of reasoning, and ofan inveterate habit of unreasonable or excessive doubt, and that I hadnot the power to do God and Christianity justice. I felt as if I oughtto pray, but something whispered, "It is irrational. " No matter, I couldrefrain no longer: and lifting up my tearful eyes to heaven I exclaimed, "God help me. " He did help me. He strengthened my struggling soul fromthat hour, and gave to the good within me a growing power over the evil. I dried my tears and returned to my party. I spoke at the poor youngAtheist's grave, and concluded my address with the following prayer, "May trust in God, and the hope of a better life, and the love of truthand virtue, and delight in doing good, remain with all who have them, and come to all who have them not. Amen. "

The gentleman with whom I had lived at Burnley had said to me on themorning of that very day, that if I prayed at the funeral he shouldnever think well of me more. He afterwards said, when he heard of theprayer I had offered, he had no objection to a prayer like that. He wasnot aware of the shorter prayer that I had offered when alone, or hewould have spoken probably in another strain. He was dreadfully opposedto religion, and very uneasy when he saw me moving in the direction ofChristianity. 

Among the friends who left the church on account of my expulsion, wasSamuel Methley, of Mirfield, near Huddersfield. He was rather eccentricin some respects; but he was an honest, earnest, kind, and Christianman. He had had little or no school instruction, and he had nothing thatcould be called learning, or high intellectual culture; but he was a manof great faith, of much love, and much prayer. His affection andreverence for me were almost unbounded, and so long as I continued abeliever in Christ, he was ready to go with me any lengths inEvangelical reform. When I ran into politics he was somewhat staggered, but followed me as far as he durst. When I began to be skeptical hestood still, afraid, and very unhappy. On one occasion he ventured torebuke me; but I knew that the rebuke was the offspring of affection, and I took it quietly. When I went to America he was greatly distressed, and prayed for me most anxiously and earnestly. When he found I hadbecome an unbeliever, he resolved never to go near a meeting of mineagain, and prayed to God to help him to keep his resolution. For manyyears he tried to wean himself from me, to extinguish his passionateregard for me; but whenever he found that I was to lecture in hisneighborhood, he lost his self-control, and came, though withreluctance, and many misgivings, to my meetings. He generally rose aftermy lectures, to protest against my extravagances, and to testify hisuncontrollable affection for me, and his anxious desire for mysalvation. To do otherwise than take his remarks in good part wasimpossible. Poor, dear, good man! I little thought at the time how muchdistress and pain I was causing him. When he found that I was comingback to Christ, he was joyful beyond measure. When he heard me preach ontrue religion, he was in transports. At a meeting that followed, hespoke with so much feeling and fervor, that I was obliged to try tocheck him a little, for fear the violence of his excitement shouldinjure his feeble and failing health. My conversion, though but partialthen, gave him the utmost delight. 

At length his feeble frame gave way, and he sank into his bed to rise nomore. He sent me word that he was very desirous to see me, and I visitedhim without delay. He was very ill. His voice was almost gone, and hespoke with great difficulty. He told me he wished me, when he was gone, to preach his funeral sermon, and write his epitaph, and take charge ofa manuscript containing the story of his life. I told him I would do so. He then spoke of his trust in God, his love of Christ, and his hopes ofa blessed immortality, while tears of joy stood glistening in his eyes. He then referred to some matters that had tried him sadly, but added: "Ihave cast my care on God. " He tried to speak of his feelings towards me, but said: "Those papers (referring to the story of his life) will tellyou all. " At last he said: "Pray with me, Joseph. " I had not prayed withany one for many years, but I said at once: "I will, Sammy;" and I fellon my knees, and prayed by his side. He then, weak as he was, prayedearnestly for me, and for my wife and family. 

He died a few weeks after. I preached his funeral sermon on thefollowing Sunday, in May, 1863, in a field near the house in which hehad lived and died, from the text: "Let me die the death of therighteous, and let my last end be like his. " There was an immensecongregation, consisting of people of all denominations, both infideland Christian, from every part of the surrounding district. Whenspeaking of his conduct in clinging to the religion of Christ, insteadof following me into the regions of doubt and unbelief, I declared myconviction that he had done right. "He had read little, " said I, "and Ihad read much: yet he was the wiser man of the two. His good religiousinstincts and feelings kept him right, and kept him happy in the warmthand sunlight of the religion of Christ; while my vain reasonings carriedme astray into the dark and chilling regions of eternal cold and utterdesolation. There is a seeming wisdom that is foolishness; and there isa childlike, artless simplicity of faith, which, while it is regarded asfoolishness by many, is in truth the perfection of wisdom. There arethings which are hid from the wise and prudent, that are revealed tobabes. And Jesus was right, when, addressing the self-conceitedskeptical critics of His day, He said: 'Except ye be converted andbecome as little children, ye cannot enter the kingdom of heaven. ' Mydear departed friend, when trusting in God as his Father, and in Christas his Saviour, and living a godly life, was right, while I, indistrusting the promptings of my religious instincts and affections, andcommitting myself to the reasonings of a cold and heartless logic, waswrong. The new-born babe, that rests untroubled in its mother's arms, and, without misgiving, sucks from her breast the milk so wonderfullyprovided for it, does the best and wisest thing conceivable. In obeyingits instincts, it obeys the great good Author of its being, and lives. If--to suppose what is happily an impossibility--if the child shoulddiscard its instincts, and refuse to trust its mother, till it hadlogical proof of her trustworthiness; and, distrusting its naturalcravings, should refuse to take the nutriment provided for it, till itcould ascertain by chemical analysis and physiological investigation, that it was just the kind of food which it required, it would die. Mydeparted friend was the happy, confiding child, and saved his soulalive; while I was the analytical and logical doubter, and all butstarved my miserable soul to death. Thank God, I have lived to see myerror. The loving, trusting Christian is right. The religion of Jesus issubstantially true and divine; and, thus far, I declare myself aChristian. "

It was a beautiful, summer-like day. The sun shone brightly, and thewinds were low, and the vast congregation was orderly and attentive, andmany were much affected. The report that I had declared myself aChristian, without any qualification annexed, got into the papers, andran through the country. To many it gave the greatest satisfaction. Good, kind Christians came round me wherever I went, testifying theirdelight and gratitude. Some wept for joy. Unbelievers were greatlyannoyed at the tidings of my conversion, and some of them came andentreated me to give the report a public contradiction. This I refusedto do. True, the papers said somewhat more than I had said; but thestatement they gave was true in substance, so I let it pass, and thegrowing change for the better in my views and feelings soon made it truein form. 

CHAPTER XVIII. 

PARTIES WHO CONTRIBUTED TOWARDS MY RETURN TO CHRIST. 

After I fell into doubt and unbelief, the Church, and the ministrygenerally, appeared to look on me as irretrievably lost. The great massof them made no attempt for my recovery. How much they cared for my soulI do not know; but for nearly twenty years they left me to wander as asheep that had no shepherd. Many of them spoke against me, and wroteagainst me, and some of them even met me in public discussion; but theynever approached me in the spirit of gentleness and love, to try to winme back to Christ, and bring me once more into His Church. Some of themtreated me with grievous injustice. As I have said some pages back, oneminister made himself most odious to me and my friends, and didsomething towards increasing our antipathy to the religion which he sogrossly dishonored, by his unjust and hateful doings. It is bad forChristianity when men like these are put forward as its advocates. Noopen enemies can do it so much injury as such unworthy friends. 

There were others, however, who took a more Christian course, and ifthey did not succeed in at once reclaiming me from my melancholydelusions, they produced a happy effect on my mind, which helped tobring about, in the end, my return to the Christian faith. 

1. There was one man, a minister, who, though he wrote against some ofmy views, always treated me with respect. He never gave me offensivenames, nor charged me with unworthy motives, nor treated me withaffected contempt. He regarded me simply as an erring brother, andstrove, with genuine Christian affection, to bring me back to what heregarded as the truth. He died before my restoration to the Church, buthis labors on my behalf were not in vain. 

2. A kind-hearted layman once sent me a book--"_The Philosophy of thePlan of Salvation_, "--accompanied with a short, but affectionate letter. The book did not convert me, but the kindness of the friend that sent ithad a happy effect. Though beyond the reach of logic, I was within thereach of love. 

3. The _Author_ of "_The Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation_" was Mr. Walker, a minister of Mansfield, Ohio. While in America I gave a courseof lectures in that town on the Bible. The friend at whose house I wasstaying took me to see Mr. Walker, who received me with great kindness, invited me to dine with him, and conversed with me in a truly Christianmanner. He even came to one of my lectures, in hopes of helping me overthe difficulties which blocked my way to the faith of Christ. I did not, however, treat him with the kind and considerate tenderness with whichhe had treated me. I was under unhappy influences, and I spoke on theBible in such a manner as to try him past endurance, and he left me thatnight with very painful feelings, regarding me, probably, as lost pasthope. Should he read this work, it may give him satisfaction to know, that his kindness, and his work on Christ as a revelation of the EternalFather, had a part in helping me back to the religion of Christ. 

4. Five years ago last December, Mr. John Mawson, Sheriff ofNewcastle-on-Tyne, was killed on the Town Moor by a terrible explosionof nitro-glycerine. I had been acquainted with him more thanfive-and-twenty years. He joined the church at Newcastle, of which I wasa minister, and remained my friend to the last. He had his doubts oncertain points of theology, but he never lost his faith in the greatprinciples of Christianity. When I was over from America once, I spentsome time in his company, and we had frequent conversations on religion. "It seems to me, " said he, "that we ought to put some trust in our_hearts_. My head has often tempted me to doubt; but my heart has alwaysclung to God and immortality. It does so still; and I believe it isright. Indeed, I have no doubt of it. " I remembered his words. They ledme to study the moral and spiritual instincts of my nature morethoroughly than I had done before. They led me to study the subject ofinstinct and natural affection generally. _My_ instincts, like theinstincts of my friend, had always clung to God and a future life, andto the principles of religion and virtue, even when reason hesitated anddoubted most. I had never given up my belief in any of the greatdoctrines of Christianity without a painful struggle. But I had been ledto think it my duty, when there was a conflict between my head and myheart, to take part with my head. My heart, for instance, would say, "Pray;" but reason, or something in the garb of reason, would say, "Don't. If what you desire is good, God will give it you, whether youpray for it or not; and if it be evil, He will withhold it, pray as youmay. Prayer may move a man like yourself; but it cannot move God. " And Ihearkened to the seeming reason, and gave up prayer. My heart said, "There is a personal, conscious, all-perfect God. " My head, or myinfidel philosophy said, "There cannot be such a God. A God all-powerfulcould prevent evil. A God all-good _would_ prevent it. God cannottherefore be a conscious, personal, all-perfect being. He must be ablind, unconscious power; the sum total of natural tendencies, workingaccording to the eternal properties of things, without the possibilityof change; and hence the existence of evil, and the prevalence ofeternal, unalterable law. " And here again my head was permitted toprevail, and my heart, in spite of all its remonstrances, was compelledto give way. And with a personal, conscious, all-perfect God, went therichest treasures of the human heart, --trust in a Fatherly Providence;the hope of a blessed immortality, and faith in the ultimate triumph oftruth and justice, and all assurance of human progress and a good timecoming. 

Yet I was obliged, in spite of the false philosophical principle I hadadopted, to accept the oracles of my heart on many points, and to rejectthe logic of my head. My heart said, "Speak the truth; to lie is wrong. "But now that it had got rid of a personal God, logic said, "There can benothing wrong in a lie that hurts no one. There is something commendablein a useful, serviceable lie. To lie to save a person from danger ordestruction is a virtue. The feeling which shrinks from such a lie is ablind, irrational prejudice, and should be plucked up and cast out ofthe soul. Truth may be proper enough in the _strong_: but _deceit_ isthe wisdom of the _weak_. " But in this case my heart, my instinctivelove of truth, prevailed. 

Again, my heart pleaded for justice and mercy; for _justice_ to all; andfor _mercy_ to the needy and helpless. But reason, or the heartless andgodless philosophy that usurped its name, said, "Utility is the supremelaw; the only law of man. Justice and mercy are right when they areuseful; but when they are hurtful they are right no longer. If bydestroying the helpless and the needy we can deliver them from theirmisery, and increase the happiness of the rest of our race, theirdestruction is a virtue, especially if we dispose of them in a quiet andpainless way, so as to spare them the fears and agonies of death!" Buthere again my heart prevailed. My natural, unreasoning, instinctivehorror of injustice and murder rendered the specious pleadings ofAtheistic utilitarianism powerless. And so on moral matters generally. 

As a rule, Atheists succeed, in course of time, in vanquishing anddestroying their moral as well as their religious instincts, and thenthey embrace the most revolting doctrines, and reconcile themselves tothe most appalling deeds. They look on marriage as irrational, andregard modesty and chastity as vices. Shame is a weakness in their eyes, and natural affections are irrational prejudices. Scruples againstlying, theft and murder, when any great good is to be gained by thosepractices, are insanity. Gratitude, even to parents, is an absurdity. Free indulgence, unlimited license, is a virtue. The curse of our raceis religion. The one great social evil is a surplus population; and theprevention or destruction of children is the sum of social science andvirtue. The extinction of the weaker races, and the destruction of thoseof every race who cannot contribute their share of wealth and pleasureto the common stock, is the perfection of philosophy. In short, all theold-fashioned principles of virtue, honor, conscience, generosity, self-restraint, self-sacrifice, and natural affection are exploded, andin their place there comes a black and hideous chaos of all indecenciesand immoralities, a boundless and bottomless abyss of all imaginableand unspeakable horrors. I shudder when I think how near I came to thishell of atheistical philosophy. My inability entirely to extinguish mybetter instincts and affections, prevented me from plunging headlonginto its frightful depths. It was more than I could do to carry out theatheistical principles of mere theoretical reasoning to its lastresults. I was, thank God, on some points, always inconsistent, and myinconsistency was my salvation. My heart preserved me in spite of myhead. 

But if I could not carry out my principle of trusting to mere reasoningto its full extent, why did I act on it at all? When I found that it ledto utter degradation and ruin, why did I not renounce it, and trust oncemore in my native instincts? When I found myself obliged to follow myheart in so many matters, why not follow it in all? I answer, I had nota sufficient understanding of the matter. I wanted more light. But thecourse of study on which the remarks of my dear good friend Mr. Mawsonled me to enter, led to clearer and correcter views on the subject. Itled to the conviction that instinct and natural affection are divineinspirations, --that the beliefs and practices to which they constrain usare the perfection of wisdom and goodness, --that to set them aside isinevitable ruin, --that whenever reason says one thing, and our religiousand moral affections and instincts say another, we ought to turn a deafear to reason, and follow implicitly the dictates of our moral andreligious faculties. And to this conviction, resulting in a greatmeasure from the remarks of my faithful and devoted friend, I owe, inpart, my present unspeakable happiness as a believer in Christ. 

5. I encountered two Christian men in public discussion who left afavorable impression on my mind. One was the Rev. Andrew Loose, ofWinchester, Indiana. The subject of discussion between me and Mr. Loosewas the divine authority of the Bible. He went through the whole debate, which lasted several days, without uttering one uncharitable, scornful, or angry word, with the exception of a single phrase in his last speech;and even that he meekly and generously recalled, after I had satisfiedhim of its impropriety. I never forgot the conduct of that dear goodman, and his Christian meekness and forbearance had a good effect on myheart. 

6. The other gentleman whose conduct left the most favorable impressionof all on my mind, was Colonel Shaw, of Bourtree Park, Ayr, Scotland, ofwhose gentlemanly behavior and great Christian kindness I have alreadyspoken. 

7. There were some other persons who, without assailing me withargument, did me considerable good. After lecturing at Burnley once, aperson rose to oppose me, and a great disturbance followed. I was thrownfrom the platform, and fell backward on the floor, and a crowd ofpersons fell upon me, and I had a narrow escape from death by violenceand suffocation. I was rescued however alive. In the tumult my overcoat, my hat, and my watch disappeared, and my body was somewhat bruised. Nextday a gentleman who had heard of the way in which I had been treated, came to my lodgings to see me. He seemed very much distressed on myaccount, and anxious, if possible, to do something which might ministercomfort to my mind. His name was Philips. He was a Methodist, and theson of a Methodist preacher. His kindness and sympathy were so genuineand so earnest, that they made a deep impression on my mind, and theynaturally recur to my memory when I think of the friends whose influencehelped to reclaim me from the miseries of doubt and unbelief. 

8. About thirteen years ago I lectured at Bacup. The Rev. T. Lawson, Congregational minister of Bacup, attended my lectures, and came andspoke to me afterwards, and invited me to call and see him, and dinewith him. I went, and we had a lengthened conversation on matterspertaining to religion and the Church. My host exhibited a remarkableamount of Christian charity and true liberality of sentiment. He hadbeen a reader of mine in his earlier days, when I was an advocate ofEvangelical reform, and he spoke of himself as my debtor; and he wasdesirous, if possible, of repaying the debt, by smoothing the way for myreturn to Christianity. Mrs. Lawson sat and listened to our conversationin silence; but when I rose to take my leave, she bade me good-bye withmost unmistakable evidences of interest in my welfare, and said, as sheheld me by the hand, "I hope we shall meet you in heaven. " I had one ortwo other interviews with Mr. Lawson at a somewhat later period, and allare to be placed among the means by which I was brought to my presenthappy position. 

9. Some nineteen years ago I had a public discussion with the Rev. Charles Williams, Baptist minister, of Accrington. It was a veryunpleasant affair. I was much exhausted at the time with over much work, and with long-continued and painful excitement caused by a veryunpleasant piece of business which I had in hand; and I did what Ihonorably could to avoid the discussion. My friends, however, would haveno nay, and I reluctantly, and in anything but an amiable temper, mademy appearance at the time appointed on the platform. How far the blamewas chargeable on me, or how far it was chargeable on others, I do notknow; but the first night's meeting was a very disagreeable one. Ithought myself in the right at the time, but I fancy my unhappy state ofmind must have rendered me very provoking, and at the same time blindedme to the real character of my proceedings. On the following night thediscussion went on more smoothly, and it ended better than it began. Iwas constrained to regard Mr. Williams as an able and good man. I methim occasionally after my separation from the Secularists, and hisbehaviour and spirit deepened the favorable impression of his characteralready made on my mind. While I was at Burnley he delivered a lecturein that town on Bishop Colenso's work on the Pentateuch. I was present. When he had done, he invited me in the kindest way imaginable to speak. I had heard next to nothing in the lecture to which I could object, butmuch that I could heartily approve and applaud. To all that he had saidin praise of the Bible I could subscribe most heartily. Indeed I feltthat the Bible was worthy of more and higher praise than he had bestowedon it, and I expressed myself to that effect. The meeting altogether wasa very pleasant one, except to a number of unbelievers, who weredreadfully vexed at my remarks in commendation of the Bible. I saw Mr. Williams repeatedly afterwards, and his kind and interestingconversation, and his very gentlemanly and Christian demeanor, hadalways a beneficial effect on my mind. 

10. One of the first to express a conviction that I should become aChristian was an American lady, whom I sometimes saw in London. She hadherself been an unbeliever, but had been cured of her skepticism byspiritualism. She was then a Catholic. She gave me a medal of the VirginMary, and entreated me to wear it round my neck. To please her Ipromised to do so. But the medal disappeared before long, and whatbecame of it I never could tell; but my friend had the satisfaction tosee her prophecy fulfilled in my happy return to Christianity. 

11. An acquaintance which I formed with the Rev. W. Newton, ofNewcastle-on-Tyne, must also be reckoned among the things which exertedan influence on my mind favorable to Christianity. Mr. Newton had been aBaptist in his earlier days, but getting into perplexity with regard tocertain doctrines, he became a Unitarian. He came to feel however, incourse of time, that something more than Unitarianism was necessary tothe satisfaction of his soul, and to the salvation of the world; and atthe time that I became acquainted with him, he had made up his mind toleave the Unitarians. On my way to the far-off regions of unbelief, Ihad passed through the Unitarian territory; and I passed through thesame territory, or near to its border, on my return to Christianity; andhad it not been for my interviews with Mr. Newton, and a somewhatstartling event or two that occurred about that period, I might havelingered for a time in that cold and hungry land. Mr. Newton helped toquicken my steps, and I moved onward, and rested not, till I found myway back to the paradise, or a garden that very much resembled theparadise, of my earlier days. 

12. Mr. J. Potts, like Mr. J. Mawson, without following me into theextremes of doubt, retained his friendship for me through all mywanderings, and never neglected any opportunity he had of showing mekindness. And others, whom I cannot take the liberty to name, evincedthe same unfailing constancy of esteem and love. And the unbrokenconnexion that remained between my enduring friends and their amiablefamilies and myself, added to the attractions Christ-ward, and made iteasier for my soul to return at last to its home of peace and rest. 

13. Between thirteen and fourteen years ago, while living in London, Ibecame acquainted with Mr. W. White. He had been reared a Quaker, but, like most hard thinkers, had had experience of doubt, and was, inconsequence, after his faith was re-established, able to strengthen hisdoubting brethren. He contributed to my conversion, first by hisenlightened conversation, and then by a long, kind, Christian letter onthe Bible, by which he helped me over a number of difficulties whichstood in the way of my faith. 

14. But perhaps none of the parties I have named, had a more powerfuland beneficial effect on my mind than one whom I have not yet mentioned. If I had been asked thirteen years ago, whether I supposed there was anyminister in the Methodist New Connexion who regarded me withaffectionate solicitude, and who was wishful for an opportunity to speakto me words of love and tenderness, I should have answered, "No. " If anyone had told me that there really was one of my old associates, withwhom I had formerly had warm controversy, not only on matterstheological, but on matters personal, who had been watching my careerfor years, with the deepest interest, and who for months and years hadbeen earnestly praying for me every day, he would have seemed to me asone amusing himself with fables. Yet such was really the case. 

With no one had I come in closer contact perhaps, or in more frequentand violent collision, than with the Rev. W. Cooke, now Dr. Cooke. Hehad taken the lead in the proceedings against me in the AshtonConference, on account of my article on _Toleration, Human Creeds, &c. _, proceedings which had a most unhappy effect on my mind, and which led, at length, to my separation from the Church, and to my alienation fromChrist. He had taken an active part in the violent controversies whichfollowed my expulsion from the ministry. We had, at a later period, spent ten nights in public discussion on the leading doctrines ofChristianity. He had, in the performance of what he considered his dutyI suppose in my case, said things which had tried me terribly; and I, with ideas of duty differing from his, had made him very liberalreturns, in a way not calculated to leave the most favorable orcomfortable impressions on his mind towards me. I had never seen himsince our long discussion but once, and then he seemed, to my fancy, tobe struggling with an inward tempest of very unhappy feeling towards me, which he was hardly able to keep from exploding. I afterwards foundthough, that I had not interpreted his looks on this occasion correctly. At the time when I took my leave of the Secularists, my unpleasantfeelings towards my old opponent had about subsided; but I had no ideathat his unpleasant feelings towards me had passed away. Yet such wasthe case. He had been reading my periodical for some time, and had beenpleased to find that both on religion and politics, I was returning, though slowly, to the views of my happier days. Some time in August, 1862, he called at my office in London, with a parcel of books under hisarm. He had been praying for me daily for twelve months, when somethingseemed to say to him, "You should do something more than pray. " And nowhe had come to try what he could do by a personal interview to aid thewanderer's return to Christ. I was from home at the time, but my eldestson was in the office, and he and the Doctor were at once engaged infriendly conversation. "How like you are to what your father was fourand thirty years ago, when I first knew him, " said the Doctor. "Yourfather and I were great friends. It was your father that first directedme to the study of Latin and Greek, which have been of great service tome; and I feel indebted to him on that account. We were afterwardsseparated. But I have observed, as I think, symptoms that your father isreturning towards his former views. " And many other kind remarks hemade. At length he said, "Do you think your father would accept a copyof my works?" My son, who knew the state of his father's mind, answered;"I am sure he would, with great pleasure. " The Doctor left copies of hisworks, kindly inscribed to me with his own hand; and with the books, heleft for me a kind and Christian letter. My son lost no time inforwarding me the letter, together with an account of the pleasant andunlooked-for interview which he had had with the writer. I received theletter, and the interesting story with which it was accompanied, withthe greatest astonishment and pleasure. I wrote to the Doctor, reciprocating his expressions of kindness, and making the best returns Icould for the valuable present of his works. The result was acorrespondence, which has continued to the present time. Thecorrespondence led to interviews, in which the Doctor exhibited, in avery striking manner, the graces and virtues that adorn the Christiancharacter. We talked, we read, we sang, we prayed together, and gave Godthanks, with tears of gratitude, for all the blessings of His boundlesslove. 

The effect of this kindness on the part of Dr. Cooke was, not only tofree my mind from any remains of hurtful feelings towards him, but todispose me, and enable me, to review the claims of Christianity and theBible in a spirit of greater fairness and candor, and so to make itpossible for me to become, what I had long believed I never couldbecome, a hearty believer in the religion of Christ. 

CHAPTER XIX. 

SOME OF THE STEPS BY WHICH I CAME TO FAITH IN CHRIST. 

I am not certain that I can state the exact process by which I passedfrom doubt and unbelief to faith in Christ, but the following, Ibelieve, is very near the truth. 

1. There was, first, a sense of the cheerlessness of unbelief--thesadness and the sorrow resulting from the loss of trust in God and hopeof immortality, and from the wretched prospect of a return to utternothingness. 

2. Then came the distressing feeling of inability to comfort myafflicted or dying friends--my utter helplessness in the presence ofsorrow, grief and agony. 

3. And then I found myself unable to account for the wonderful marks ofdesign appearing in nature, and especially in my own body, without theacknowledgment of an intelligent Deity. The wonderful perfection andbeauty of a flower or a feather would confound me; while mysteriousadaptations in my own frame would fill me with amazement. Darwin'stheory of development relieved me for a time; but I soon came to seethat some of his explanations of natural phenomena were erroneous, andthat none of his facts proved the truth of his theory. Still later Ifound that Darwin himself acknowledged that the evidences of design inthe methods by which certain species of plants were fertilized, were notonly overpowering, but startling. 

4. Then came dissatisfaction with the theories by which unbelieverssought to account for the existence and order of the universe. Theysupposed the universe to be eternal, and attributed the production ofplants, and animals, and man to the blind unconscious working oflifeless matter. They attributed to dead matter the powers whichbelievers attributed to a living God. They were obliged to believe thatsenseless atoms could produce works transcending the powers of themightiest minds on earth. To reconcile their belief in the eternity ofthe universe, and in the unchanging properties of matter, with thephenomena of change and progress, they supposed an infinite successionof worlds, or of beginnings and endings of the same world, and imaginedthe earth running exactly the same course, and having exactly the samehistory, every time it came into existence. Hence it became with them anarticle of faith, that we had ourselves lived an infinite number oftimes, and should live an infinite number of times more in the future, repeating always exactly the same life, with exactly the same results. It was also an article of faith that we were mere machines, governed bypowers over which we had no control; that our ideas of liberty, and ourfeelings of responsibility, or of good and ill desert, were alldelusions; that all the errors, and crimes, and miseries of our racewere inevitable, and were to be eternally repeated; and that a changefor the better was eternally impossible. But time would fail me tomention all their theories. It is enough to say that the wild andunsatisfactory nature of these dreams helped to drive me back toChristianity. 

5. There was, of course, no tendency in unbelief to promote virtue, orto check vice. Its natural tendency was to utter depravity. AndChristianity retained such an influence over me, even to the last, thatI could never reconcile myself to a vicious life. 

6. Then came another trouble. Infidelity could give no guarantee thatwrong should not finally triumph, and right be finally crushed. It isbelief in God alone that can give assurance that virtue shall beultimately rewarded, and vice ultimately punished. The Christian canbelieve past doubt, that "Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he alsoreap;" that "with what judgment we judge, we shall be judged; and withwhat measure we mete, it shall be measured to us again. " But the infidelhas no foundation for such a faith. For anything he knows, a man may sowvillany, and reap honor and blessedness. He may live by injustice andcruelty, and meet with no punishment, either here or hereafter; whileanother may spend his days in doing good, and give his life for thesalvation of his fellows, and receive only torture, reproach, and death. 

Nor is there any security for the triumph of truth on the infidelprinciple. For anything infidelity knows, truth may be always in themire, and its friends be forever reproached and shunned; while error mayalways be in the ascendant, and its propagators honored and rewarded. Indeed this is the case at present, if infidelity be true. Forinfidelity is in the dust, while faith in God and Christ is in highrepute. And infidels are suspected and dreaded, while consistentbelievers are loved and trusted. Faith smoothes man's way through life, and in some cases raises him to honor and power; while Atheism makes aman's pathway rugged, and prevents his elevation. This state of thingsis exceedingly unsatisfactory to unbelievers. They ought, if they arethe wisest of men, as they suppose, to be everywhere received withhonor. They ought to be placed in power. The world should ring withtheir praise. The universe should enrich them with its treasures. Thenames of their predecessors in unbelief should be had in the greatesthonor. They should stand first on the roll of fame. Their monumentsshould fill the earth. The sweetest poets should sing their praises;the most eloquent orators should proclaim their greatness; and thenations should delight to celebrate their worth. Their pictures andstatues should grace our courts, our temples, and our palaces. Theirdeeds should form the staple of our pleasant histories, and theirwritings crowd the shelves of our libraries. Children should be taughtto lisp their names with reverence, and the aged should bless them withtheir parting breath. 

On the other hand, if religion be false and foolish, if it be unnaturaland mischievous, its friends should be pitied or despised, if notrebuked and punished. Its founders and propagators should be branded asthe weakest or the basest of men. Their names should be had in contemptor abhorrence. Their writings should be everywhere decried. Theirpictures and statues should fill some chamber of horrors. Historians, poets, and orators should hold them up to reprobation. Christians shouldbe kept from places of trust, and from posts of honor. They should bewretched, and poor, and miserable, and the hearts of men, and the powersof nature, should combine for their destruction, and for the utterextinction of their cause. 

Yet the state of things is just the contrary. Christianity triumphs, andChristians are honored; while infidelity languishes, and its disciplesare covered with shame. On the Atheist's theory the human race hasexisted for millions of years, yet it has never produced more than a fewindividuals who have acknowledged the principle of his creed. The massof men, in all ages, have been believers in God. The civilized as wellas the savage, the learned as well as the ignorant, the high as well asthe low, alike have adored a Deity. Even the greatest of our race havebeen believers. The sweetest poets, the profoundest philosophers, thegreatest statesmen, the wisest legislators, the most venerable judges, the most devoted philanthropists, have all believed in God. Two or threetribes have been found, it is said, without an idea of God; but theywere savages of the lowest grade; and it is not yet settled whether theaccounts that have been given of those wretched creatures be correct ornot. 

And Atheism has always been regarded with horror. It is so still. It isbelieved to be the nurse of vice and crime. Atheists are everywherelooked upon with suspicion and dread. The prevailing impression is thatthey are bad and dangerous men, --that no reliance is to be placed ontheir word, --that they are naturally licentious, dishonest, deceitful, cruel, --that they are prepared for any enormity, --that they are enemiesto domestic purity and civil order, and that no one is safe in theirpower. If ever they were regarded by mankind with favor, the time isforgotten. There is not a nation on earth in which they are popular now. They are everywhere branded as infamous. 

If Atheists have always been so bad as to _deserve_ this fate, theirprinciples must be bad. If they have deserved a better fate, --if theyhave been pure, and just, and true, --if they have been remarkable forgenerosity, patriotism, and philanthropy, --if they have distinguishedthemselves as the friends of virtue, and the benefactors of mankind, howsad to think that they have never received their due at the hands ofmen. 

The longer the Atheists look on their condition, the less satisfactoryit appears. They have no grand history, no glorious names, to reflecthonor on their cause. They have no noble army of martyrs. They have nogreat monuments. And they can have no assurance of anything better indays to come. The probability is that their memory will rot, and thattheir principles will be an offence and loathing to mankind through allsucceeding generations. 

But look on the other side? The highest name on earth is a religiousname; the name of Jesus. The names which stand next in honor are thoseof His Apostles and followers. The mightiest nations on earth areChristian nations. Christians rule the world. Christian ministers arehonored and revered. Christian churches rise to wealth and power. TheChurch controls the state. It controls it most when it is leastambitious, and most consistent. The Church has a glorious history. Ithas the grandest array of honorable names. It has the noblest army ofmartyrs. It has the richest literature. Its sacred books are read in allthe leading languages of the earth. The great geniuses are her's. Therichest poetry, the grandest eloquence, the divinest philosophy, thenoblest courage, the richest generosity, the most devoted philanthropy, are all her's. She has the credit of being the parent and the nurse ofour highest civilization. She is the great educator. She builds ourschools. She rules our colleges. She controls the press. She plants newnations. She spreads herself and exerts her influence in every land. Youcannot destroy the Church. It is immortal. You cannot limit its power. It is irresistibly expansive and invincible. If at any time it suffersloss, it is through its own unfaithfulness; and a return to duty is areturn to dominion. 

Even in countries not Christian the religious element is supreme, andthe religious men alone are honored. The greatest names in the historyof India and China, of Persia and Turkey, are the names of theirprophets and religious leaders. 

What follows from all this? That if infidelity be true and good, andreligion false and mischievous, the world and the human race are whollywrong. The best and wisest men are everywhere despised, and the weakestand wickedest are everywhere honored. The originators of the greatestdelusions are deified; and the revealers of the greatest truths areregarded as monsters. Truth no longer can be said to be mighty, anderror can no longer be said to be weak. The right is no longer sure oftriumph, nor the wrong of overthrow. Men love darkness and hate thelight; and it is not the few that do so, but the many. And there seemsno hope of a change for the better. Earth is no place for the great, thegood, the wise; but for the ignorant, the deluded, and the base alone. It is the paradise of fools, and the purgatory of philosophers. 

But I asked, "_Is_ infidelity true and good, and religion false andmischievous? Am I not laboring under some monster delusion? Have I notbeen imposed upon by a vicious logic? Are not mankind right in hatingand dreading infidelity, and in loving and honoring religion? There is atremendous mistake somewhere. Either infidelity is wrong, or mankind andthe universe are fearfully perverse. "

7. And now I began a reconsideration of the claims of religion andinfidelity. As I have said, I re-read the Bible. I reviewed Churchhistory. I examined the character and workings of religious communities. And I found the Bible a better and a wiser book than I had everimagined. And I found Christianity, as presented in the teachings andlife of Jesus, the fairest and loveliest, the most glorious andbeneficent of all systems. I found Jesus Himself to be the mostbeautiful and exalted of all characters. I saw in Paul a dignity and aglory second only to those of Christ. I found in the New Testament theperfection of wisdom and beneficence. I found in the history of theChurch a record of the grandest movement, and of the most glorious andbeneficent reformation, the world had ever witnessed. I found in thechurches the mightiest agencies and the most manifold operations for thesalvation of mankind. "Christianity, " said I, "whether supernatural ornot, is a wondrous power. It is good, if it is not true. It is glorious. It _deserves_ to be Divine, whether it be so or not. What a world weshould have, --what a heaven on earth--if men could be brought to believeits teachings, to imbibe its spirit, and to obey its precepts. What aheaven of bliss it would be to one's soul if one could see it and feelit to be really true. "

It had conquered my heart. It had won my love. And I would gladly havedied, or would gladly have lived through ages of hardship and toil, tobe satisfied of its divinity. How glad I was when I found men heartilybelieving it. How sad when I found them doubting, like myself. Howdelighted I was when I found my objections to its truth slowly fadingaway, and saw facts in its favor coming gradually into view. 

But doubt had become a powerful tyrant, and I had become a slave; andthough I _wished_ I could be a Christian, I could indulge no hope ofever experiencing so great a happiness. But I would do Christianityjustice, to the best of my ability. I would exhibit its excellencies. Iwould defend it against false accusations. I would preach it so far as Ihonestly could. I would practise its precepts so far as I was able. Iwould cherish its spirit. "If it is not from God, " said I, "it is thebest production of the mind of man. If I cannot hold it forth as adivine revelation, I can extol it as the perfection of human wisdom. Andsome of its teachings are evidently true, and others are easily provedto be so. It is true throughout, so far as I can test it; and it may betrue--perhaps I shall some day find it to be true--on points on which Iam unable to test it at present. I will wait, and labor meanwhile topromote its beneficent influence!"

I looked on the other side. I read the Secularists' Bible: I reviewedthe history of unbelief; I examined the character and working of infidelcommunities. And what was the result! The Secularists' Bible I found tobe a huge and revolting mass of filth and loathsomeness; the mostshameless attack on virtue and happiness that ever came under my view. Iremembered that Carlisle and Robert Owen had published books of the sameimmoral and dehumanizing tendency. The history of infidelity I found tobe a history of licentiousness, and of every abomination. The infidelcommunities I found to be hot-beds of depravity. The leaders of theparty were teachers and examples of deceit, of dishonesty, ofintemperance, of gambling, and of unbounded licentiousness. They had novirtue; they had no conscience; and it was only when they were in thepresence of men of other views, that they had any shame, or modesty, orregard for decency. And they were fearfully intolerant and malignanttowards those who crossed them, or thwarted them, in their projects. They were no great workers, but they would exert themselves to theutmost to annoy or vilify the objects of their displeasure. The factsthat came to my knowledge with regard to the morals of the Secularistscontributed to my deliverance from the thraldom of unbelief. 

The honor awarded to Christ, and the infamy attached to infidelity, areno mistakes. Jesus has never been exalted beyond His merits, andinfidelity has never been hated or dreaded beyond its deserts. Christianity is the sum and perfection of all that is good, and true, and glorious; and atheism is the sum and aggravation of all that isvile, and mischievous, and miserable. It would be sad for the world ifmen should lose their instinctive dread of infidelity, and begin tospeak of it as an error of little moment. It is a monsterconglomeration of all evil, and it has no redeeming quality. 

8. Among the lectures which I delivered in my transition state was onein answer to the question; "What do you offer as a substitute for theBible? Can you give us anything better?" I said that I had no desire to_do away_ with the Bible; that I wished them to read it, study it, andreduce the better part of its precepts to practice. I said: "With thosewho would destroy the Bible, or prevent its circulation, I have nosympathy and no connexion. The Bible is a book of great interest andvalue; to say the least, it presents us with the thoughts of the bestand wisest of men, on subjects of the greatest interest and importance;it gives us the best picture of the life and manners of the nations andinstitutions of the ancient world; it is a wonderful revelation of humannature; it tells the most interesting stories; it contains the grandestand most beautiful poetry, the wisest proverbs, the most faithfuldenunciations of vice and crime, the most earnest exhortations to duty, the best examples of virtue, the most instructive and touchingnarratives of people of distinguished worth, the most rational andpractical definitions of religion, the worthiest representations of Godand the universe, the greatest encouragement to fidelity under reproachand persecution, the richest consolations under afflictions and trials, and the most cheering exhibitions of future blessedness. We know ofnothing good in any system which is not favored by some portion of theBible. We know of nothing evil which is not condemned by other portions. All that is best and noblest and grandest in man's nature is thereembodied. We know of no good or generous feeling which is not thereexpressed. We cannot imagine it possible for a book to be more earnestin its exhortations to the performance of duty, or to the culture ofvirtue. There is no book on earth that we should be more reluctant topart with than the Bible. Its destruction would be a fearful loss tomankind. It is a mine containing treasures of infinite value. The wisestmay learn more wisdom from its teachings, and the best be raised tohigher virtue by its influence. It has done much good; it is doing goodstill; it is calculated to do still greater good in days to come. Old asit is, it is a wiser book than the books of religion that are writtenin the present day. It is wiser than the preachers; wiser than the greatdivines. It is infinitely superior to the Bibles that have been made inlater times, such as the Bible of the Shakers, the Bible of Reason, andthe Book of Mormon. 

"It is superior to the Koran, though the authors of the Koran, likelater makers of Bibles, had the older Bible to help them. The Koran isthe best of modern Bibles, because it borrows most freely from the Oldand New Testaments. 

"The Bible is vastly better as a moral book, and as a persuasive andhelp to duty, than the writings of the best of the ancient Greeks andRomans. The Bible is consistent with itself as a moral teacher, thoughthe precepts of Judaism are inferior to those of Christianity. The Bibletreats man as a subject of law, as bound to obey God and do right, fromfirst to last; and though it begins with fewer and less perfectprecepts, suited to lower states of society, it goes steadily on toperfection, till it gives us the highest law, and the most perfectexample, in the teachings and life of Christ. Read your Bibles; committhe better portions of the Book to your memory; think of them, practisethem. Don't be ashamed to do so. The greatest philosophers, notexcepting such men as Newton, Locke, and Boyle; the most celebratedmonarchs, from Alfred to Victoria; the most venerable judges, with SirMatthew Hale as their representative; the sweetest poets, from Chaucer, Spenser, Shakespeare, and Milton, down to Dryden, Young, and Cowper; andthe most devoted philanthropists, from Penn, and Howard, and Wesley, toElizabeth Fry and Florence Nightingale, have been lovers and students ofthe Bible. The men that hate the Bible and wish for its destruction, arethe base and bad. The men who love it and labor for its world-widecirculation, are the good and the useful. You cannot have a bettercompanion than the Bible, if you will use it judiciously. There is nodanger that you should rate it too high. If you should regard it assupernaturally inspired, it will do you no harm. Such ideas may make youread it more carefully, and pay more respect to its teachings, and thatwill be a blessing. Men are in no danger of prizing good books toohighly. As a rule, they esteem them far too lightly. A great good bookis one of the richest treasures on earth. There is still less dangerthat you should think too much of the Bible. The man does not live thathas erred in that direction. The best friends the Bible has, the moststrenuous advocates of its divinity, do not estimate the Book above itsworth. They do not value it according to its worth. It is richer in itscontents, it is better and mightier in its influences, than itsdevoutest friends are aware. 

"There are men who prate about Bibliolatry, and labor to lower men'sestimate of the Bible. They may spare their breath. The people whoidolize the Bible too much are creatures of their own imagination only, and not living men and women. People may love the Bible unwisely, butnot too well. To place it too high as a means of instructing, regenerating and blessing mankind, is not in man's power. 

"I esteem it myself more highly than I ever did. My ramblings in theregions of doubt and unbelief; my larger acquaintance with the works ofinfidel philosophers, atheistical reformers, fanatical dreamers, re-organizers of society, makers of new moral worlds, skepticalhistorians of civilization, Essays and Reviews, Elements of SocialScience, Phases of Faith, and Phases of no Faith, and a world of otherbooks; my enlarged acquaintance with men, my sense of spiritual want andwretchedness when shut out from religious consolations, have led me tovalue the Bible, skeptical as I yet am, as I never valued it before. 

"I was born in a town on a hill, from which I had delightful views of arich and beautiful valley. I looked on those beautiful prospects spreadout before me, with their charming variety of scenery, from my earliestdays, to the time I left my native land, but I have no recollection thatI ever experienced in those early times any large amount of pleasurefrom the sight. In course of time I left the place of my birth and thehome of my childhood, and visited other lands. I saw rivers and lakes, and mountains and plains, and forests and prairies in great abundance, and in almost endless variety. And I compared them one with another, andmarked their points of difference and resemblance. And then after mymany and long wanderings, I returned to the place of my birth, andlooked on the scenes of my childhood again; and I was lost in ecstacies. I was amazed that I had seen so little of their beauty, and been solittle transported with their charms before. 

"And so with regard to the Bible. I was born in a family in which theBible was read every day of the year. I heard its lessons from the lipsof a venerable father, and of a most affectionate mother. I read thebook myself. I studied it when I came of age, and treasured up many ofits teachings in my heart. I preached its truths to others. I defendedits teachings against infidel assailants, and was eloquent in itspraise. 

"But a change took place; a strange, unlooked-for change. I was severedfrom the Church. I became an unbeliever. I turned away my eyes from thebook, or looked chiefly on such portions of it as seemed to justify myunbelief. I have been led of late to return to the book, and to study itwith a desire to do it justice; and the result is, I love it, I prizeit, as I never did in my life. I read it at times with unshakabletransports, and I am sorry I should ever have been so insensible to itsinfinite excellences. "

Such was my lecture. Those who had come to oppose, seemed puzzled whatto say. One man said I had been brought there to curse the Bible, andlo! I had blessed it altogether. Another said that what I had utteredcould not be my real sentiments--that my praise of the Bible must be atrap or a snare. My answer was, They are my real convictions, and thesentiments that I publish in my weekly paper. Then how comes it that youare brought here by the Secularists? I answered, My custom is to acceptinvitations from any party, but to teach my own sentiments. 

One young man came to me at Bristol, after hearing me deliver thislecture, and said how glad he was at what I had said. "When my motherwas dying, " said he, "she gave me a Bible, and pressed me to read it;and I did so for a while. But when I became a skeptic, I lost myinterest in the book, and I didn't know what to do with it. I didn'tlike to sell it, or destroy it, because it was the gift of my mother;yet I seemed to have no use for it. I shall read it now with pleasure. "

On the following evening I lectured on _True Religion_. The gentlemanwho had come to oppose me said it was the best sermon, or about thebest, he had over heard. He seemed at a loss to know what right I had tospeak so earnestly in favor of all that was good, and appeared inclinedto abuse me for not saying something bad. I took all calmly, and themeeting ended pleasantly. 

9. And now, instead of trying to shake men's faith in religion, Ilabored to strengthen it. I was satisfied that the faith of theChristian was right in substance, if it was not quite right in form. AndI was satisfied there was something terribly wrong in unbelief, though Icould not yet free myself entirely from its horrible power. 

10. The feeling grew stronger that my remaining doubts wereunreasonable; that my soul was a slave to an evil spell, the result oflong persistence in an evil method of reasoning; yet I lacked the powerto emancipate myself. At length, as I have said, I appealed to Heavenand cried, "GOD HELP ME!" and my struggling soul was strengthened andreleased. 

11. I had looked at the Church when a Christian minister from thehighest ground, and it seemed too low. I had compared it with Christ andHis teachings, and it seemed full of shortcomings. I now looked at itfrom low ground, and it seemed high. I compared it with what I had seenin infidel society, and read in infidel books; and I was filled withadmiration of its order, and of its manifold labors of love. I tried toimitate the order and beneficent operations of the Church in my Burnleysociety, but failed. Faith in Christianity, and the spirit of itsglorious Author, were wanting. The body without the spirit is dead. 

12. I was first convinced that Christianity was necessary to thehappiness of man, and to the regeneration of the world, but had doubtsas to its truth. I now saw that much of it was true. In course of time Icame to be satisfied that the religion of Christ was true as a _whole_;that it was a revelation from God; that Christ Himself was a revelationboth of what God _is_, and of what man _ought_ to be; that He was God'simage and man's model: that He was God incarnate, God manifest in theflesh, and the one great Saviour of mankind. My objections to miraclesgave way. They seemed groundless. I saw miracles in nature. They werewrought on every emergency, even to secure the comfort of the loweranimals. What could be more rational than to expect them to be wroughtin aid of man's illumination and salvation? My moral and religiousfeelings got stronger. My skeptical tendencies grew weaker. I continuedto look at Christ. I studied him more and more. My heart waxed warmer;my love to God and Christ became a mighty flame. I got among thefollowers of Christ; I gave free scope, I gave full play, to my betteraffections, and heavenward tendencies. I read, I prayed, I wrote, Ilectured, I preached. I gave free utterance to what I believed, andwhile doing so, came to believe still more, and to believe with fullerassurance. I used no violence with myself, except my lower self. I wentno further in my preaching than I had gone in my belief, and I acceptedno doctrines or theories which did not present themselves to my soul astrue and right. But I came at length to see, not the perfection anddivinity of any particular system of theology, but the perfection anddivinity of Christianity, and the substantial perfection and divinity ofthe Sacred Scriptures. 

13. I examined the popular objections to Christianity and the Bible. Some were exceedingly childish; some seemed wicked; some, it was plain, originated in ignorance; some in error. Paine, Owen, Parker, and certainstudents of nature, came to erroneous conclusions with regard to Christand the Bible, because they tried them by false standards. Jesus saidnothing on the value of representative and democratic forms ofgovernment, so Paine considered Him ignorant of the conditions of humanhappiness. It was Paine however that was ignorant, not Jesus. Jesus wasso wise, that Paine was not able to appreciate His views or do Himjustice. Owen believed that man was the creature of circumstances; thathis character was formed for him, not by him, and that he was notresponsible therefore for his actions. Christ taught a contrarydoctrine. Owen therefore considered Christ to be in error: but the errorwas in himself. Parker did not believe in the possibility of miracles:but the Bible contained accounts of miracles. The Bible therefore mustbe pronounced, to a great extent, fabulous. But miracles _are_ possible;miracles are actual, palpable realities, and Parker's objection falls tothe ground. Many smatterers in science object to the credibility of thegospel history on the same ground, and are answered in the same way. 

Some objections to the Bible and Christianity originate inmisinterpretations of portions of the Bible. The Scriptures are madeanswerable for foolish doctrines which they do not teach. Someobjections seem based on a wilful misconstruction of passages ofScripture. Many objections owe their force to wrong theories of Divineinspiration, and to erroneous notions with regard to the design of theSacred Scriptures put forth by certain divines. These are obviated bythe rejection of those unwarrantable theories and erroneous ideas, andthe acceptance of better ones. Many get wrong notions about whatconstitutes the _perfection_ of the Bible, and look in the Scripturesfor a _kind_ of perfection which is impossible in a book written inhuman language, and meant for the instruction and education of imperfecthuman beings. There is not a language on earth that is absolutelyperfect, nor is it likely that there ever was, or ever will be, such alanguage. An absolutely perfect book therefore in any human language isan impossibility. But no such thing as an absolutely perfect book isnecessary or desirable, any more than an absolutely perfect body orsoul, or an absolutely perfect church or ministry. There is a kind ofimperfection in God's works which constitutes their perfection. There isa kind of perfection talked about by metaphysical divines, which wouldbe the extreme of imperfection. We have reason to be thankful that thereis no such perfection either in Nature or the Bible. Nature and theBible would be worthless if there were. But there is a practicalperfection, a perfection of _usefulness_, in both; a perfection ofadaptation to the accomplishment of the highest and most desirableobjects: and that is enough. 

The principal objects for which the Bible was written were, 1. To makemen wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 2. To furnishGod's people unto every good work. 3. To support them under theirtrials, and to comfort them under their sorrows, on their way to heaven. No higher or more desirable ends can be conceived. And it answers theseends, whenever its teachings are received and obeyed. And this is true, substantial perfection. This is the reasoning of the Psalmist. "The lawof the Lord is _perfect_, " says he, and the proof he gives is this, "_itconverteth the soul_. " "The testimony of the Lord is sure, _making wisethe simple_. The statutes of the Lord are right, _rejoicing the heart_. Moreover by them is Thy servant warned, and in keeping of them there isgreat reward. " This is all the perfection we need. 

14. Spiritualism had something to do with my conversion. I know thestrong feeling prevailing among many Christians against spiritualism, but I should feel as if I had not quite done my duty, if I did not, tothe best of my recollection, set down the part it had in the cure of myunbelief. My friends must therefore bear with me while I give them thefollowing particulars:--

As I travelled to and fro in America, fulfilling my lecturingengagements, I met with a number of persons who had been converted, bymeans of spiritualism, from utter infidelity, to a belief in God and afuture life. Several of those converts told me their experience, andpressed me to visit some medium myself, in hopes that I might witnesssomething that would lead to my conversion. I was, at the time, soexceedingly skeptical, that the wonderful stories which they told me, only caused me to suspect them of ignorance, insanity, or dishonesty;and the repetition of such stories, to which I was compelled to listenin almost every place I visited, had such an unhappy effect on my mind, that I was strongly tempted to say, "All men are liars. " I had socompletely forgotten, or explained away, my own previous experiences, and I was so far gone in unbelief, that I had no confidence whatever inanything that was told me about matters spiritual or supernatural. Imight have the fullest confidence imaginable in the witnesses when theyspoke on ordinary subjects, but I could not put the slightest faith intheir testimony when they told me their stories about spiritual matters. And though fifty or a hundred persons, in fifty or a hundred differentplaces, without concert with each other, and without any temptation ofinterest, told me similar stories, their words had not the least effecton my mind. The most credible testimony in the world was utterlypowerless, so far as things spiritual were concerned. And when theparties whose patience I tried by my measureless incredulity, entreatedme to visit some celebrated medium, that I might see and judge formyself, I paid not the least regard to their entreaties. I was wiser inmy own conceit than all the believers on earth. 

At length, to please a particular friend of mine in Philadelphia, Ivisited a medium called Dr. Redman. It was said that the proofs giventhrough him of the existence and powers of departed spirits were such asno one could resist. My friend and his family had visited this medium, and had seen things which to them seemed utterly unaccountable, excepton the supposition that they were the work of disembodied spirits. 

When I entered Dr. Redman's room, he gave me eight small pieces ofpaper, about an inch wide and two inches long, and told me to take themaside, where no one could see me, and write on them the names of such ofmy departed friends as I might think fit, and then wrap them up likepellets and bring them to him. I took the papers, and wrote on seven ofthem the names of my father and mother, my eldest and my youngestbrothers, a sister, a sister-in-law, and an aunt, one name on each; andone I left blank. I retired to a corner of the room to do the writing, where there was neither glass nor window, and I was so careful not togive any one a chance of knowing what I wrote, that I wrote with a shortpencil, so that even the motion of the top of my pencil could not beseen. I was besides entirely alone in that part of the room, with myface to the dark wall. The bits of paper which the medium had given mewere soft, so that I had no difficulty in rolling them into roundpellets, about the size of small peas. I rolled them up, and could nomore have told which was blank and which was written on, nor which, among the seven I had written on, contained the name of any one of myfriends, and which the names of the rest, than I can tell at this momentwhat is taking place in the remotest orbs of heaven. Having rolled upthe papers as described, I laid them on a round table, about three feetbroad. I laid on the table at the same time a letter, wrapped up, butnot sealed, written to my father, but with no address outside. I alsolaid down a few loose leaves of note paper. The medium sat on one sidethe table, and I sat on the other, and the pellets of paper and theletter lay between us. We had not sat over a minute, I think, when therecame very lively raps on the table, and the medium seemed excited. Heseized a pencil, and wrote on the outside of my letter, wrong side up, and from right to left, so that what he wrote lay right for me to read, these words: "I CAME IN WITH YOU, BUT YOU NEITHER SAW ME NOR FELTME. WILLIAM BARKER. " And immediately he seized me by the hand, andshook hands with me. 

This rather startled me. I felt very strange. For WILLIAM BARKER was thename of my youngest brother, who had died in Ohio some two or threeyears before. I had never named him, I believe, in Philadelphia, and Ihave no reason to suppose that any one in the city was aware that I hadever had such a brother, much less that he was dead. I did not tell themedium that the name that he had written was the name of a brother ofmine; but I asked, "Is the name of this person among those written inthe paper pellets on the table?"

The answer was instantly given by three loudish raps, "Yes. "

I asked, "Can he select the paper containing his name?"

The answer, given as before, was "Yes. "

The medium then took up first one of the paper pellets and then another, laying them down again, till he came to the fifth, which he handed tome. I opened it out, and it contained my brother's name. I was startledagain, and felt very strange. I asked, "Will the person whose name is onthis paper answer me some questions?"

The answer was, "Yes. "

I then took part of my note paper, and with my left hand on edge, andthe top of my short pencil concealed, I wrote, "_Where d----_, "_intending_ to write, "_Where did you die?_" But as soon as I hadwritten "_Where d----_, " the medium reached over my hand and wrote, upside down, and backwards way, as before, --

"_Put down a number of places, and I will tell you. _"

Thus answering my question before I had had time to ask it in writing. 

I then wrote down a list of places, four in all, and pointed to eachseparately with my pencil, expecting _raps_ when I touched the rightone; but no raps came. 

The medium then said, "Write down a few more. " I then discovered that Ihad not, at first, written down the place where my brother died: so Iwrote down two more places, the first of the two being the place wherehe died. The list then stood thus:--

SALEM, LEEDS, RAVENNA, AKRON, CUYAHOGA FALLS, NEW YORK. 

The medium then took his pencil, and moved it between the differentnames, till he came to CUYAHOGA FALLS, which he scratched out. That was the name of the place where he died. 

I then wrote a number of other questions, in no case giving the mediumany chance of knowing by any ordinary means what I wrote, and in everycase he answered the questions in writing as he had done before; and inevery case but one the answers were such as to show, both that theanswerer knew what questions I had asked, and was acquainted with thematters to which they referred. 

When I had asked some ten or a dozen questions, the medium said, "Thereis a female spirit wishes to communicate with you. "

"Is her name among those on the table?" I asked. 

The answer, in three raps, was, "Yes. "

"Can she select the paper containing her name?" I asked. 

The answer again was, "Yes. "

The medium then took up one of the paper pellets, and put it down; thentook up and put down a second; and then took up a third and handed it tome. 

I was just preparing to undo it, to look for the name, when the mediumreached over as before, and wrote on a leaf of my note paper--

"IT IS MY NAME. ELIZABETH BARKER. "

And the moment he had written it, he stretched out his hand, smiling, and shook hands with me again. Whether it really was so or not, I willnot say, but his smile seemed the smile of my mother, and the expressionof his face was the old expression of my mother's face; and when heshook hands with me, he drew his hand away in the manner in which mymother had always drawn away her hand. The tears started into my eyes, and my flesh seemed to creep on my bones. I felt stranger than ever. Iopened the paper, and it was my mother's name: ELIZABETH BARKER. I askeda number of questions as before, and received appropriate answers. 

But I had seen enough. I felt no desire to multiply experiments. So Icame away--sober, sad, and thoughtful. 

I had a particular friend in Philadelphia, an old unbeliever, calledThomas Illman. He was born at Thetford, England, and educated, I wastold, for the ministry in the Established Church. He was remarkably wellinformed. I never met with a skeptic who had read more or knew more onhistorical or religious subjects, or who was better acquainted withthings in general, except Theodore Parker. He was the leader of thePhiladelphia Freethinkers, and was many years president of the SundayInstitute of that city. He told me, many months before I paid my visitto Dr. Redman, that _he_ once paid him a visit, and that he had seenwhat was utterly beyond his comprehension, --what seemed quite atvariance with the notion that there was no spiritual world, --and whatcompelled him to regard with charity and forbearance the views ofChristians on that subject. At the time he told me of these things, Ihad become rather uncharitable towards the Spiritualists, and verydistrustful of their statements, and the consequence was, that hisaccount of what he had witnessed, and of the effect it had had on hismind, made but little impression on me. But when I saw things resemblingwhat my friend had seen, his statements came back to my mind with greatpower, and helped to increase my astonishment. But my friend was nowdead, and I had no longer an opportunity of conversing with him aboutwhat we had seen. This Mr. Illman was the gentleman mentioned on aformer page, whom I attended on his bed of death. 

The result of my visit to Dr. Redman was, that I never afterwards feltthe same impatience with Spiritualists, or the same inclination topronounce them all foolish or dishonest, that I had felt before. It wasplain, that whether their theory of a spirit world was true or not, theywere excusable in thinking it true. It _looked_ like truth. I did notmyself conclude from what I had seen, that it was true, but I wassatisfied that there was more in this wonderful universe than could beaccounted for on the coarse materialistic principles of Atheism. Myskepticism was not destroyed, but it was shaken and confounded. And now, when I look back on these things, it seems strange that it was notentirely swept away. But believing and disbelieving are habits, and theyare subject to the same laws as other habits. You may exercise yourselfin doubting till you become the slave of doubt. And this was what I haddone. I had exercised myself in doubting, till my tendencies to doubthad become irresistible. My faith, both in God and man, seemed entirelygone. I had not, so far as I can see, so much as "a grain of mustardseed" left. So far as religious matters were concerned, I was insane. Itmakes me sad to think what a horrible extravagance of doubt had takenpossession of my mind. A thousand thanks to God for my deliverance fromthat dreadful thraldom. 

15. I have been asked how I meet my own old objections to the Divineauthority of the Bible. I answer, some of them originated inmisinterpretations of Scripture. Others originated in mistakes withregard to the character of Christ. Some things which I regarded asdefects in Christ were, in truth, excellencies. Some were based onmistakes with regard to the truth of certain doctrines, and the value ofcertain precepts. I looked on certain doctrines as false, which I now amsatisfied are true; and I regarded certain precepts as bad, which I amnow persuaded are good. Some things which I said about the Bible weretrue, but they proved nothing against its substantial perfection anddivinity. Much of what I said in my speech at Salem, Ohio, about theimperfection of all translations of the Scriptures, the various readingsof Greek and Hebrew manuscripts, the defects of Greek and Hebrewcompilations, and the loss of the original manuscripts, was true; but itamounted to nothing. It disproved the unguarded statements of certainrash divines; but it proved nothing against the divine inspiration orsubstantial perfection of the Bible as taught in the Bible itself, andas held by divines of the more enlightened and sober class. That whichis untrue in what I wrote about the Scriptures is no longer an obstacleto my faith, now that I see it to be untrue. And those remarks which aretrue in my writings on the Bible give me no trouble, because my faith inBible inspiration is of such a form, that they do not affect it. Theymight shake the faith of a man who believes in a kind of inspiration ofthe Bible which is unscriptural, and in a kind of perfection of the Bookwhich is impossible; but they do not affect the faith of a man who keepshis belief in Bible inspiration and Bible perfection within the boundsof Scripture and reason. 

And here I may say a few words about the objections I advanced in mydebate with Dr. Berg. 

1. The great mass of those objections prove nothing against the Bibleitself, as the great and divinely appointed means of man's religiousinstruction and improvement. They simply show that the theory held byDr. Berg about the inspiration and absolute perfection of the book waserroneous. If Dr. Berg had modified his notions, and brought them withinScriptural bounds, this class of objections would all have fallen to theground. 

2. But some of my statements were untrue and unjust. For instance, inone case I said, 'The man who forms his ideas of God from the Bible canhardly fail to have blasphemous ideas of Him. ' Now, from the account ofthe Creation in Genesis, to the last chapter in Revelation, the onegrand idea presented of God is that He is good, and that His delight isto do good, --that He is good to all, and that His tender mercies areover all His works. Whatever may be said of a few passages of dark ordoubtful meaning, the whole drift of the Bible is in accordance withthat wonderful, that unparalleled oracle of the Apostle, 'GOD IS LOVE. '

3. Another statement that I made was, that the man who studies God inNature, without the Bible, is infinitely likelier to get worthier viewsof God, than he who gets his ideas of God from the Bible without regardto Nature. Now the truth is, no man _can_ get his ideas of God from theBible without regard to Nature; for the Bible constantly refers toNature as a revelation of God, and represents Nature as exhibiting thegrandest displays of God's boundless and eternal goodness. The Bible andNature are in harmony on the character of God. The only difference is, that the revelations of God's love in the Bible, and especially inChrist, are more striking, more overpowering and transforming than thoseof Nature. And lastly, the notions of God entertained by those who havethe light of Nature alone, are not to be compared with the viewsentertained by those who form their views of God from the Bible alone, or from the Bible and Nature conjoined. 

4. One of my strongest objections was based on the 109th Psalm. ThisPsalm contains strong expressions of revenge and hatred towards theenemy of the Psalmist. The answer to this objection is, 1. That the Psalmist is not set up as our great example, and that hisutterances are not given as the highest manifestation of goodness. 

2. The Psalms are exceedingly instructive and interesting, and must havebeen of immense value, both as a means of comfort and improvement, tothose to whom they were first given; but the perfection of divinerevelation was yet to come. The Psalms are of incalculable value still, but they are not our standard of the highest virtue. John the Baptistwas greater, higher, better than the Psalmist; yet the least of thefollowers of Jesus is higher than he. 

3. But thirdly; we must not conclude that the feelings and expressionsof the Psalmist were wicked, merely because they fell short of thehighest Christian virtue. 'Revenge, ' says one of our wisest men, 'is awild kind of justice;' but it _is_ justice notwithstanding, when calledforth by real and grievous wrong. It is goodness, though not goodness ofthe highest kind. It is virtue, though not perfect Christian virtue. Andthe revenge of the Psalmist was provoked by wrong of the most grievousdescription. Read the account of the matter given in the Psalm itself. 'Hold not thy peace, O God of my praise; for the mouth of the wicked andthe mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spokenagainst me with a lying tongue. They compassed me about also with wordsof hatred; and fought against me without a cause. For my love they aremy adversaries: but I give myself unto prayer. And they have rewarded meevil for good, and hatred for my love. ' This was injustice, ingratitude, cruelty of the most grievous kind. And these wrongs had been continuedtill his health and strength wore reduced to the lowest point. 'I amgone, ' says he, 'like the shadow when it declineth. My knees are weak;my flesh faileth; so that when men look at me, they shake their heads. '

And a similar cause is assigned for the revengeful expressions in the69th Psalm. There we find the persecuted Psalmist saying, "They thathate me, and would destroy me, are my enemies wrongfully, and they aremany and mighty. Then I restored that which I took not away. For _thysake_ have I borne reproach: the reproaches of them that reproached theeare fallen upon me. I was the song of the drunkards. Reproach hathbroken my heart; and I am full of heaviness: and I looked for some oneto take pity, but there was none; and for comforters, but noneappeared. " Thus the men that wronged and tormented the Psalmist wereenemies to God and goodness, as well as to himself. 

We know that the virtue of the injured and tormented Psalmist was notthe virtue of the Gospel; but it _was_ virtue. It was the virtue of thelaw. And the law was holy, just, and good, so far as it went. If theresentment of the Psalmist had been cherished against some good orinnocent man, it would have been wicked; as it was, it was righteous. True, if the Psalmist had lived under the better and brighterdispensation of Christianity, he would neither have felt the reproachesheaped on him so keenly, nor moaned under them so piteously, norresented them so warmly. He might then have learned

 "To hate the sin with all his heart, And still the sinner love. "

He might have counted reproach and persecution matters for joy andgladness. And instead of calling for vengeance on his enemies, he mighthave cried, "Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. " Butthe Psalmist did _not_ live under the dispensation of the Gospel. Helived under a system which, good as it was, made nothing perfect. And heacted in accordance with that system. And the intelligent Christian, andthe enlightened lover of the Bible, will not be ashamed either of thePsalmist, or of the Book which gives us the instructive and interestingrevelations of his experience. 

5. Another of my objections to the Bible was grounded on the statement, that God visits the iniquities of the fathers on the children. But it isa fact, first, that children _do_ suffer through the sins of theirfathers. The children of drunkards, thieves, profligates, all sufferthrough the misdoings of their parents. It is also a fact, that mengenerally suffer through the misdoings of their fellow-men. We allsuffer through the vices of our neighbors and countrymen. The sins ofidlers, spendthrifts, misers, drunkards, gluttons, bigots, persecutors, tyrants, thieves, murderers, corrupt politicians, and sinners of everykind, are in this sense visited on us all. And we derive advantages onthe other hand from the virtues of the good. And it would be a strangeworld, if no one could help or hurt another. It is better things are asthey are. The advantages we receive from the good, tend to draw us toimitate their virtues. The sufferings entailed on us by the bad, tend todeter us from their vices. 

And so it is with parents and children. Children are specially prone toimitate their parents. If they never suffered from the evil ways oftheir parents, they would be in danger of walking in those waysthemselves for ever. When they suffer keenly from their parents'misdoings, there is ground to hope that they will themselves do better. I have known persons who were made teetotalers through the sufferingsbrought on them by the drunkenness of their fathers. And on the otherhand; the blessings entailed on children by the virtue of their parents, tend to draw them to goodness. And I have known fathers, who wouldventure on evil deeds when they thought only of the suffering they mightbring on themselves, who have been staggered, and have shrunk from theircontemplated crimes, when they have thought of the ruin they might bringon their children. And where is the good parent who is not morepowerfully stimulated to virtue and piety by thoughts of the blessingswhich he may secure thereby to his offspring? The whole arrangement, bywhich our conduct is made to entail good or evil on others, and by whichthe conduct of others is made to entail good or evil on us, tends toengage us all more earnestly in the war with evil, and to make us labormore zealously for the promotion of knowledge and righteousness amongall mankind. 

6. Another of my objections to the Bible was based on those passageswhich represent God as causing men to do bad deeds. Joseph tells hisbrethren, that it was not they, but God, who sent him into Egypt. Davidsays, 'Let Shimei curse; for God hath bidden him. ' Of course, the wordsof men like Joseph and David are not always the words of God. But JesusHimself speaks of Judas as appointed or destined to his deed oftreachery. What can we make of such passages? Does God make men wicked, or cause them to sin? We answer, No. How is it then? We answer, What Goddoes is this: when men have made themselves wicked, He turns theirwickedness to good account, by causing it to show itself in someparticular way rather than in some other. God did not make the brethrenof Joseph envious and malicious; but he caused their envy and malice toinduce them to sell their brother into Egypt, rather than to kill himand throw him into a pit. The wickedness was their own; the particularturn given to it was of God. God did not make Shimei a base, bad man;but Shimei having become base and bad, God chose that his villany shouldspend itself on David, rather than on some other person. God did notmake Judas a thief and a traitor; but Judas having made himself so, Godso places him, that his avarice, his dishonesty and his treachery shallminister to the accomplishment of a great beneficent design. God did notteach the spirits that deceived Ahab to lie; but those spirits havinggiven themselves to lying, God chose that they should practise theirillusions on Ahab rather than on others. God did not make Pharaoh meanor tyrannical; but Pharaoh having become so, God chooses to employ hisevil dispositions in bringing about remarkable displays of His power. God does not make politicians corrupt; but politicians having becomecorrupt, God chooses to place them in positions in which they can rob, and torment, and dishonor us, and so incite us to labor more zealouslyfor the Christianization of our country. A man becomes a thief, andsays, I will rob John Brown to-night. And he places himself in the wayalong which he expects John Brown to pass, and prepares himself for hisdeed of plunder. But God does not wish to have John Brown robbed; so Hearranges that David Jones, a man whom he wishes to be relieved of hismoney, shall pass that way, and the thief robs _him_. The dishonesty isthe thief's own, but it is God that determines the party on whom itshall be practised. 

I have a bull-dog that would worry a certain animal, if I would take itwhere the animal is feeding. But I choose to bring it in view of anotheranimal which I wish to be destroyed, and he worries that. I do not makethe bull-dog savage; but I use his savagery for a good purpose, insteadof letting him gratify it for an evil one. This view of things explainsa multitude of difficult passages of Scripture, and enables us to seewisdom and goodness in many of God's doings, in which we might otherwisefancy we saw injustice and inconsistency. 

I have not time to answer all my old objections to the Bible, advancedin the Berg debate, nor have I time to answer any of them at fulllength: but I have answered the principal ones; and the answers givenare a fair sample of what might be given to all the objections. 

As for the objections grounded on little contradictions, on matters oflittle or no moment, they require no answer. Whether the contradictionsare real or only apparent, and whether they originated with copyists, translators, or the original human authors of the Books in which theyare found, it is not worth our while to inquire. They do not detractfrom the worth of the Bible one particle, nor are they inconsistent withits claims to a super-human origin. 

And so with regard to the expressions scattered up and down theScriptures in reference to natural things, which are supposed to beinconsistent with the teachings of modern science. They are, in ourview, of no moment whatever. Men writing or speaking under divineimpulse, with a view to the promotion of religion or righteousness, would be sure, when they alluded to natural things, to speak of themaccording to the ideas of their times. Their geography, their astronomy, and even their historical traditions, would be those of the people amongwhom they lived. Their spirit, their aim, would be holy and divine. 

Nor have we any reason to wish it should be otherwise. Nor had our oldtheologians ever any right, or Scriptural authority, for saying it was, or that it ought to be, otherwise. To us it is a pleasure and anadvantage to have a record of the ideas, of the first rude guesses, ofour early ancestors, with regard to the wonders and mysteries of theuniverse, and of the events of 'the far backward and abyss of time. ' Itcomforts us, and it makes us thankful, to see from what small andblundering beginnings our numberless volumes of science have sprung. Andit comforts us, and makes us thankful, to see how the first faintstreaks of spiritual and moral light, that fell on our race, graduallyincreased, till at length the day-spring and the morning dawned, andthen the full bright light of the Sun of Righteousness brought theeffulgence of the Perfect Day. 

And here perhaps may be the place for a few additional remarks on Divineinspiration. 

We may observe, in the first place, that a man moved to speak by theHoly Spirit, will, of course, speak for holiness. His aim will be thepromotion of true religiousness, and this will be seen in all he says. He may not be a good scholar. He may not speak in a superhuman style. His reasoning may not be in strict accordance with the logic of theschools. His dialect may be unpolished. He may betray a lack ofacquaintance with modern science. He may not be perfect even in hisknowledge of religion and virtue. But he will show a godly spirit. Theaim and tendency of all he says will be to do good, to promoterighteousness and true holiness. 

And so if a man be moved to _write_ by the Holy Spirit, there will be aninfluence favorable to holiness in all he writes. His object will begood. If he be a scholar, he will unconsciously show his learning; if hebe a man of science, he may show his science. If he be ignorant ofscience, his ignorance may show itself. The Spirit of Holiness willneither remove his ignorance nor conceal it: it will not make him talklike a learned man or a philosopher; but it will make him talk like asaint, like a servant of God, and a friend of man. His writings willbreathe the spirit and show the love of holiness, and a tendency to allgoodness. 

And these are just the qualities we see in the Bible. It breathes a holyspirit. It tends to promote holiness. The writers were not all equallyadvanced in holiness; hence there is a difference in their writings. They were not alike in their mental constitutions or their naturalendowments. They were not equal in learning, or in a knowledge ofnature, or in general culture. They differed almost endlessly. And theirwritings differ in like manner. But they all tend to holiness. Some ofthe writers were poets, and their writings are poetical. Others were notpoets, and their writings are prose. The poets were not all equal. Someof them were very good poets, and their writings are full of beauty, sublimity and power. Others of them were inferior poets, and theircompositions are more coarse, or more formal. Some of the writers wereshepherds or herdsmen, and their writings are rough and homely. Some ofthem were princes and nobles, scholars and philosophers, and theirwritings are richer and more polished. Some of them were mere clerksand chroniclers, and their writings are dry and common-place; otherswere fervid, powerful geniuses, and their works are full of fire andoriginality. Their thoughts startle you. Their words warm you. They arespirit and life. All the writers show their natural qualities andtempers. All exhibit the defects of their learning and philosophy. Allwrite like men, --like men of the age, and of the rank, and of theprofession, and of the country, to which they belong. They write, inmany respects, like other men. The thing that distinguished them is, aspirit of holiness; a regard, a zeal, for God and righteousness, and forthe instruction and welfare of mankind. In their devotion to God andgoodness they are all alike, though not all equal; but in other respectsthey differ almost endlessly. In their devotion to God and goodness, they are _unlike_ the mass of pagan worldly writers, but not so unlikethem in every other respect. 

The divine inspiration of the sacred writers, or their wondrous zeal forrighteousness, is hardly a matter for dispute. It is a simple, plain, palpable matter of fact. We see it on almost every page of theirwritings. We feel it in almost every sentence. 

Take the account of Creation in Genesis. No one could have written thatdocument under the influence of an ungodly or unholy spirit. It speaksthroughout with the utmost reverence of God. It represents Him as actingfrom the best and noblest feeling. He works, not for His own interest orhonor, but solely for the purpose of diffusing happiness. He not onlydoes the greatest, the best, the noblest things, but He does them with ahearty good will. Every now and then He stops to examine His works, andis delighted to find that everything is good. It is plain He _meant_them to be good. He creates countless multitudes of happy beings, anddoes it all from impulses of His own generous nature. All living thingsare made to be happy, and all nature is made and adapted to minister totheir happiness. And when at length He has completed His works, crowningall with the creation of man, He looks on all again, and with evidentsatisfaction and delight, declares them all very good. 

Read the account of His creation of man. "And God said, Let us make manin our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over thefish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, andover all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon theearth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God createdhe him, male and female created he them. And God blessed them, and Godsaid unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, andsubdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowlof the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. AndGod said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which isupon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is thefruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. And to everybeast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything thatcreepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every greenherb for meat: and it was so. And God saw everything that he had made, and behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were thesixth day. " There can be no mistake as to the spirit and disposition ofthe Great Being whom we see working, and hear speaking, in this passage. Everything savors of pure and boundless love. 

1. He makes man male and female, that they may have the comfort andadvantages of society, and of love and friendship in their highest, holiest, and most intimate form. 

2. Then He makes them in His own image, which, whatever else it maymean, means ungrudging and unbounded goodness on His part. There can benothing higher, greater, better, happier than God. To make man in Hisown image, and to appoint him, so far as possible, to a like position, and a like lot with Himself, was the grandest display of goodnesspossible. 

3. And He gives the man and woman dominion over every livingthing, --makes them, next to Himself, lords of the universe. And Heblesses them, speaks to them sweet good words; and His blessing makethrich and adds no sorrow. He encourages them to be fruitful; to multiply, and replenish the earth, and to subdue it, --to turn it ever more totheir advantage. He in effect places all things at their disposal;every green herb, bearing seed, and every tree yielding fruit, is givento them for food; and they are at the same time given for food to everybeast of the field, and to every fowl of the air, and to everything thatcreepeth on the face of the earth. A richer, sweeter story, --a story ofmore cheerful, generous liberality, --a picture more creditable orhonorable to God, one cannot imagine. 

And the story is all of a piece. There is not a jar in it from first tolast. Its consistency is complete. Whatever else may be said of theauthor of this account, it is certain that he was moved by a HolySpirit, that he had the loftiest and worthiest views of God, and that heloved Him with all his heart and soul. He believed in a good and holyGod, and in a good and holy life. 

I say nothing about the harmony or discord between this account ofCreation, and the facts of Geographical, Astronomical, or Geologicalscience. I do not trouble myself about such matters. To me it is aquestion of no importance or concern whatever. And I have no troubleabout the interpretation of the story. 

It wants no interpretation. It is as plain as the light. And I take itin its simple, obvious, literal, natural sense. I keep to theold-fashioned meaning--the meaning generally given to it before thedisputes about Geology and Astronomy seemed to render a new andunnatural one necessary. The days of the story are natural days, and thenights are natural nights. The length of each of the six days was thesame as that of the Sabbath day. The seven days made an ordinary week. The first verse does not refer to a Creation previous to the week inwhich man was made. It is a statement of the work of Creation ingeneral, of which the verses following give the particulars. All thework that is spoken of was believed by the writer to have been begun andended in six ordinary natural days. 

As to whether the story be literally or scientifically correct or not, Ido not care to inquire. I am satisfied that it is the result of divineinspiration--that he who wrote it or spoke it was moved by the HolySpirit. The Spirit of truth, of love, of purity, of holiness pervades itfrom beginning to end. It does justice to God; it bears benignly onman; it favors all goodness. I see, I feel the blessed Spirit in everyline, and I want no more. 

We are told that there are _two_ accounts of Creation, and that on somepoints they differ from each other. For anything I know this may be thecase. But one thing is certain, they do not differ in the views theygive of God or of His objects. They both represent Him as a being notonly of almighty power and infinite wisdom, but of pure, unsullied, boundless generosity. In truth, the only impulse to Creation thatpresents itself is, the natural, spontaneous goodness of the Creator. And on some points the manifestations of God's love and purity, of Hisrighteousness and holiness, are more full and striking in the secondaccount than in the first. God's desire for the social happiness of mancomes out more fully. Man, according to this second account, is madeprevious to woman, and permitted for a time to experience the sense ofcomparative loneliness. He is left to look through the orders ofinferior creatures, in search of a mate, and permitted to feel, for amoment, the sense of disappointment. At length he is cast into a deepand quiet sleep, and when he awakes, his mate, his counterpart, an exactanswer to his wants, his cravings, perfect in her loveliness, standsbefore his eyes, and fills his soul with love and ecstacy. Marriage isinstituted in its purest and highest form. The law of marriage isproclaimed, which is just, and good, and holy in the highest degree. Provision is made for the comfort and welfare of the new-created pair. Their home is a paradise, or garden of delights; their task is to dressit and to keep it. Their life is love. The _general_ law under whichthey are placed is made known to them, and they are graciously warnedagainst transgression. The law is the perfection of wisdom andgenerosity. It allows them an all but unlimited liberty of indulgence. They may eat of the fruit of every tree in the garden but one. Indulgence must have its limits somewhere, or there could be no virtue, and without virtue there could be no true happiness. 

Law, trial, and temptation are all essential to virtue andrighteousness. Here they are all supplied; supplied so far as we cansee, in their best and most considerate forms. No law is given to thelower animals. No self-denial is required of them. They are incapableof virtue or righteousness, and are therefore left lawless. A _child_left to himself would bring his mother to shame; a man left to himselfwould rush headlong to destruction. But birds and beasts do best whenleft to themselves, or when left to the law in their own natures. Theirinstincts, or God's own impulses, urge them ever in the right direction, and secure to them the kind and amount of happiness they are capable ofenjoying. They are incapable of virtue, so they are made incapable ofvice. They cannot share the highest pleasures; they shall not be exposedtherefore to the bitterest pains. Man is capable of both virtue andvice, and he must either rise to the one or sink to the other. He cannotstay midway with the lower animals. Man must be happy or miserable in away of his own; he cannot have the portion of the brute. He must eitherbe the happiest or the most miserable creature on earth. He must eitherdwell in a paradise, or writhe in a purgatory. He must either live inhappy fellowship with God, or languish and die beneath his frown. And inthe nature of things, the possibility of one implies liability to theother. This is man's greatness, and bliss, and glory, that he is capableof righteousness; capable of fellowship, unity, with God; and capable ofprogress, improvement, without limits, of life without end, and ofhappiness without bounds. 

All this, which is the perfection of true philosophy, the sum of alltrue wisdom and knowledge, is presented in the most striking, astounding, and intelligible form in this second, or supplementaryaccount of creation. Duty is defined in the clearest manner. It isenjoined in the plainest terms. The results of transgression areforetold with all fidelity. The great principle is revealed thatrighteousness is life and happiness, and that sin is misery and death. And man is left to his choice. 

Here we have the substance, the elements, of all knowledge, of all law, of all duty, of all retribution. We have the principles of the divinegovernment. We have the substance of all history. We have in substance, the lessons, the warnings, the counsels, the encouragements, theprophecies and revelations of all times and of all worlds. The tendencyof the whole story is to make us feel that righteousness is the onegreat, unchanging and eternal good; and that sin, unchecked indulgence, is the one great, eternal, and unchanging curse. The spirit of thestory, its drift, its aim, is _holiness_ from first to last. The writeris moved throughout by the Holy Spirit--the Spirit of truth andrighteousness--the Spirit of God. We see it, we feel it, in every part. We want no proof of the fact in the shape of miracle; the proof is inthe story itself. It is not a matter of dispute; it is a matter of plainunquestionable fact. And that the story is essentially, morally, andeternally true, is proved by all the events of history, by all the factsof consciousness, and by the laws and constitution of universal nature. 

And in the history of man's first sin as here given, and in the accountof its effects, and in the conduct of God to the sinning pair, I find, not the monster fictions of an immoral and blasphemous theology, but themost important elements of moral, religious, and physical science. Andinstead of feeling tempted to ridicule the document, I am constrained togaze on it with the highest admiration and the profoundest reverence forits amazing wisdom. 

As to whether the account of the creation of the man and the woman, andthe story of the forbidden fruit, and of the serpent, and of the tree oflife, are to be taken literally or allegorically, I have no concern atpresent. My sole concern with it is that of a Christian teacher andmoralist. The only question with me is: 'Is it divinely inspired? Doesthe writer speak as a man moved by the Holy Spirit? Is it the tendencyof the story to make men lawless, recklessly self-indulgent, regardlessof God and duty; or is it the tendency of the story to make men fear Godand work righteousness?' And that is a question answered by the storyitself. On other matters the author writes as a man of his age andcountry; on this, the only matter of importance, he writes as a manmoved by the Spirit of God. 

And what I say of the accounts of Creation, I say of the history of Cainand Abel, of Enoch and Job, of Noah and the Flood, of Abraham and Lot, of Moses and his laws, and of the Hebrews and their history, of thePsalms and Proverbs, of the Prophets and Apostles. All have one aim andtendency; all make for righteousness. The writers are all moved by oneSpirit--the Spirit of holiness. 

With the exception of the Book called Solomon's Song, and some otherunimportant portions of the Bible, the Scriptures all bearunquestionable marks, are full from Genesis to Revelations, of proofsindubitable, that they are the products of divine inspiration; thattheir authors wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. Whatevertheir rank or profession, whatever their position or education, whatevertheir age or country, whatever their particular views on matters oflearning or science, the sacred writers all speak as men under holy, heavenly influences, and their writings, however they may differ instyle, or size, or other respects, are all, "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that theman of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. "

16. I have been asked why I do not publish a refutation of my formerreasonings one by one, and a full explanation and defence of my presentviews. I answer, my only reason for not doing this, so far as it isreally desirable, is a want of time. I did something in this line in my_Review_. I have done a little more in my lectures on the Bible and onFaith and Science, and I hope, in time, to do more. 

17. I have been asked again, why I shun discussion on the subject. Ianswer, I have never done so. When those who invite me to lecture wishme to allow discussion, I comply with their wishes. I agreed to a publicdiscussion at Northampton; but the person who was to have met me drewback. Again, if any one really wishes to discuss with me, he can do sothrough the press. I published my views in my _Review_ thirteen orfourteen years ago. I have published many of them since in a number ofpamphlets, giving all as good an opportunity of discussing them as theycan wish. And there is not the same necessity for a man who haspublished his views through the press, to invite discussion on theplatform, as there is for a man who has _not_ given his views throughthe press. 

The following letter, written to a friend in Newcastle-on-Tyne, mayexplain my views on this point a little more fully:--

MY DEAR SIR, --In answer to your question whether I will meetthe Representative of Secularism in debate, I would say, that I hadrather, for several reasons, spend what remains of my life and strengthin peaceful labors as a preacher, a lecturer, and an author. I seem tohave done enough in the way of public discussion. And I have not theamount of physical or nervous energy, or the strength of voice andlungs, which I once had. I am suffering, not only from the effects ofage, but from a terrible shock received in a collision on the railway, causing serious paralysis of my right side, and greatly reducing theforce and action of my heart and brain. 

Then I am not the representative of the Church, or of any section of it. I can only stand forth as the advocate of my own views. Further; thereare many questions connected with the Bible, which appear to me morefitted for quiet thought and friendly discussion among scholars andcritics, than for debate in a popular audience. On many of those pointsChristian divines differ among themselves. They differ, for instance, tosome extent, in their views of Bible inspiration and the sacred canon;they differ as to the worth of manuscripts, texts, and versions, thevalidity of various readings, the origin and significance ofdiscrepancies in some of the historical and chronological portions ofthe Bible, &c. , &c. On none of these points do I consider myself calledupon to state or advocate any particular views. 

There are however points of a broader and more important character, onwhich a public popular discussion might be proper and useful; such asthe general drift and scope of the Bible, or its aim and tendency; thecharacter and tendency of Christianity as presented in the life andteachings of its Author, and in the writings of the Apostles; thecomparative merits of Christianity, and of Atheistic Secularism as setforth in the writings of Secularists. 

I understand the leaders of the Secularists to teach, that Christianityis exceedingly mischievous in its tendency, --that it is adverse tocivilization, and to the temporal interests of mankind generally, --thatthe Bible is the curse of Europe, &c. These are subjects on which apopular audience may be as well qualified to judge, as scholars andcritics. And if you particularly desire it, I will authorize you toarrange for a discussion on them between me and such representative ofSecularism as you may think fit. I should not however like thediscussion to occupy more than three nights in any one week. And Ishould wish effectual precautions to be taken to secure a peaceful andorderly debate. It will be necessary also to have the subjects to bediscussed plainly and definitely stated. 

Yours, most respectfully, JOSEPH BARKER. 

18. I may now add, that the evidences which had most to do in convincingme of the truth and divinity of Christianity, were the internal ones. Iwas influenced more by moral and spiritual, than by historical andcritical considerations. I do not think lightly of Paley's works on theEvidences, or of Miall's _Bases of Belief_, or of Dr. Hopkins', or Dr. Channing's, or Dr. Priestley's _Evidences of Christianity_; but theBible, and especially the story of Christ, was the principal instrumentof my conversion. I believed first with my heart rather than my head. True, my head soon justified the belief of my heart: but my heart wasfirst in the business. I believe in miracles; I think them of greatimportance. I believe especially in the miracles of Christ. But thatwhich melted my heart; that which won my infinite admiration; that whichfilled me with unspeakable love and gratitude; that which made me aChristian and a Christian believer, was Christ himself. Even Hismiracles moved me more as expressions of His love, than as proofs of Hispower. The great thing that overpowered me was the infinite excellencyof Christ, and the wonderful adaptation of Christianity to the spiritualand moral, the social and physical, wants of mankind, Christ Himself isHis own best advocate. His life and character are His strongest claimson our love and loyalty. And His religion, like the sun, is its own bestevidence of its divinity. The infinite worth of the sun--the astonishingand infinitely varied adaptation of his light and warmth to the wants ofevery living thing--his wonderful and beneficent effects on plants andtrees, on animals and man, are the strongest proofs of His Divineoriginal. And so with Christianity, the Sun of the moral and spiritualworld. It proves its heavenly origin by its amazing adaptation to man'snature, and by its almighty tendency to promote his improvement andperfection; by the light, the life, the blessedness it gives; by thelove it kindles; by the glorious transformations which it effects indepraved individuals and degenerate communities; by the peace, the hope, the joy it inspires; and by the courage and strength it imparts both inlife and in death. 

19. The form in which Christianity presented itself to me, and the wayin which it operated on my soul, may be seen from the articles I wroteon "Christ and His teachings, " about the time of my conversion. Theyrefer to the doctrine of Christ with regard to a Fatherly God, and Hisloving care of His creatures. The first thing that struck me in thisdoctrine was its beauty and tenderness. It is just the kind of doctrinewhich the hearts of the best of men would wish to be true. It answers tothe weaknesses and the wants of our nature; to the longings andaspirations of our souls. It is full of consolation. It makes theuniverse complete. It makes man's life worth living. It makes thegreatness, the vastness, the infinitude of our intellectual andaffectional nature a blessing. It gives peace--the peace that passesunderstanding. It gives joy, --the joy that is unspeakable and full ofglory. It opens our lips in the sight of sorrow, and enables us to givethe sufferer consolation. It gives the universe a head. It gives itunity. It gives to man a Ruler. It gives to law a commanding force. Itgives to conscience a controlling power. It makes virtue duty, while itgives to it fresh grandeur and beauty. It exalts it in our eyes; and itendears it to our hearts. And it furnishes the all-perfect example. Andit makes reasonable the inculcation of humility and charity, offorbearance and forgiveness. And it dignifies the work of beneficence. It makes us the allies and fellow-workers of the infinite. It makes usone with Him. In teaching the ignorant, in bringing back the erring, instrengthening the weak, in reforming the vicious, in cheering the sad, in blessing the world, we are working as children in fellowship withtheir infinite Father, and the pulses of our generous nature beat inharmony with the living, loving, all-pervading Spirit of the universe. 

And while it brightens the present, it gilds the future. It makes ablessed immortality a natural certainty. If God our Father lives, thenwe His children shall live also. Death is abolished. Day dawns at laston the night of the grave. Earth is our birth-place and our nursery;death is the gate-way to infinity, and there is our glorious and eternalhome. Our work for ever is the joyous work of doing good. Our futurelife is an eternal unfolding, and a delightful exercise, of our highestpowers. The mysteries of universal nature open to our view, and in theconfluence of the delights of knowledge and the transports ofbenevolence, our joy is full; our bliss complete. 

This doctrine, in the form in which Jesus presents it, has hold of thehearts of nearly the whole population of Christendom. It has thestrongest hold on the best. Even those who doubt it, doubt it with asigh; and those who give it up, surrender it with regret. And as theymake the sacrifice the earth grows dark. And life grows sad. And naturewears the air of desolation. The music of the woods becomes less sweet. The beauty of the flowers becomes less charming. There creeps a drearysilence over land and sea. Existence loses more than half its charms. The light of life burns dim. The past, the present, and the future allare cheerless. The world is one vast orphan-house. Mankind arefatherless. Our dearest ones are desolate. And language has no word tocomfort them. The lover sighs. The husband and the father weeps. Thebravest stand aghast. The charm of life, the unmixed bliss of being, isno more. 

But the question of questions is, Is the doctrine true? The _heart_ saysit is, and even the intellect acknowledges that there are ten thousandappearances in nature which cannot be accounted for on any otherprinciple. We cannot at present dwell on the subject; but the doctrineof Jesus with regard to God and immortality is the grandest and mostconsoling, and is the most adapted to strengthen the soul to duty, andto cheer and support it under suffering, that the mind of man canconceive. 

And then as to Jesus Himself, the love and the reverence with which Heis honored by so large a portion of the foremost nations of the earth, are no mistake, --no accident. They are the natural result of His worthand excellency. They are the natural response of the generous heart ofhumanity, to its wisest Teacher, its loftiest Example, and its greatestBenefactor. The devoutest love, the liveliest gratitude, the richesthonors, the costliest offerings are his, --He deserves them all. And Hisname shall remain, and His fame shall spread, as long as the sun andmoon endure. 

All nations love and adore the good. Men will even die for them. Whatwonder then that Jesus should be so loved? What wonder that so manytongues should praise Him, so many hearts adore Him, and so many nationsbow before Him, and accept Him as their Lord? For He devoted Himself tothe service, not of a class or a nation, but of the world. The sick, thepoor, the ignorant, the fallen; the little innocent children, thewronged and outcast woman, the hated Samaritan, the despised Pagan, theobnoxious publican, the youthful prodigal, the dying penitent, the cruelpersecutor, all shared His love, His pity, and His prayers. He lived, Hetaught, He died for all. 

20. The first Christians that invited me to preach were the MethodistReformers of Wolverhampton. The next were the Primitive Methodists ofTunstall and Bilston. The Primitive Methodists at Tunstall invited me tojoin their community, and as soon as I consistently could, I did so. Iwas afterwards accepted as a local preacher. My labors as a preacher andlecturer have been mostly in connection with that community. I wasspecially struck with the zeal, the labors, and the usefulness of thePrimitive Methodists while on my way from the wilds of error; and myintercourse with its ministers and members since I became a Christian, has proved to me an unspeakable comfort and blessing. I have receivedfrom them the greatest kindness: and I pray God that I may prove acomfort and a blessing to them in return. 

21. I had great sacrifices to make when I renounced my connection withthe unbelievers and became a Christian, and for some time I and myfamily had experience of severe trials. We had to give up our oldbusiness, and it seemed impossible to obtain a new one, and for a timewe were threatened with the bitterness of want. We were unwilling toask a favor of any Christian party, lest our motives for embracingChristianity should be suspected; and at times I felt perplexed and sad. One day my eldest son, seeing I was depressed, said, "Father, dear, don't be troubled. We must trust in God now. I _do_ trust in Him; and Iam so happy to think that we are all Christians, that I can bearanything. " God bless his dear good soul. We did trust in God, and Hesustained us. He supplied our wants. He overruled all things for ourgood. And we can now say, "The lines have fallen to us in pleasantplaces; we have a goodly heritage. "

22. I have met with some unpleasantnesses since my return to Christ; butI am not sure that they are worth naming; and for the present they shallremain unnamed. I have met with many things of a very pleasantcharacter. Thousands that followed me into doubt have come back with meto Christianity. Thousands that were sinking, were saved by myconversion. I believe I may say thousands of unbelievers that were notled into doubt by me, have been redeemed from their wretchedness throughmy example and labors. Some young ministers have been kept from rash andruinous steps by the story of my experience. Many believers have beenstrengthened in their faith and encouraged in their Christian laborsunder my sermons and lectures. Many have been benefited by mypublications. My family has been greatly comforted and blessed. Thepower of the infidel class has been diminished. I have myself enjoyed akind and a degree of happiness that I never enjoyed while the slave ofdoubt and unbelief. And it is a great consolation to think that I wasbrought to God while in my health and strength, and that I have now beenpermitted to spend from eleven to twelve years in the work of Christ. Another great comfort is, that my circumstances are such as to enable meto give some proof of my devotion to the cause of Christ; of my infinitepreference of the religion of Christ, both to the miserable philosophyof unbelief, and to the wretched fictions of ignorant or anti-Christiandivines. 

23. I read quite a multitude of books on my way back to Christ, and if Ihad time, I would give some account of the influence which some of themmade on my mind. But I have not. It may seem strange, but I had sunkbelow the level of ancient Paganism, and the books which I read on myfirst awaking to a consciousness that I was wrong, were Pagan works. Iread much in Plato and Aristotle, Cicero and Seneca, for a time, andthen in Plutarch, M. A. Antonine, and Epictetus. The works of Epictetus, with the comments of Simplicius, proved exceedingly profitable. I thenread the writings of Theodore Parker, Dr. Channing, and some of theworks of Dr. Priestley, and got good from all. They all helped toinspire me with a horror of Atheism, and to strengthen my faith in God, and in His boundless and eternal love. I next read a number of my ownworks, beginning with those that were somewhat skeptical, and readingbackwards, to those which were Christian. I then read freely my oldcompanions and favorites, including Hooker, Baxter, and Howe; JeremyTaylor, William Law, and Bishop Butler. I read Shakespeare freely, andPope, and then Thomson, and Goldsmith, and Young, and Cowper, andTennyson, and several others of our poets. Then came the works ofCarlyle, Burke, Penn, and Wesley; of Robert Hall, and Dr. Cooke, and Mr. Newton; and the writings of Paley and Grotius. I also read Guizot's_History of Civilization_, and those portions of Dr. Henry's _History ofEngland_ that referred to the Church and Christianity. Still later Iread Augustine's _Confessions_, Montalembert's _Monks of the West_, andeverything I could find to illustrate the history of Christianity. 

I was delighted, transported, with many of Wesley's hymns. I found inthem an amount of truth, and beauty, and richness of good feeling, I hadnever found in them before. I read many of the hymns of Watts with greatpleasure, as well as several collections of hymns and poetry by RoundellPalmer and others. I also read the writings of Chalmers, Whewell, andLord Brougham on natural theology, and the works of several otherauthors on that subject. 

At a later period I read something in Neander, Lange, and others on thelife of Christ. Still later I read Young's _Christ of History_, withRenan and _Ecce Homo_. Renan tried me very much. He seemed to write inthe scoffing spirit of Voltaire, and I laid the book aside before I gotto the end. _Ecce Homo_ delighted me exceedingly. I read it a dozentimes. I studied it, and it did me a great deal of good. It bothstrengthened my faith in Christ, and increased my love to Him. Stilllater I read _Ecce Deus_ with pleasure and profit. 

The book however that did me most good was the Bible. I came to itcontinually, as to an overflowing fountain, and drank of its waters withever-increasing delight. 

24. I began to preach before I was fit; but I never might have been fit, if I had not begun. I became fit by working while unfit. And myimperfect labors proved a blessing to many. 

25. There was much prejudice against me at first; but not more than Ihad reason to expect; and it gradually gave place to confidence and kindfeeling. Some said I ought to remain silent a few years; but as I didnot know what a few years or even a few days might bring forth, Ithought it best to speak at once. I had spoken freely enough on thewrong side, and I saw no reason why I should not speak as freely and atonce on the right side. Nor do I regret the course I took. It was thebest. Some that thought otherwise at first, think as I do now. Forinstance, when Mr. Everett first heard that some of his friends hadinvited me to preach for them, he was very angry, and said I ought neverto speak or show my face again in public as long as I lived. In lessthan four years he came to hear me, was much affected, shook me by thehand, thanked me, invited me to his house, showed me his library, andhis museum of Methodist antiquities and curiosities, offered me a homein his house, and was as kind to me as a father. 

I never quarrelled with people for regarding me with distrust or fear, though I often checked my over-zealous friends, who were disposed toquarrel with all who did not regard me with the same amount of love andconfidence as themselves. 

I have never defended myself against slanderers, either by word orwriting, except when justice to my friends has seemed to require it. 

I have never complained of any disadvantages under which I have labored. It is right that a man who has erred as I have, should have somethingunpleasant in his lot to remind him of his error, and render him morecareful and prayerful for the time to come: and there is to me apleasure in doing penance for my faults. 

26. I have never thrown the whole blame of my errors on others, nor haveI ever seen reason to take the whole to myself. God alone is able todistribute praise and blame, rewards and punishments, according to men'sdeserts, and to Him I leave the task. At first I was disposed to be verysevere towards myself: but two years' experience in the religious bodythat I first joined, of a kind of treatment resembling that of my earlydays, satisfied me that I ought to judge myself a little more leniently. I would not however be unduly severe towards others. I cannot tell, whena man does me wrong, how far he may be under the influence ofunavoidable error, and how far he may be under the influence of a wickedwill. I may be able to measure the injustice of the act, but not thewickedness of the actor. God alone can do that. A man's treatment of memay satisfy me that I ought not to place myself in his power; but cannotjustify me in saying of him that he deserves the damnation of hell. Therule with regard to men's deserts is, "Judge not, that ye be notjudged. "

27. But when I have made the most liberal allowance for myself, and evenwhile I feel satisfied that in my investigations my object was thediscovery of truth, and that my errors were wholly unintentional, I muststill feel ashamed and mortified at the thought that I was so weak as tobe capable of such grievous errors. Even when I take into account theimperfection of my education, and the disadvantages of my situation, andall the temptations by which I was assailed, I am still ashamed andhumbled, and feel that my place is in the dust. But if, while prostrate, God says to me, "Arise!" shall I resist the call? If in the exercise ofHis love He restores to me the joys of His salvation, and bids me speakand labor in His cause, shall I not thankfully obey the heavenly voice?Shall I carry my humility to the extreme of disobedience? Shall I notrather arise, and, with a cheerful and joyous heart, do my Saviour whatservice I can? I will not presume to usurp the prerogative of God, evento judge and punish myself. I will leave myself to Him, the merciful andall-knowing, and He shall do with me what He sees best. I will notreject His mercy. I will not resist His will. Let Him do what seemeth toHim good, whether it be in the way of tenderness or of severity. It haspleased Him, thus far, to mingle much compassion with His chastisements, and His goodness calls for gratitude and joy. 

28. And as I act towards God, I will act towards His people. If theyfrown on me, I will take it patiently; but if they welcome me withdemonstrations of affection, I will rejoice. If they close their pulpitsagainst me, I will say, "Your will be done. " If they open them to me, Iwill enter, and, to the best of my ability, declare the counsel of God. A portion of God's people, --a large and most worthy portion--havereceived me graciously; and my duty is, and my endeavor, I trust, willbe, to reciprocate their love and confidence. I say with the poet:--

 "People of the living God, I have sought the world around, Paths of doubt and sorrow trod, Peace and comfort nowhere found; Now to you my spirit turns, Turns, a fugitive unblest; Brethren, where your altar burns O receive me to your rest. 

 "Lonely I no longer roam, Like the cloud, the wind, the wave; Where you dwell shall be my home, Where you die shall be my grave; Mine the God whom you adore, Your Redeemer shall be mine; Earth can fill my heart no more, All my joys shall be divine. "

29. It seems strange that I should have been permitted to wander intodoubt and unbelief, and live so long under its darkness and horrors. There is a mystery about it that I cannot understand. But what I knownot now, I may know hereafter. The mystery of Job's trial was explainedwhen his afflictions were at an end. The mystery of my strange trial isstill wrapt up in darkness. True, my strange experience has not been anunmixed calamity. It has brought me advantages which I could nototherwise have enjoyed. I know things which I never could have known, ifI had always remained within the enclosures of the Church, and under theinfluence of Christianity. And my heart is more subdued to the will ofGod. I am more at one with Him than I ever was before. I love Him more. I love Jesus more. I love His religion more. I have a clearer view and afuller knowledge of its infinite worth. I have, of course, a fullerknowledge of the horrors of infidelity. And my faith in God andChristianity rests on a firmer foundation than it did in my early days. Many things which I once only _believed_, I now _know_. Many things forwhich I had formerly only the testimony of others, I now know to be trueby my own experience. There are quite a multitude of things on which Ihave greater certainty, and on which I can, in consequence, speak withmore authority than in my early days. There are, too, cases of doubtwhich I can meet, which formerly I could not have met. I can make moreallowances too, than formerly, for those who are troubled with doubt, orensnared by error. And my preaching, in some cases, is more powerful. And I am more free from bigotry and intolerance. While I see more tolove and admire in the Church generally, I love _all_ hard-workingchurches without partiality. I think less of the points on which theydiffer, and more of the points on which they agree. They appear to memore as one church. There are many points on which I might once haveengaged in controversy, which now appear of little or no moment. While Ihave more zeal for God, I have more charity for men. 

There are many things in Wesley's hymns, and many things in other hymns, which formerly I did not understand or appreciate, or understood andappreciated but very imperfectly, which now I understand more perfectly, and prize more highly. And so with many things in the Bible. 

30. And I have, at times, and have had for years, strange glimpses ofthe magnificence and wondrousness of the universe; startling views ofthe awful grandeur and movements of its huge orbs, and of the terribleworking of its great forces, and an overpowering sight and sense of thepresence and power of the living God in all, which I never had in myearlier days. And I have often had, and still have, at times, strangefeelings of the fact and mystery of existence: of my own existence, andof the existence of other beings, and of God. 

31. And I have, at times, strange feelings with regard to the infinitevalue of life and consciousness, and of my intellectual and moralpowers. And I have pleasant and wonderful thoughts and feelings withregard to the lower animals, as the creatures of God, my Father; and asmanifestations of His goodness, and wisdom, and power; and as sharerswith me of an infinite Father's love. And I love them as I never lovedthem in my earlier days. I feel happier in their company. I listen withmore pleasure to the songs of birds, and gaze with more delight on everyliving thing. The earth and its inhabitants are new to me. The plantsand flowers are new. The universe is new. I am new to myself. All thingsare new. It seems, at times, as if the new, enlarged, and higher life ofwhich I have become conscious through my strange experience, were worththe fearful price which I have paid for it. 

32. But then again I think of the time I spent in sin and folly, --of themischief I did in those dark days, --of the grief I caused to so manygood and godly souls, --of the sorrows I entailed on those most dear tome, and of the terrible disadvantages under which I labor, and underwhich I must always labor, in consequence of my unaccountable errors, and I am confounded and dismayed. But then, on the other hand, I amreminded that I did not sin wilfully, --that I did not err purposely orwantonly, --that what I did amiss I did in ignorance, --that I verilybelieved myself in the way of duty when I went astray, --that I wasinfluenced by a desire to know the truth, --that I believed myself, atthe outset, bound as a Christian, and as a creature of God, to use myfaculties to the utmost in searching the Scriptures, and exploringNature, in pursuit of truth, --that when I advocated infidel views, Iadvocated them believing them to be true, and believing that truth mustbe most conducive to the virtue and happiness of mankind. True, appearances were against me; but I felt myself bound, even when anunbeliever, to "walk by faith, "--by faith in principles which I supposedmyself to have found to be true. My life, even in my worst condition, was a life of self-sacrifice for what I regarded as eternal truth. WhenI gave up my belief in a Fatherly God, and my faith in a blessedimmortality, I believed myself to be making a sacrifice at the shrine oftruth. I thought I heard her voice from the infinite universe demandingthe surrender, and conscience compelled me to comply with the demand. Ifelt the dreadful nature of the sacrifice, but what could I do?

I remember the words I uttered, and I remember the mingled emotionswhich filled and agitated my soul, on that occasion. I was distressed atthe terrible necessity of giving up the cherished idols of my soul, yetI was filled for a moment with a strange delight at the thought that Iwas doing my duty in compliance with the stern demands of eternal law, and the dread realities of universal being. And I hoped against hopethat the result would all be right. 

I weep when I read the strange words which I uttered on that dark andterrible occasion. I said to myself, "The last remains of my religiousfaith are gone. The doctrines of a personal God, and of a future life, Iam compelled to regard as the offspring, not of the understanding, butof the imagination and affections. " It is no easy matter to weanone's-self from flattering and long cherished illusions. It is no easymatter to believe that doctrines which have been almost universallyreceived, and which have been so long and so generally regarded asessential to the virtue and happiness of mankind--doctrines, too, whichhave mingled their mighty influences with so much of the beautiful andsublime in human history, and which still, to so many, form all thepoetry and romance, almost all the interest and grandeur and blessednessof human life, have no foundation in truth. To persons who believe in aFatherly God, and in human immortality, pure naturalism is terriblyuninviting. It was always so to me. I well remember the mingled horrorand pity with which, when a Christian, I regarded the man who had nopersonal God, and no hope of a future life. I remember too how I wroteor spoke of such. I mourned over them as the most hapless and miserableof all living beings. Yet I myself have come at length, by slow degrees, after a thousand struggles, and with infinite reluctance, to the dreadconclusion, that a personal God and an immortal life are fictions of thehuman mind. Yet existence has not quite lost its charms, nor life itsenjoyments. There is something infinitely grand, and unspeakablyexciting and elevating in the consciousness of having made a sacrificeof the most popular and bewitching of all illusions, out of respect totruth. It was an enviable state of mind which prompted, the grand andthrilling exclamation, "Let justice be done, though the heavens shouldfall. " And that state of mind is no less enviable which can sustain aman in the sacrifice of God and immortality at the shrine of truth. Sucha sacrifice, accompanied, as it must be in the present state of society, with a thousand other sacrifices of reputation, friendships, popularpleasures, and social favor, is an exercise of the highest virtue, ademonstration of the greatest magnanimity, and is accompanied orfollowed with an intensity of satisfaction which none but themartyr-spirit of truth can conceive. It is often said by Christians, that the reason why persons doubt the existence of God and a future lifeis, that they have good cause to dread them; or, as Grotius expressesit, that they live in such a way that it would be to their interest thatthere should be no God or future life. This was not the case with me. Myunbelief came upon me while I was diligently striving in all things todo God's will. My virtue outlived my faith. 

"Born of Methodist parents, and reared under Christian influences, and aChristian myself, and even a Christian minister for many years, I wasbrought slowly and reluctantly, in spite of a world of prejudices, andin spite of interests and associations and tastes all but almighty intheir influence, to the conclusion, that pure, unmixed Naturalism aloneaccorded with what was known of the present state and the past historyof the universe. I say I was brought to these conclusions in spite of aworld of opposing influences. While a Christian, all that the worldcould promise or bestow seemed to be within my reach. Friends, popularity, wealth, power, fame; and visions of infinite usefulness toothers, and of unbounded happiness to myself in the future, were allpromised me as the reward of continued devotion to the cause of God andChristianity. As the reward of heresy and unbelief, I had to encountersuspicion, desertion, hatred, reproach, persecution, want, grief offriends and kindred, anxious days and sleepless nights, and almost everyextreme of mental anguish. Still, inquiry forced me into heresy furtherand further every year, and brought me at length to the extreme of doubtand unbelief. "

It was, then, in no light mood that I gave up my faith in God, andChrist, and immortality. The change in my views was no headlong, hastyfreak. It was the result of long and serious thought--of misguided, buthonest, conscientious study. And hence I have sometimes thought, and amstill inclined to think, that God had a hand in the matter--that He ledme, or permitted me to wander, along that strange and sorrowful road, and to pass through those dreary and dolorous scenes, and drink sodeeply of so dreadful a cup of sorrow, for some good end. "He maketh thewrath of man to praise Him, " and perhaps he may turn our errors also togood account. I am not disposed to believe that my life has been afailure. It may, for anything I know, prove to have been a greatsuccess. "Men are educated largely by their mistakes, " says one. Ithardly seems likely that God would suffer a well-intentioned, thoughweak and erring child, to ruin either himself or others for ever. God isgood, and the future will justify His ways, and all His saints shallpraise Him. 

My business meanwhile is, to do what I can to promote the interests oftruth, and the welfare of mankind. I must, so far as possible, redeemlost time. I have a thousand causes for gratitude, and none forcomplaint. I am very happy in general; as happy as I desire to be, andas happy, I expect, as it is good for me to be. I sometimes feel as ifI were _too_ happy. And I certainly never ask God to make me _more_happy. I ask Him to make me wiser, and better, and more useful, but notmore happy. At times my cup of joy runs over. It is strange it should beso, yet so it is. But joy and sorrow are often found in company. Paulsays of himself, "Sorrowful, yet always rejoicing. " The author of _EcceDeus_ says, "The good man's life is one unbroken repentance. Throughouthis life he suffers on account of his sins. What, then of joy?" he asks:and he answers, "It is contemporaneous with sorrow. They areinseparable. The joy that is born of sorrow is the only joy that isenduring. " It may seem strange, but it is true, the last year of my lifehas been the happiest I ever experienced. 

CHAPTER XX. 

A FEW OF THE LESSONS I HAVE LEARNED ON MY WAY THROUGH LIFE. 

And now for a few of the lessons which I have learned on my way throughlife. 

1. One, alas! is, that it is very difficult to bring young people tobenefit by the experience of their elders. It would be a happy thing ifwe could put old men's heads on young men's shoulders; but no method ofperforming the operation has, as yet, been hit upon. It might answer aswell, if old men could empty their heads into the heads of the young. But this is a task almost as difficult as the former. The heads of theyoung are generally full of foolish thoughts, and vain conceits, andwild dreams of what they are to be, and do, and enjoy in the days tocome, with large admixtures at times of more objectionable materials; sothat there is no room for the counsels and admonitions of their elders. Then there are some who do not _like_ to be counselled or admonished. Having set their minds on the attainment of a certain object, they areunwilling to listen to any but such as commend their course, andencourage them with promises of success. There are others who thinkthey have no need of counsel or admonition. Counsel and admonition areproper enough for some people, but they are not required in their case, they imagine. They do not exactly think themselves beings of a superiororder, beyond the reach of ordinary dangers; but they _act_ as if theythought so. In words they would acknowledge themselves to be but men, liable to the common frailties of their race; but their conduct seems tosay, "It is impossible _we_ should ever err or sin as some men do; weare better constructed, and are born to a happier lot. " Their purpose isto do right, and it never enters their minds that they can ever dowrong. And if you tell them that they are in danger of becomingintemperate, or skeptical, or of falling into any great error or sin, they feel hurt, and say, "Do you suppose we are dogs that we should dosuch things?" Dogs or not, when the time of trial comes, they do them. And then they discover, that men are not always so wise, so good, or sostrong as they suppose themselves; that people may be the subjects ofweaknesses of which they are utterly unconscious, till assailed by someunlooked for temptation; and they mourn at the last, and say, "How havewe hated instruction, and despised the counsel of the Holy One. " And nowthey see that the strongest need a stronger one than themselves toshield them, and that the wisest need a wiser one than themselves toguide them, if they are to be kept from harm. 

We have no disposition to be severe with such persons, for we belongedto the same unhappy class ourselves. It never once entered our minds inour earlier days, that we could ever fall away from Christ. We saw thatothers were in danger, but we never supposed we were in dangerourselves. We preached from the text, "Let him that thinketh hestandeth, take heed lest he fall, " and we pressed the solemn warning onour hearers with the greatest earnestness; but we never applied it toourselves. We supposed ourselves secure. And if any one had told us thatwe should one day cease to be a Christian, and above all, if any man hadsaid that we should fall into unbelief, and be ranked with the opponentsof Christianity, we should have thought him insolent or mad. Yet we knowwhat followed. We cannot therefore deal harshly with our tooself-confident brethren. But we must give them faithful warning. Be onyour guard, my dear young friends. You are not so free from defects, norso far from danger, as your conscious innocence, or the great deceiver, may insinuate. There may be tendencies to evil within you, andtemptations in the mysterious world around you, of the character andforce of which you have no conception. It was as great and good a man asyou perhaps that said, "Weaker than a bruised reed, Help I every moment need. "

And he was wise that said, --

 "Beware of Peter's words, Nor confidently say, 'I never _will_ deny thee, Lord;' But, 'Grant I never may. '"

There are devices of the wicked one of which you are not yet aware;"depths of Satan" which you have not yet fathomed; and terriblepossibilities of which, as yet, you have never dreamed. I say again, Beon your guard. "Be not high-minded, but fear. " "Blessed is the man thatfeareth always. " None are so weak as those who think themselves strong. None are in such danger as those who think themselves secure. 

Man, even at best, is not so great, so wise, so strong, as some areprone to suppose: and when, cut off from Christ and His people, from theBible and prayer, he trusts in his own resources, he is poor, and weak, and frail in the extreme. There are no errors, no extravagances, nodepths of degradation, into which the lawless self-reliant man may notfall. When I had lost my faith in Christ, and had freed myself from allrestraints of Bible authority and Church discipline, I said to myself, "I will be a MAN; all that a man acting freely, giving his soulfull scope, tends naturally to become; and I will be nothing else. " Ihad come to the conclusion that man was naturally good--that, whenfreely and fully developed, apart from the authority of religion, churches and books, he would become the perfection of wisdom, andgoodness, and happiness. I said to myself, "Christ was but a man; andthe reason why He so much excelled all other men was, that He actedfreely, without regard to the traditions of the elders, the law ofMoses, or any authority but that of His own untrammelled mind. I willfollow the same course. I will free myself from the prejudices of myeducation, from the influence of my surroundings, and from the authorityof all existing laws and religions, and be my own sole ruler, my ownsole counsellor, my own sole guide. I will act with regard to thereligion of Christ, as Christ acted with regard to the religion ofMoses; obey it, abolish it, or modify it, as its different parts mayrequire. I will act with regard to the Church authorities of my time asJesus acted with regard to the Scribes and Pharisees of His day; I willset them aside. I will be a man; a free, self-ruled, and self-developedman. "

Alas, I little knew the terrible possibilities of the nature of man whenleft to itself. I had no conception of its infinite weakness with regardto what is good, or its fearful capabilities with regard to what is bad. I had no idea of the infinite amount of evil that lay concealed in thehuman heart, ready, when unrepressed, to unfold itself, and take allhorrible forms of vice and folly. I indulged myself in my madexperiments of unlimited freedom till appalled by the melancholyresults. I did not become _all_ that unchecked license could make me;but I became so different a creature from what I had anticipated, that Isaw the madness of my resolution, and recoiled. I came to the verge ofall evil. God had mercy on me and held me back in spite of my impiety, or I should have become a monster of iniquity. Man was not made forunlimited liberty. He was made for subjection to the Divine will, andfor obedience to God's law. He was made for fellowship with the goodamong his fellow-men, and for submission to Christian discipline. He canbecome good and great and happy only by faith in God and Christ, byself-denial, by good society, by careful moral and religious culture, and by constant prayer and dependence on God. I now no longer say, "Iwill be a _man_;" but, "Let me be a Christian. " I no longer say, "I willbe all that my nature, working unchecked, will make me;" but, "Let mebe all that Christ and Christianity can make me. Let me check alltempers at variance with the mind of Christ; and all tendencies atvariance with His precepts. Let the mouth of that fearful abyss whichlies deep down in my nature be closed, and let the infernal fires thatsmoulder there be utterly smothered; and let the love of God and thelove of man reign in me, producing a life of Christ-like piety andbeneficence. Let all I have and all I am be a sacrifice to God inChrist, and used in the cause of truth and righteousness for the welfareof mankind. "

The enemy of man has many devices. In my case, as in the case of so manyothers, he transformed himself into "an angel of light. " He did not say, "Give up your work: forsake Christ; desert His Church; indulge yourappetites; give yourself to selfish, sensual pleasure; free yourselffrom religious restraint, from moral control, from scruples ofconscience, and live for gain, or fame, or power. " On the contrary; hiscounsel was, "Perfect your creed; perfect your knowledge; reform theChurch; expose its corruptions; reform the ministry; expose its errors;go back to the simplicity of Christ; return to the order of the ancientChurch; pay no regard to prevailing sentiments, or to establishedcustoms; begin anew. Resolve on perfection; it is attainable; be contentwith nothing less. Assert your rights. Be true. Prove all things; holdfast to what is good, but cast away whatever you find to be evil. Callno one master but Christ; and what Christ requires, ask no one butyourself. Be true to your own conscience. God has called you to restorethe Church to its purity, to its simplicity, to its ancient power. Befaithful, and fear no opposition. Free inquiry must lead to truth, andtruth is infinitely desirable. Assail error; assail men's inventions;spare nothing but what is of God. It is God's own work you are doing; itis the world's salvation for which you are laboring; and God's ownSpirit will guide you, and His power will keep you from harm. " All thiswas true; but it was truth without the needful accompaniment of piouscaution. It was true, but it was truth without the needful amount ofhumility, of meekness, of gentleness, and of self-distrust. It wastruth, but it was truth put in such a form as to do the work offalsehood. It was an appeal to pride, to self-conceit, toself-sufficiency. It was truth presented in such a shape, as to abatethe sense of my dependence on God; as to make me forgetful of my ownimperfections; as to exclude from my mind all thoughts of danger, and soprepare me for mistakes, mishaps, and ultimately ruin. It is not enoughto aim at good objects: we must be humble; we must be sensible that oursufficiency is of God; we must be conscious of our own weakness, of ourown imperfections, and of our own danger, and move with care, andwatchfulness, and prayer. We must not please ourselves with thoughts ofthe wonders we will achieve, of the services we will render to theworld, and of the honor we shall gain; but cherish the feeling that Godis all, and be content that He alone shall be glorified. We are butearthen vessels; the excellency of the power is of God. 

O my poor soul, how do I grieve when I think of thy early dreams, and ofthy sad awakening. Like Adam, I lived in a Paradise of bliss, suspectingno evil, and dreading no change. I had been trained to piety from myearliest years. The Bible was my delight. Christ and Christianity weremy glory and joy. The Church was my home. To preach the Gospel, todefend God's cause, and to labor for the salvation of the world, werethe delight of my life. I was successful. I was popular. I had manyfriends, and was passionately beloved. Wherever I went, men hailed me astheir spiritual father. The chapels in which I preached were crowded totheir utmost capacity, and men regarded me as the champion ofChristianity. They applauded my labors in its behalf, and testifiedtheir esteem and admiration by unmistakable signs. At one time I mighthave applied to myself the words of Job, "When the ear heard me, then itblessed me; and when the eye saw me, it gave witness to me. The youngmen saw me, and gave me reverence; and the aged arose and stood up. Untome men gave ear, and waited; and kept silence at my counsel. They waitedfor my words as for the showers; and opened their mouths as for thelatter rain. I chose out their way, and sat chief, and dwelt as a kingin the army, as one that comforteth the mourners. " And everythingseemed to foretell a continuance of my happy lot. My prejudices and myconvictions, my tastes and my affections, my habits and my inclinations, my interests and my family, all joined to bind me to the cause of Christby the strongest bonds. And I seemed as secure to others as to myself. Hence I looked forward to a life of ever-increasing usefulness, reflecting credit on my family and friends, and conferring blessings onmankind at large. I revelled in hopes of a reformed Church, and aregenerated world; and, passing the bounds of time, my spirit exulted inthe prospect of a glorious immortality. Yet "when I looked for good thenevil came; and when I waited for light there came darkness. " I fellaway. My happy thoughts, my joyous hopes, my delightful prospects, allvanished. I underwent a most melancholy transformation. The eyes thatgazed on me with affectionate rapture, now stared at me with affrightand terror; and brave, stout men wept over me like children. The lightof my life was extinguished. My dwelling was in darkness. "I was abrother to dragons, and a companion to owls. " And there was nothingbefore me but the dreary prospect of a return to nothingness. And canyou, my young friends, dream of safety with facts like these in view?Again, I say, be on your guard. An easy, dreamy self-security is theextreme of madness. Our only safety is in watchfulness and prayer. Ouronly sufficiency is of God. 

 "O, never suffer me to sleep Secure within the reach of hell; But still my watchful spirit keep In lowly awe and loving zeal: And bless me with a godly fear, And plant that guardian angel here. "

2. The second lesson I would name is this: It is dangerous to allow badfeeling to get into your hearts towards your Christian friends, or yourbrother ministers. It is especially dangerous to allow it to remainthere. It works like the infection of the plague. Try therefore to keepyour minds in a calm and comfortable state towards all with whom youhave to do. Guard against rash judgments and groundless suspicions; oryou may take offence when no offence is meant. But even when people doyou harm on purpose, it is best to be forbearing. We never know theforce of temptation under which men act; or the misconceptions underwhich they labor. We may ourselves have caused their misdoings by someunconscious error of our own. It is well to suspect ourselves sometimesof unknown faults, and to go on the supposition that what appearsunkindness in others towards us, may be the result of some unguardedword or inconsiderate action on our part towards them. 2. Keep yourhearts as full as possible of Christian love. The more abundant yourlove, the less will be your liability either to give or take offence. 3. And do not overrate the importance of men's misconduct towards you. Weare not so much in the power of others as we are prone to imagine. Theworld is governed by God, and no one can hurt us against His will. Dothat which is right, and you and your interests are secure. So takethings comfortably. And try to overcome evil with good. And if you findthe task a hard one, seek help from God. 

3. Another lesson which I have learned on my way through life is, thatit is dangerous to indulge a spirit of controversy. There may beoccasions when controversy is a duty; but it is best, as a rule, just tostate what you believe to be the truth, and leave it to work its way insilence. If people oppose it, misrepresent it, or ridicule it, thenstate it again at the proper time, with becoming meekness andgentleness, and then commit it to the care of its great Patron. It isdifficult to run into controversy without falling into sin. Men need tobe very wise and good to be able to go through a controversy honorablyand usefully; and by the time they are qualified for the dangerous work, they prefer more peaceful employment. Controversy always tends toproduce excess of warmth, and warmth of a dangerous kind. It oftendegenerates into a quarrel, and ends in shame. Men go from principles topersonalities; and instead of seeking each other's instruction, try onlyto humble and mortify each other. They begin perhaps with a love oftruth, but they end with a struggle for victory. They try to deal fairlyat the outset, but become unscrupulous at last, and say or do anythingthat seems likely to harass or injure their opponents. The beginning ofstrife is like the letting out of water from a reservoir; there is firsta drop, then a trickle, then a headlong rushing torrent, bearing downall before it, and sweeping away men and their works to destruction. Itis best, therefore, to take the advice of the proverb, and "leave offcontention before it be meddled with. "

4. Another lesson that I have learnt on my way through life is, thatministers should deal very tenderly with their younger brethren. Theyshould teach them, so far as they are able, and check them when they seethem doing anything really wrong; but they should never interfereneedlessly with their spiritual freedom. Young men of mind andconscience _will_ think. They will test their creeds by the SacredOracles, and endeavor to bring them into harmony with the teachings ofChrist and His Apostles. And it is right they should. It is their duty, as they have opportunity, to "prove all things. " And few young men, ofany considerable powers, can compare the creeds which they receive intheir childhood with the teachings of Sacred Scripture, without comingto the conclusion, that on some points they are erroneous, and on othersdefective; that on some subjects they contain too much, and on otherstoo little. And good young men will naturally feel disposed to lay asidewhat they regard as erroneous, and to accept what presents itself totheir minds as true. In some cases they will make mistakes. The only menthat never think wrong, are those who never think at all. There neverwas a child born into the world that learned to walk without stumblingoccasionally, and at times even falling outright. And there never was aspiritual child that learned to travel in the paths of religiousinvestigation, without falling at times into error. But what is to bedone on such occasions? What does the mother do when her baby falls?Does she run and kick the poor little creature, and say, "You naughty, dirty tike, if ever you try to walk again, I will throw you into thegutter?" On the contrary, she runs and catches up the dear little thing;and if it has hurt itself, she kisses the place to make it well, andsays, "Try again, my darling; try again. " And it _does_ try again: andin course of time it learns to walk as steadily as its mother; and whenshe begins to stagger under the infirmities of age, it takes her hand, and steadies her goings. 

And so it should be in spiritual matters. When a good young man fallsinto error, we should treat him with the tenderness and affection of amother. "We were gentle among you, " says Paul to the Thessalonians, "even as a nurse cherisheth her children. " And this is the example thatwe should follow towards our younger brethren. Whether we would keepthem from erring, or bring them back when they go astray, we shouldtreat them tenderly. .. . We should try to win their love and confidence. Men can often be led, when they cannot be driven. There are numbers who, if you attempt to drive them, will run the contrary way; who, if youtreat them with respect, and show them that you love them, will followyou where-ever you may go. 

But you must give them time. They cannot always come right all at once. When a fisherman angles for large fish, he provides himself with aflexible, elastic rod, and a good long length of line; and when he hashooked his prey, he gives it the line without stint, and allows it todart to and fro, and plunge and flounder at pleasure, till it has tireditself well, and then he brings it to the bank with ease. If he were toattempt to drag the fish to the shore at once, by main force, it wouldsnap his rod, or break his line, and get away into the deep; and hewould lose both his fish and his tackle. And so it is in the world ofmind. When we have to do with vigorous and active-minded young men, wemust allow their intellects a little play. We must wait till they beginto feel their weakness. We must place a little confidence in them, andgive them a chance both of finding out their deficiencies, and ofdeveloping their strength. 

It would not be amiss if elder preachers could go on the suppositionthat they are not quite perfect or infallible themselves, --that it ispossible that their brethren may discover some truth in Scripture, thathas not yet found its way into their creed; or detect some error intheir creed, that has lurked there unsuspected for ages. And they oughtto be willing to learn, as well as disposed to teach. 

But in any case, if our studious young brethren miss their waysometimes, we must be kind and gentle towards them, and in our endeavorsto save them, must proceed with care. Deal harshly with them, and youdrive them into heresy or unbelief. Deal gently and lovingly with them, and you bring them back to the truth. How often the disciples of Jesuserred with regard to the nature of His kingdom, and the means by whichit was to be established. Yet how patiently He bore with them. And inthis, as in other things, He has left us an example that we should treadin His steps. The sun keeps the planets within their spheres, and evenbrings back the comets from their far-off wanderings, by the gentlepower of attraction. And the Sun of Righteousness keeps His spiritualplanets in their orbits, and brings from the blackness of darkness thestars that wander, by the same sweet power. And the secondary lights ofthe world must keep their satellites in their orbits, and bring back totheir spheres the stars that fall or lose their way, by kindredinfluences. The mightiest and divinest power in the universe isLOVE. 

5. And now comes a lesson to the young thinkers. Suppose your elderbrethren should treat you unkindly; suppose they should discourage yoursearch after truth, and require you to conform your creed to their ownideas, and your way of speaking to their own old style of expression;suppose that they should look with suspicion on your endeavors to comenearer to the truth, and, whenever you give utterance to a thought or anexpression at variance with their own, should denounce you as heretics, and threaten you with excommunication, what should you do?

We answer, go quietly on in the fear of the Lord. Make no complaint, butprepare yourselves for expulsion. When expelled, go quietly to someChurch that can tolerate your freedom, and work there in peace as theservants of God. Cherish no resentment. Commit your cause to God, and, laboring to do His will, leave Him to choose your lot. 

Even the trials that come from the ignorance or wickedness of men, areof God's appointment. We are taught that it was by God's ordinationthat Judas betrayed Christ; that God employed the wickedness of thetraitor for the accomplishment of His great designs. David said, referring to Shimei, "Let him curse, for God hath commanded him. " Godemployed the wickedness of Shimei, to try and punish David. Wesley hasembodied the sentiment in one of his hymns, as follows:

 "Lord, I adore Thy gracious will; Through every instrument of ill My Father's goodness see: Accept the complicated wrong Of Shimei's hand, and Shimei's tongue, As kind rebukes from Thee. "

Joseph said, God had sent him down to Egypt to save many souls alive. His wicked brethren were only the instruments of his banishment. _They_meant it for _evil_, _God_ turned it to _good_. And so in your case: Godmay be using the ignorance or the wickedness of your persecutors toseparate you from a body for which you are not fitted, and to place youin one where you will be more useful and more happy. When we do right, God will make the errors, and even the sins of our enemies, work for ourgood. 

6. Another lesson which I have thoroughly learnt is, that though men maybecome unbelievers through other causes than vice, they cannot continueunbelievers without spiritual and moral loss. The inevitable tendency ofinfidelity is to debase men's souls. And here I speak not on thetestimony of others merely, but from extensive observation and personalexperience. I have known numbers whom infidelity has degraded, but nonewhom it has elevated. We do not say that every change in a Christian'sbelief is demoralizing. Disbelief in error, resulting from increase ofknowledge, may improve his character; but the loss of faith in Christ, and God, and immortality, can never do otherwise than strengthen a man'stendencies to vice, and weaken his inclinations towards virtue. Wheninfidels say that their unbelief has made them more virtuous, theyattach different ideas to the word virtuous from those which Christiansattach to it. They call evil good, and good evil. The secularists callfornication and adultery virtue. But this is fraud. That infidelity isunfavorable to what men generally call virtue, and friendly to what mengenerally call vice, infidels themselves know. Their passions andprejudices may make them doubt the bad influence of their unbelief for atime, but not long. I myself questioned the downward tendency ofinfidelity in my own case for a time, but facts proved too strong for mein the end. My friends could see a deterioration both in my temper andconduct. And there was a falling off in my zeal and labors for the goodof mankind from the first. There was a falling off even in my talents. There was a greater tendency to self-indulgence. It was owing to thestill lingering influence of my early faith, and of my early Christiantastes and habits, that I was no worse. The virtue which I retained Iowed to the religion on which I had unhappily turned my back. Whenunbelievers are moral, they are so, not in consequence, but in spite oftheir unbelief. When Christian believers are bad, they are so, not inconsequence, but in spite of their religion. Infidelity tends to destroyconscience. It annihilates the great motives to virtue. It strengthensthe selfish and weakens the benevolent affections and tendencies of ournature, and smoothes the road to utter depravity. The farther men wanderfrom Christ, and the longer they remain away, the nearer they approachto utter degeneracy. 

It seldom happens that men who have lived long under the influence ofChristianity, become grossly immoral as soon as they lose their faith:but they decline in virtue from the first, and utter depravation comesin time. I have seen a tree growing prostrate on the ground, when manyof its roots had been torn up from the soil; but it grew very poorly;and the growth it made was owing to the hold which the remainder of itsroots still had on the soil. The branch that is cut off from the treemay retain a portion of its sap, and show some signs of languishing lifefor weeks; but it dies at length. And so with the branches cut off fromthe spiritual vine; they gradually wither and decay. The iron takenwhite hot from the furnace, does not get cool at once; but it graduallycomes down to the temperature of the atmosphere with which it issurrounded. The prodigal did not get through his share of his father'sproperty in a day, but he found himself perishing of hunger at length. Aman does not die the moment he ceases to eat, but he _will_ die if he_persists_ in his abstinence. A man may live in an unhealthy district, and breathe unwholesome air for some time, without apparent injury; butdisease will show itself in the end. It is not uncharitableness thatmakes us speak thus, but charity itself. It is desirable, that bothbelievers and unbelievers should know the truth on this importantsubject. Infidelity is the enemy of all virtue, and consequently of allhappiness; and it is necessary that this should be generally andthoroughly known, and that the old-fashioned prejudice against it shouldbe allowed to keep its ground, and remain as strong as ever. AndChristians must show their charity towards unbelievers, not by abatingmen's horror of infidelity, but by endeavoring to deliver them from itsdeadly power. 

7. And here comes another lesson. Do not suppose that unbelievers areirreclaimable. There is always good ground to hope for the conversion ofthose unbelievers who retain a respect for virtue, if they are properlytreated; and even those who are sunk in vice should not be abandoned indespair. Several of those who have returned to Christ during the lastten years, were men who had gone far in various forms of wickedness. Andmany of those converts from infidelity of whom we read in old religiousbooks, were persons of immoral character. And though habits of vice arenot easily broken off, yet the miseries they entail on men may rousethem to more vigorous efforts for their deliverance. And it sometimeshappens that those who are poor in promise, are rich in performance. Youremember the Saviour's parable of the two sons. The Father said to thefirst, "Son, go work to-day in my vineyard. " And he answered and said, "I will not, " but afterwards he repented and went. And the father saidto the second, "Go. " And he answered and said, "I go, Sir, " and wentnot. And this, said Christ, is what takes place between Me and mankind. I say to the fair-seeming people, "Give yourselves to God;" and theyanswer, "We will, Lord, " but still live on in selfishness and sin. Isay to abandoned profligates, "Give yourselves to God;" and they answer, "We will not;" but on thinking the matter over, they repent and live toGod. Harlots and publicans enter the kingdom of God, while scribes andpharisees remain without. The oyster, if you look at its outwardcovering, is a "hard case;" yet within, it is soft and tender in theextreme. The ugliest caterpillar is but an undeveloped butterfly, and intime, if placed under favorable influences, may leave its crawling, andmount aloft on wings of gold and silver. And it often happens that theworst children make the best men. The fiercest persecutor of the earlyChurch became the chief of the Apostles. He was honest when dragging thesaints to prison; and all that was wanted to make him a preacher of thefaith which he labored so madly to destroy, was LIGHT. 

And so it is still. Some of the most unhappy and unpromising of men andwomen may require but a gentle word, a glimmer of light, or amanifestation of your kind concern for their welfare, to win theirhearts to God. It does not appear that any of the early Christianssupposed that there was anything good in the heart of Saul thepersecutor, and nothing is said of any attempt on their part to convincehim of his error. And many, even when they heard he was converted, couldnot believe the story. And even Ananias, when told by God Himself thatthe converted persecutor was praying, could not get over his fears andsuspicions all at once. When God said, "Go, and help the poor man, "Ananias answered, "Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evilhe hath done to Thy saints at Jerusalem. " But the Lord said unto him, "Go thy way, haste to his help, for he is a chosen vessel unto Me, tobear My name before the Gentiles, and to kings, and to the children ofIsrael. " At last Ananias went his way, and visited the praying penitent. But even after this, when Paul had been preaching for some time withgreat success, and had made the greatest sacrifices, and braved evendeath itself, in the cause of Christ, there were numbers who doubted hissincerity. "When he went to Jerusalem, and attempted to join himself tothe disciples, they were all afraid of him, and did not believe that he_was_ a disciple. " Barnabas however, good man, took him by the hand, andsucceeded at length in obtaining for him, to some extent, the advantagesof Church fellowship. 

Here then we have a couple of lessons; the first is, to seek theconversion of unbelievers; the second is, to guard against an excess ofskepticism in ourselves with regard to the sincerity of those who appearto be converted. It would be well in forming our judgments of personsprofessing religion, to follow the rule laid down by Christ, "By theirfruits ye shall know them. A good tree cannot bring forth bad fruit, nora bad tree good fruit. " If men live soberly, righteously, and godly--ifthey make great sacrifices, and incur reproach and persecution forChrist, and labor zealously in His cause, it is no great stretch ofcharity to go on the supposition, that their profession of faith in Godand Christ is sincere. 

8. But suppose the churches should treat a convert from infidelity asthe church at Jerusalem treated Paul, what should he do? We would say, Take all quietly, and go zealously on with your work. You are theservant of God, and not of man; and you must not desert your Master, because a number of His servants err in their judgment of you, or show, in their conduct towards you, a lack of charity. Serve your Redeemer allthe more faithfully. This was the course which Paul took. He "increasedthe more in strength;" and he abounded the more in labors. It would be apoor excuse for the neglect of your duty to God and Christ, toyourselves and your fellow creatures, to say, "The churches did nottreat us as kindly as they ought; they doubted our sincerity. " Suchconduct would not only be exceedingly wicked, but extremely foolish. Itwould be the surest way to confirm the doubts of the churches, and makethem feel, that in treating you coldly, they had acted wisely. Thesurest way to gain the confidence of the Church, is not to care too muchabout it. If you show that you are satisfied with the favor of God, andwith your own sweet consciousness of the happy change you haveexperienced, everything else will come in its season. Goodness will drawafter it the reputation of goodness. The shadow will follow thesubstance. And whether it does or not, your duty is to be resigned andcheerful. A man that has really been converted from infidelity toChristianity, will be so happy, and will feel so thankful for theblessed change, if he appreciates it as he ought, that he will hardlycare whether he has the favor and confidence of his brethren or not. There is no intimation that the returned Prodigal looked black at hisfather, and threatened to go back again into the far country, becausehis elder brother refused to join in his welcome home. The probabilityis, that he felt so ashamed of his sin and folly, so overpowered withthe tenderness of his father, and so happy to find himself at homeagain, that he never inquired whether other people were satisfied ornot. The father noticed the unhappiness of his elder son, and sought tosoothe and comfort him; but the younger son was occupied with otherthoughts; and having suffered long the grievous pangs of hunger, hewould, for a time at least, be busy at the table, speculating inraptures, it may be, on the difference between the flesh of "the fattedcalf, " and "the husks that the swine did eat. "

It is, in one respect, an advantage to the converted unbeliever to betreated by the Church with shyness. It affords him an opportunity ofproving his attachment to Christ and Christianity, in a way in which hecould not prove it, if every one welcomed him with demonstrations ofaffection, and signs of joy. None are so slow to believe in thesincerity of a converted infidel as infidels themselves; and to be ableto give to his old associates a proof so decisive of the genuineness ofhis change, and of the value he puts on Christianity, will be regardedby the convert as a privilege of no light value. And it is fit andproper, as well as better for the convert, that he should be reminded ofhis former weakness, and incited to watchfulness and humility, by thepain of some kind of life-long disadvantage. 

9. Let no one expect to get through the world without trouble. The thingis not possible. Nor is it desirable. We _need_ a little trouble now andthen to keep us awake; and God will take care that we have it. We hadbetter therefore look for it, and when it comes, bear it patiently. Itis no use fretting or fuming; it only makes things worse. When we arerestless under little troubles, God sends us greater ones; and if ourimpatience continues, he sends us greater still. And there is no remedy. An eel may wriggle itself "out of the frying-pan, into the fire;" but itcannot wriggle itself back again out of the fire, even into thefrying-pan. And so it is with us. We may wriggle ourselves out of onelittle trouble, into two greater ones; but we cannot wriggle ourselvesback again out of the two greater ones, into the little one. The longerwe resist the will of God, the worse we shall fare. We had bettertherefore bear the ills we have, than plunge into others that we knownot of. It is best to submit at once. If we were wise we should say withthe Redeemer, "The cup that My Father giveth me, shall I not drink it?"God knows what is best for us, and He will never inflict on us a pangwhich He does not see to be necessary to our usefulness and welfare. Itis not for His own pleasure that He afflicts us, but for our profit, that we may be partakers of His holiness. 

And sorrow is the seed of joy. And pain adds to the sweetness of ourpleasures. Hunger sweetens our food, and thirst our drink, and wearinessour moments of rest; and "our light afflictions, which are but for amoment, work out for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight ofglory. "

We are quite mistaken when we look at our trials as unmixed evils. They"are blessings in disguise. " The dripping clouds which hide the sun, enrich the earth. The difficulties with which we have to contend, increase our strength. The tail of the kite, which seems to pull itdown, helps it to rise. And the afflictions, which seem to press us tothe ground, help to raise us to heaven. 

Let us take our lot with meekness then, and learn in all things to sayto our Heavenly Father, "Thy will be done. "

10. Join the Church. The Church is an institution of Heaven, andconnection with it is necessary to your spiritual safety. Some thinkthey can stand alone; but when they make the attempt, they fall. No onecan stand, who does not use the means which God has given him for hissupport; and one of those means is fellowship with the Church. Withoutcivil society men gradually sink into barbarism; and without religioussociety Christians sink into earthliness and impiety. 

Some of the sweetest and most beautiful of our flowering shrubs, andsome of the richest of our fruit-bearing trees, are unable to raisethemselves from the ground without the assistance of their strongerkindred. This is the case with the honeysuckle, the ivy, and the grapevine. Left to themselves on the open plain, they sprawl upon the ground, choked with the grass, and cropped and trampled on by beasts, until atlength they perish. But placed in woods or hedgerows, they clasp withtheir living tendrils, or embrace with their whole bodies, theirvigorous neighbors, climb to the light and sunshine by their aid, display their blossoms, and bear their rich delicious fruit in fullperfection. And we are like these trees. We must have support fromothers, or perish. 

This is not all. Even the stoutest and strongest trees, such as the oak, the ash, and the sycamore, do best in company. Plant those trees ingroves, and guard them from the crushing steps and greedy maws ofcattle, and they grow up tall, and straight, and smooth. They shieldeach other from the stormy winds, and they show a sort of silentemulation, each raising its head as high as possible, to catch thefreshest air and the fullest streams of light. But plant one of thosetrees alone in the open field, and leave it unfenced and unguarded, andthe probability is, it will perish. If it should escape destruction, itsgrowth will be retarded, and its form will be disfigured. It will haveneither size nor comeliness. It will be cropped by the cattle, and bentand twisted by the winds; it will be stunted and dwarfed, crooked andmis-shapen, knotted and gnarled, neither pleasant to the eye, nor goodfor timber. Not one in a thousand would ever become a tall, a straight, and a majestic tree. 

Mr. Darwin says, that on some large tracts on which, while they wereunenclosed and unprotected, there was not a tree to be seen, there soonappeared, after the land was enclosed by a fence, a countless multitudeof fine Scotch firs. The seeds of these trees had been sown by somemeans, and they had germinated, and the embryo trees had sprung up; butthe cattle had cropped the tender shoots, or crushed and trampled themdown, and not one had been able to raise its head above the grass orheather. On looking down and searching carefully among the heather, hefound in one square yard of ground, no fewer than thirty-two smalltrees, one of which had been vainly trying to raise its head above theheather for six and twenty years. After this tract of land had beenenclosed for awhile, it was covered thick with a countless multitude offine young trees. And so it is with Christians. Leave them in the opencommon of the world, and they gradually come down to a level with thetastes and manners of the world. Place them within the guardedenclosures of the Church, and they rise to the dignity and glory ofsaints. "He that walketh with wise men shall be wise; but a companion offools shall be destroyed. " Hence "the Lord added to the Church dailysuch as should be saved. "

When you get into the Church, stay there as long as you honestly can;and honor it by a truly Christian life; and aid it by your labors; andsupport it liberally with your money. The best spent money in the worldis that which is employed in promoting the spread of Christianity. Andtry to live in peace both with your pastor and your fellow-members. Obeythe rules. Do not dream of unlimited liberty; you cannot have it; and itwould do you no good if you could, but harm. And unlimited liberty forone, would be slavery or martyrdom for the rest. Judge the Church andyour pastors charitably, as you would like to be judged yourself. Expectto find imperfections in them, and make as much allowance for them asyou can, that they may be led to make allowances for the imperfectionsthey find in you. Look more at the good that is in your brethren than atthe evil; it will cause you to love them the more, and make you feelhappier in their company. If any of them be overtaken in a fault, try torestore them, in the spirit of meekness. And let the mishaps of yourbrethren remind you that _you_ too are exposed to temptation. 

Calculate on meeting with trials or unpleasantnesses in the Churchoccasionally; for offences are sure to come. Churches are made up ofmen, and men are full of imperfections, so that misunderstandings, andeven misdoings at times, are inevitable. You may be misjudged orundervalued. There will be differences of tastes and opinions, and evenclashings of interest, between you and your brethren. And trials maycome from quarters from which you could never have expected them, and ofa kind that you could not possibly anticipate. But make up your minds, by the help of God, to bear all patiently. Remember how God has bornewith you; and consider what Jesus suffered from the weaknesses, theerrors, and the sins of men; and how meekly and patiently He endured. 

And understand that others may have to bear with as manyunpleasantnesses from you, as you have to bear with from them. You maymisunderstand or undervalue others, as much as they misunderstand orundervalue you. And others may be as much disappointed in you, as youare in them. And you may try their patience, as much as they try yours. We know when we are hurt by others, but we do not always know whenothers are hurt by us. And we can see the defects of others, when wecannot see our own. And we should consider, that _they_ will know whenthey are hurt by us, when they may not know that we are hurt by them;and that _they_ will be able to see our imperfections, when they will bequite unconscious of their own. And if we would not have them to maketoo much of _our_ defects and blunders, we must not make too much of_theirs_. If they can bear with _us_, we must learn to bear with _them_, and think ourselves well off to have things settled so. If we could seeourselves as God sees us, we might be more astonished that others shouldbe able to bear with us, than that we should be required to bear withthem. 

And the trials we meet with in the Church will do us good, if we look atthem in a proper light, and receive them in a proper spirit. They willreveal to us the defects of our brethren, and draw us to labor for theirimprovement. And in laboring for the improvement of others, we shallimprove ourselves. 

And the unpleasant friction which takes place between us and ourbrethren, will only tend to smoothe the ruggedness of our temper, andrub off the unevennesses of our character, provided we can keepourselves from impatience and resentment. In going along the course of abrook or a river, you sometimes come upon a bend, where you find a heapof smooth and nicely rounded pebble stones thrown up. Did you ever askyourselves how these pebbles came to be so round and smooth? When brokenoff from their respective rocks, they were as irregular in form, theyhad as sharp corners, and as rough, and ragged, and jagged edges, andwere altogether as ugly and unsightly things as any fragments of rocksyou ever looked upon. But they got into the water, and the stream rolledthem along, and rubbed them gently one against another, and this was theway they came to be so round and smooth. There is no doubt, that if thestones could have talked, and if they had had no more sense than wehave, whenever they found that their neighbor stones were rubbing them, they would have screamed out, "Oh! how you scratch;" never dreaming thatthey were scratching the other stones just as much at the same time. Butfortunately the stones could not talk; and though they had not so muchsense as we have, they had less nonsense, and that served them aswell--so they took their rubbing quietly; and hence the smoothness oftheir surface, and the beauty of their shape. Now here we are, livingstones in the great stream of time, tumbled about and rubbed one againstanother. Let us take our rubbing patiently, and give ourselves a chanceof getting rid of our unevennesses, and of being brought to a comelyshape. Have patience, my friends. The trouble will not continue long. When we have got our proper shape, God will remove us to our properplaces in that living temple which He is building in the heavens, andour rubbing will be at an end for ever. 

When I was first invited by the Primitive Methodists of Tunstall topreach in their chapel, one of the class-leaders and local preachers inthe circuit threw up his plan, and sent in his class-book, saying hewould not belong to a society that would allow Joseph Barker to preachin their pulpits. He was under a wrong impression with regard to myviews. One of the Tunstall travelling preachers went to see him, andtold him that he was laboring under a mistake, and advised him to takeback his class-book and plan. "Come, " said he, "and have a little talkwith Mr. Barker. " He came, and found he had been mistaken. "Forgiveme, " said he. "I cannot, " said I; "you have committed no offence. I willsave my pardons till you do something really wicked. " "Then let uspray, " said he; and we knelt down, and prayed for one another, and weall felt better. He came that night to hear me lecture. The subject wasTHE CHURCH. I spoke of the unpleasantnesses with which wesometimes meet from our brethren, and while exhorting my hearers to taketheir trials patiently, I used the illustration I have given here. Theold man sat on my left in the front of the gallery, and was muchexcited. He wept. At length, unable any longer to restrain his feelings, he cried aloud, "Glory; Hallelujah; I'll stop and be rubbed. " He didstop. But he had not much more rubbing to endure. In less than twelvemonths, on retiring one night to rest, in his usual health, he passedaway suddenly, and peacefully, to his rest in heaven. Let us "stop andbe rubbed. " Better be rubbed in the Church, than thrown out into thebroad highway of the world, and broken with the strong man's hammer. 

11. And now with regard to reform. It is right that we should bereformers. There are plenty of evils both in the Church and the State, as well as in individuals, and it is our duty to do what we can to abateor cure them. But there is a right and a wrong way of going about thebusiness, and if we would avoid doing mischief while we are trying to dogood, we must proceed with care. 

Reformers must learn to wait as well as to work. You cannot makechurches, or states, or even individuals, all that you would like themto be, in a moment. You cannot make yourselves what you would like to beas quickly as you would wish. If you are like a man that I know, youwill find the improvement of your own habits, and tempers, and manners, a task for life. And if the change for the better is so slow inyourselves, whom you have in your hands continually, and with whom youcan take what liberties you please, what can you expect it to be inothers? It is the law of God that things shall pass from bad to good, and from better to best, by slow and almost imperceptible gradations. 

All the great and beneficent operations of Nature are silent and slow. Nothing starts suddenly into being; nothing arrives instantly atperfection; nothing falls instantly into decay. The germination of theseed, the growth of the plant, the swelling of the bud, the opening ofthe flower, the ripening of the fruit, are all the results of slow andsilent operations. Still slower is the growth of the majestic forest. And the trees of greatest worth, which supply us with our choicest andmost durable timber, have the slowest growth of all. And so it is withthings that live and move. Their growth is silent as the grave. And man, the highest of created beings, advances to maturity most tardily of all. Our development is so gradual, that the changes we undergo from day today are imperceptible. And the development of our minds is as gradual asthe growth of our bodies. We gather our knowledge a thought, a fact, alesson at a time. We form our character, a line, a trace, a touch a day. 

Society is subject to the same law. Churches and nations are collectionsof individuals, each changing slowly, and must therefore themselveschange more slowly still. You cannot force the growth of a single plantor animal at pleasure; still less can you force at will the advancementor improvement of society. You may change a nation's laws andinstitutions suddenly, but the change will be of no service, so long asthe minds of the people remain unchanged. 

All the great beneficent changes of Nature are gradual. How slowly thedarkness of the night gives place to the morning dawn, and how slowlythe grey dawn of the morning brightens into noon! How slowly the cold ofwinter gives place to the warmth of spring and summer. How slowly theseed deposited in the ground springs up, putting forth first the blade, then the ear, and then the full ripe corn in the ear. And how slowly wegrow up from babyhood to manhood, and how slowly we pass on from earlysprightly manhood, to the sobriety and wisdom of age. And how slowly thenations advance in science, in arts, and in commerce; in religion, andmorals, and government. And so it is in all the works of God. Even thestartling phenomena presented by the earth's surface, which earlierphilosophers supposed to be the result of violent and suddenconvulsions, are now regarded as the result of the slow and ordinaryaction of natural powers. Leisurely movement is the eternal anduniversal law. And it is no use complaining; you cannot alter it. Youcannot make a hen hatch her eggs in less than three weeks, do what youwill. You may crack the shells, thinking to let the chickens out alittle earlier; but you let death in, and the chickens never do come outat all. "The more haste the less speed. " I have had proof of this morethan once in my own experience. I once lived in a house terriblyinfested with rats, and I wanted to get rid of them as quick as I could, for they were a great nuisance. But, I was in too big a hurry tosucceed. One night I heard a terrible splashing in the water-tub in thecellar. "That's a rat, " said I, "I'll dispatch that, anyhow:" and I tookthe lighted candle and poker, and hastened into the cellar, thinking tokill the creature at once. When the rat saw me with candle and poker, itmade an extra spring, completely cleared the edge of the tub, and gotsafe away into its hole. I was in such a hurry to kill it, that I savedits life. When I got to it, it was drowning itself as nicely as it coulddo; and if I had had patience to wait, it would have been dead in tenminutes. But because I would not wait, and let it die quietly, it wouldnot die at all. And it may be living now for anything I know, and mayhave bred a hundred other rats since then, and all because I would notgive it time to die in peace. There are rats everywhere still. There arerats in the Church, rats in the State; rats in palaces, and rats inhovels. There are rats of despotism and tyranny, rats of slavery andwar, rats of rebellion and anarchy. There are rats of superstition andidolatry, rats of heresy and infidelity, rats of intemperance andlicentiousness. And it is right to try to kill them off. But we hadbetter go to work carefully. We cannot put things right in an instant. And when wicked laws, or vicious principles have received their deathblow, we had better give them time to die in quiet. Haste and impatiencemay spoil all. 

12. Though unbelief may not always be a sin, it is always a greatcalamity. As we have said, its tendency is always to immorality, andimmorality always tends to misery and death. Byron perished in hisprime, and his short life and his untimely death were both unhappy. Unbelievers are seldom happy in their domestic relations. And in cuttingthemselves off from God, they reduce the noblest affections of theirsouls to starvation. They have no suitable exercise or gratification fortheir natural instinctive gratitude, their reverence, or their love. They have nothing in which they can securely trust. Even their familyand social affections often decline and die. 

Many unbelievers are poor, and infidel poverty is always envious. Theworld is a very trying one to unbelievers: hardly anything pleases them;and nothing pleases them long. Rulers do not please them: they aredespots and tyrants. Their fellow subjects do not please them: they arecowardly slaves. Their masters do not please them: they areextortioners. Their men do not please them: they are knaves. The rich donot please them: they are leeches, caterpillars, cormorants. The poor donot please them: they are mean, deceitful and dishonest. Religion doesnot please them; it is superstition: and philosophy does not pleasethem; it is a bore and a sham. Priests do not please them; they arecheats: and the people do not please them; they are dupes. The climatesdo not suit them: they are too hot, or too cold; too damp, or too dry;and the seasons do not please them--they are always uncertain, andseldom right. The world at large disgusts them: it takes the part oftheir enemies. It favors the religious classes, and mocks and torturesthe infidel philosopher. Their bodies are not right; they are alwaysailing, and threatening to give way: and their minds are not right; theyare never contented and at rest. There is nothing right in the present;and there is nothing promising in the future. They think themselves thewisest people in the world, yet people in general regard them as fools;and they themselves can see that their fancied wisdom does not provetheir friend. 

They can give no explanation of the mysteries of the universe. Theycannot account for the facts which geology reveals with regard to thenatural history of the globe. They cannot account for the mechanism ofthe heavens, or the chemistry of the earth. They cannot account forlife, organization, or intelligence. They cannot account for instinct. They cannot account for the marks of design which are everywhere visiblein Nature, nor for the numberless wonders of special arrangement andadaptation manifest in her works. They cannot account for the differencebetween man and the lower animals. Animals can indulge themselves freelyand take no harm; man cannot indulge himself freely without misery andruin. Animals can be happy without self-denial; man cannot. Man excelsin the gift of reason, yet commits mistakes, and perpetrates crimes, which we look for in vain among the beasts of the field. Man, with athousand times more power than the brutes, and with immensely greatercapacities and opportunities for happiness, is frequently the mostmiserable being on earth. On the supposition that man was made for adifferent end, and endowed with a different nature from the brutes--onthe supposition that man was made for virtue, for piety, for rational, religious self-government, for voluntary obedience to God, for the joyof a good conscience, for heaven--in a word, on the supposition that theScriptural and Christian doctrine about man is true, all this isexplained; but on the infidel theory all is a torturing, maddeningmystery. 

And let infidels do what they will, and say what they please, the worldat large will hold to the religious theory. Mahometans, Pagans, andChristians all insist that man is made for higher work, and meant for ahigher destiny, than the lower animals. The Christian theory is acceptedby the highest of our race. They regard it with the deepest reverence. The books that unfold it they regard as divine. They read them in theirfamilies. They read them in their temples. They teach them in theirschools. They publish them in every language; they send them round theglobe. In England and America, the first of the nations, you see themeverywhere. You meet with them in hotels, in boarding-houses, at railwaystations, and on steam packets; in asylums and infirmaries; in barracksand in prisons; in poor-houses and in palaces; in the drawing-rooms ofthe wealthy, and in the hovels of the poor. The greatest scholars andrarest geniuses devote their lives to the diffusion of their doctrines;and there is no probability of a change. If Christianity be false, theworld is mad: if it be true, the case of the infidel is deplorable inthe extreme. 

And that many portions of the Christian system _are_ true, is pastdoubt. They carry the evidence of their truth on their very face. Andother portions admit of easy proof. The truth of many Christiandoctrines can be proved by experience. And the rest are probable enough. There is nothing absurd, nothing irrational in Christianity. Theteachings of Christ are the perfection of goodness. They are theperfection of wisdom and beauty. Even Goethe could say, "The humanrace can never attain to anything higher than Christianity, as presentedin the life and teachings of its Founder. " And again he says, "How muchsoever spiritual culture may advance, the natural sciences broaden anddeepen, and the human mind enlarge, the world will never get beyond theloftiness and moral culture of Christianity as it shines and glistens inthe Gospels. "--_Farhenlehre_, iii. 37. 

And nothing can be more true. 

Look for a few moments at Christ and Christianity. 

And, first, what is Christ as presented in the Gospels?

1. He is, first, holy, harmless, undefiled; a lamb without blemish andwithout spot. This is the lowest trait in His character. Yet it is agreat thing for any one to remain innocent in a world like this, with anature like ours. 

2. But He was, second, an example of the highest moral and spiritualexcellence. He was devout, pious, resigned, towards His Heavenly Father. He was full of benevolence towards men. He did good. The happiness ofmankind was the end, and doing good the business, of His life. He had noother object. He paid no regard to wealth, to power, to pleasure, or tofame. He was so fixed and single in His aim, that there is no room formistake. To do good, to bless mankind, was His meat and drink. 

3. And He did good to men's bodies as well as to their souls. While Hetaught the ignorant, and reformed the bad, and comforted the penitent, He healed the sick, gave sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, breadto the hungry, and life to the dead. 

4. He enjoined the same way of life on His disciples. "Freely ye havereceived, " said He, "freely give. "

5. While He lived and labored for the good of all, He paid specialattention to the poor. 

6. Yet He never flattered the poor, nor pandered to their prejudices orpassions. He never taught them to envy the rich, or revile the great, orto throw the blame of their sorrows on others. 

7. While kind to the poor, He was just and respectful to the rich. Hisconduct to Nicodemus, to Zaccheus, to the young man that came toquestion Him about the way to heaven, and to the Roman centurion, wascourteous and comely to the last degree. He was faithful, but not harsh. 

8. He was good to all classes. He loved the Jews, yet He was just andkind to the Samaritans, to the Syro-phenician woman, and to the Romansoldier. 

9. He was especially kind to women, even to the fallen ones. He showednone of that indifference or disdain for woman that the proud barbarianexhibits, or of that heartless contempt which the vicious sensualistmanifests. He rose alike above the selfish passions and the inveterateprejudices of his age, and conferred on the injured sex the blessings offreedom and dignity, of purity and blessedness. 

10. He showed the tenderest regard to children. "He took them in Hisarms and blessed them, " and said, "Suffer little children to come untoMe, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of heaven. "

11. He was kind to the outcast. He was a friend of publicans andsinners. He went among the lowest, the most neglected, the mostdespised, the most hated and dreaded of mankind, and labored for theirsalvation. The parables of the Lost Sheep, and of the Prodigal Son, speak volumes in His praise. 

12. He was always gentle, tolerant, and forgiving. He refused to bringdown fire from heaven on the villagers that had slighted Him, saying"The Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. "He commended the virtue of Samaritan heretics. He has nothing harsh evenfor the infidel Sadducee. He complies with the unreasonable wishes ofthe skeptical Thomas. He pardons Peter. He is severe with the Scribesand Pharisees only, who made void the law of righteousness by theirtraditions, and took the key of knowledge, and used it, not to open, butto keep shut the door of the kingdom of heaven. 

13. As a reformer, He went to the root of social and political evils, and sought the reform of laws, institutions, and governments, bylaboring for the instruction and renovation of individuals. 

14. He was patient as well as disinterested. He was willing to sow, andlet others reap; to labor, and let others enjoy the fruits of hislabors. 

15. He formed a Church, employing the social instincts and affections ofHis followers as a means of perpetuating and extending His beneficentinfluence in the world. 

16. He checked the impertinence, and silenced the vanity of captiouscavillers. 

17. He carried the truth into markets and sea-ports, as well as taughtit in the temple and in the synagogues. 

18. He had the eloquence of silence as well as of speech. 

19. He could suffer as well as labor. He bore reproach and insolence, and at last laid down His life for mankind. 

20. He could make allowances even for His murderers. When they mockedHim in His dying agonies, He could say, "Father, forgive them; they knownot what they do. "

He excelled as a teacher. 

1. He was very practical; seeking always to bring men to be merciful, astheir Father in Heaven is merciful. 

2. He was very plain; using the simplest forms of speech, and the mostnatural and touching illustrations. 

3. He presented truth and duty in His parables in the most impressiveforms. 

4. His doctrines about God and providence, about duty and immortality, about right worship and the proper employment of the Sabbath; about truegreatness, and the forgiveness of injuries; about gentleness andtoleration; about meekness and humility; about purity and sincerity, aswell as on a great variety of other subjects, were the perfection oftrue philosophy. His parable of the talents, His remarks on the widowand her two mites, and on the woman and the box of ointment, showingthat nothing is required of us beyond our powers and opportunities, arestriking, instructive, and impressive in the highest degree. 

5. He made it the duty of all whom He taught to instruct others. Hiswords, "freely ye have received, freely give;" and the sentence, "It ismore blessed to give than to receive, " are among the divinest oraclesever heard on earth. 

6. He illustrated and enforced all His lessons by a consistent example. He practised what He taught. 

7. And He commanded His disciples to do the same. "Let your light soshine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify yourFather which is in heaven. "

8. There can be nothing juster or kinder than His great rule, "Allthings whatsoever ye would that men should do unto you, do ye even sounto them. "

9. His doctrine that God will treat men as they treat each other, ismost striking and important. "Blessed are the merciful, for they shallobtain mercy. " "With what judgment ye judge ye shall be judged; and withwhat measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. " "If ye forgivemen their trespasses, your heavenly Father will forgive you yourtrespasses; but if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither willyour heavenly Father forgive you your trespasses. "

10. His remarks on riches and poverty, on honor and reproach, onsuffering and glory, though regarded by some with shyness and distrust, contain a world of important truth. 

11. His lessons on spiritual or religious freedom, on self-denial, onthe true mark of discipleship, on the great judgment, on the future ofChristianity, and on the heavenly felicity, are all remarkable for theirwisdom, and for their purifying and ennobling tendency. 

But it would require volumes to do Christ and His doctrine justice. AndI feel as if I were wronging the Saviour to speak of His worth anddoctrine, when I have neither time nor space duly to set forth theirtranscendent excellency. Every peculiar trait in His character that Ihave named, deserves a treatise to present it in all its importance andglory; and I, alas, can give but a sentence or two to each. [A]

But Christ has our devoutest love and gratitude, and our profoundestreverence. And the more we contemplate Him, the more constrained we feelto regard Him, not only as the perfection of all human excellence, butas the revelation and incarnation of the eternal God. And we feel it agreat honor and unspeakable privilege to be permitted to bear His name, to belong to His party, and to labor in His cause. We are indebted toHim for everything that gives value to our existence, and we give Him, in return, with cheerfulness and gladness, our heart, our life, our all. 

 Ah, why did I so late Thee know, Thee, lovelier than the sons of men? Ah, why did I no sooner go To Thee, the only ease in pain? Ashamed I sigh, and inly mourn That I so late to Thee did turn. 

[A] Since the above was written we have published a bookentitled JESUS: A PORTRAIT. Look at it. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS. 

1. While the tendency of infidelity is to make men miserable, it is thetendency of Christianity to make men happy. When I was living atBurnley, an infidel came to me one morning and said, "Barker, we may saywhat we will, but those Ranters, (meaning the Primitive Methodists) arethe happiest men alive. There is one lives next to me, and he sings allthe day long. He gets up singing and goes to bed singing. " They _are_the happiest men alive. And real Christians of all denominations arehappy. 

2. Some time after my return to Christianity, I spent a few days in thehouse of a Primitive Methodist, a farmer, on the Cheshire Hills. Iseemed in Paradise. The master and the mistress were cheerful and kind, and the daughters and girls were almost continually singing delightfulChristian melodies while busy at their work. One moment they weresinging of a BEAUTIFUL STREAM, and then of a HAPPY LAND. One wouldbegin, "Jesus, Lover of my soul"--and when that was finished, anotherwould begin with, "When I can read my title clear, to mansions in theskies, "--and the singing and the work went on together all the day. Itwas heaven. And a thousand such facts might be given. 

3. My own experience is in harmony with these facts. My return to Christmade me happy beyond measure. It brought me enjoyments, transports, towhich, for years, I had been an utter stranger. The fact is, for a longtime the worth of my life was well-nigh gone. I lived, because I felt I_ought_ to live, for the sake of those who were dear to me. But formyself, the light and joy of my life seemed gone for ever. My existencewas a long dark struggle with crushing destiny. Though naturallyhopeful, I was made to feel the bitterness of blank despair. I hadmoments of relief, but I had weeks of gloom and despondency. Now all ischanged. I have moments of sadness and depression; but weeks and monthsof joy and gladness. I see the universe in an entirely different light. And instead of murmuring at Nature as cruel, I adore a gracious andmerciful God. Of my errors and misdoings I must always feel ashamed, anda consciousness of them must for ever tend to make me sad at times; yetnotwithstanding all drawbacks, I have enjoyed more satisfaction, morereal happiness, a hundred times over, during the last twelve months, than I enjoyed during the whole period of my alienation from God. Thesimple-hearted Christian knows what he says, when he tells you "There'ssomething in religion. " It has a power and a blessedness altogetherdifferent from anything else under heaven. Knowledge is sweet, and loveis sweet, and power and victory are sweet; but religion--the religion ofChrist--is sweeter, infinitely sweeter than all. It is the life andblessedness of the soul. It is its greatness, its strength, its glory:its joy, its paradise, its heaven. 

4. If the churches abound with defects, the cause is in humanity, andnot in Christianity. Men are not imperfect because they are Christians, but because they are not Christian enough. The worst men are thefarthest from Christianity, and the best are nearest to it. And theworst creeds are the least Christian, and the best are the mostChristian. And Christianity is better than the best. There is not avirtue on earth, nor a truth in the universe, which does not form apart, or a consistent and fitting appendage, of the Christian system. The best, the wisest, the noblest man on earth is no better, no wiser, no nobler, than the teachings of Jesus tend to make the whole humanrace. 

5. The influence which Jesus exerted on the world, and the influencewhich He is still exerting, is the mightiest and most beneficent everexperienced by mankind; and the monument which He has raised forHimself, the Christian Church, with all its institutions, itsliteratures, its agencies and achievements is, beyond all comparison, the grandest, the noblest, and in all respects the most magnificent andglorious that the history of the world can boast. He has indeed gainedfor Himself a name above every name; a glory and a power which have noequal and no resemblance; and His followers may well adore Him as thebrightness of the Father's glory, and the express image of His love andmajesty. 

6. And what can we do better than chime in with the anthem of Hisworshippers? What can we do better than teach His beneficent doctrines, and follow His glorious example? Talk as we will, the noblest and thehappiest life a man can live is a life of Christian love andbeneficence. And the best association on earth is that which isorganized on the principle of love to Christ, pledged to theself-sacrificing labors of a wise philanthropy, the work of serving andblessing mankind. 

7. A belief in Christ gives one a power to do good to mankind which noskeptic can have. It kindles love, and stimulates to activity, asnothing else does. And it inspires courage, and produces patience, andgives comfort under persecution. And it lays on us no unnecessaryrestraints. It leaves us free to every good word and to every good work. And it is friendly to science and to unlimited progress. It offers abond of union for all great minds, and for all good hearts. It increasesour power to reform both churches and states, without urging us to wildand revolutionary measures, which might imperil the interests of both. To accept this religion, to avow this faith, involves nothing of whichwe need be ashamed, but everything in which we may reasonably glory. Weescape alike the follies of theological dreamers, and the gloom andhorrors of infidel philosophy. We live amidst the soft mild glories ofeternal light; we cheer ourselves with the richest and most glorioushopes, and we spend our lives in the grandest contemplations and thenoblest occupations the heart of man can conceive. 

8. The vainest of all vain things, the most unseemly and revolting ofall forms of pride, is the pride of disbelief in God and immortality. And the maddest if not the wickedest of all occupations, is to labor todestroy the faith and blight the hopes of others. What good, humane, ormerciful motive can a man have to impel him to such a horribleundertaking?

9. How soothing the thought that your sufferings are marked by a lovingGod, and will be overruled for your good! And how cheering the thought, when life is in danger, or drawing to a close, that death is the gate ofa higher life! And how comforting the thought, when your loved ones areleaving you, that they are going before you to a happier home, and thatby-and-by you will see their faces, hear their voices, and share theirpresence and society again! And what a relief, when visiting the sick, the sorrowing, or the dying, to be able to speak to them of an infiniteFather, of another life, and of brighter scenes, and of a happier lot, in a better land!

10. We have spent time enough among the dead. And you can see with yourown eyes which are the living, loving, and laboring portions of theChurch. You can see which portions build the most schools, teach themost children, reclaim the most drunkards and profligates, and do mostto develop and cultivate the religious and moral sentiments of themasses. And one of the lessons we always pressed on you was, to judge atree by its fruits. We do not intend to swerve from our plan of avoidingsectarian and theological controversy; but we may ask you to compare theamount of good religious work done by the Methodists in fifty years, with the good done by the so-called liberal Christians, and to drawyour own conclusion. The Primitive Methodists alone, with the smallestamount of means, have done incalculably more good in fifty years, thanthe Unitarians, with unlimited supplies of wealth, and all theadvantages of learning and position, have done in a hundred and fiftyyears. We have cast in our lot with the living, working portion of theChurch. It is our home. We had rather be a doorkeeper of the humblestliving, hard-working church in the land, than dwell with the spirituallydead and cold in the palaces of princes. We will help the men that aredoing the hard and needful work of humanity. If you can see such men asthe Primitive Methodists and the orthodox Churches generally, working asthey _do_ work, and succeeding as they _do_ succeed, and not respectthem and love them, and take part in helping them, you have not theheart of tenderness and the spirit of Christian manliness for which wehave given you credit. 

11. The influence of Christianity cannot be otherwise than beneficial;nor is it possible that Christianity should become the ruling power onearth without greatly abating, if not entirely curing the evils ofhumanity, and making mankind as happy as their nature and capacitiesadmit. 

Imagine Christianity to be received and reduced to practice by all thepeople on earth, what would be the result? Disease would graduallydiminish. Nine-tenths of it would quickly disappear; and life would beboth happier and much longer. 

Along with disease would go want, and the fear of want. All would bewell fed, well clad, well housed, and well supplied with all thenecessaries and comforts of life. The world is stored with abundance ofnatural wealth. The surface of the earth is vast enough, and its soil isrich enough, to supply homes and plenty to all its inhabitants, if theywere fifty times as numerous as they are. 

Three or four hours a day would be the utmost length of time that menwould need to labor. The cessation of war would set the soldiers freefor productive employment. The peaceful disposition of the people athome would allow the police forces to devote themselves to useful labor. The idle classes would set to work, and the wasteful classes wouldbecome economical. A limit would be fixed to the extravagances offashion. Things comely and useful would satisfy the desires of both menand women. The powers of nature would be pressed more generally into ourservice, and compelled to do our drudgery both in the mine and on thefarm. A sense of justice would dispose men to be content with theirshare of the blessings of Providence, and Christian generosity wouldprompt the rich to supply the wants of the helpless. The dangers ofuseful toil would be diminished. The catalogue of mournful accidents inflood and field, in mines and factories, would be abridged. Oppressionwould cease. The wisest and best would be our legislators and rulers. Patriots, philanthropists, and philosophers would take the place ofselfish politicians. Political trickery would give place to honorablestatesmanship. All cruel forms of servitude would cease. All wicked lawswould be abolished. All needless burdens would be removed from the backsof the people. All would be well taught. All dreams of impossibleequality, and all thoughts of violent and bloody revolutions, would passaway. Vice and crime would disappear, with all the tortures both of mindand body which they occasion. Commerce would flourish. All nations wouldfreely and lovingly exchange their surplus products. All classes woulddeal with each other honorably. Each one would do to others as he wouldthat others should do to him. No one would suffer from fraud, or fromthe fear of fraud. Trade would be a mutual exchange of benefits. Business would be a pleasant pastime, gainful to all, and ruinous tonone. 

Marriage would be universal, and would prove in every case a comfort anda blessing. The family circle would be the abode of love, and peace, andjoy. Each home would be a little heaven. Children would be wiselytrained and carefully nurtured in knowledge and piety. The virtues andthe graces would adorn their lives from youth to age. All talent andskill, the powers of eloquence and of poetry, the influences of musicand of song, and all the powers of art would serve the cause of truthand virtue, of religion and humanity. 

Superstition would die. Unnatural conceptions of God, and cruel, wasteful, and useless forms of worship, would give place to faith in aGod of light and love, of wisdom and of purity, and to a spiritual, rational, and rapturous kind of devotion. All ignorant dread of naturalphenomena would give place to joyous and loving admiration, and todevoutest adoration, of the great eternal Ruler of the world. Ifcalamities came they would be accepted as divine appointments, asneedful means of everlasting good. Death would lose its terrors. Beliefin a blessed immortality would enable us to pass from earth in peace andjoy. Bereavements would be less distressing. The departure of ourfriends would be but a transition to a better state of being. 

The world itself would change. Its beauties would become more beautiful;its glories would become more glorious, and all its joys and pleasureswould be more transporting. The eye, the ear, the taste, the smell wouldall become the inlets of more and richer enjoyments. Science andliterature in their divinest forms would become the common lot of ourrace. The glory of God's character and the brightness of the eternalfuture, would shed unwonted radiance over the present life, and make itrapturous, glorious, and divine. The religion of Christ, while raisingmen to heaven, would bring down heaven to earth. 

On the other hand, the want of trust in God and of a hope of immortalitytends to darken earth, and to embitter life. When men are severed fromGod and Christ, they suffer loss both in character and enjoyment. We canspeak from experience. We never ruined our health by vicious indulgence. We never became the slave of intemperance or licentiousness. We neverdishonored our family, or lost the love and confidence of our wife andchildren. But we lost our trust in God, and our hope of immortality. Andthe heavens above grew dark, and the earth became a desolation. Lifelost its value, and sorrow its consolation; and many and many a time wewished that we had never been born. For hours have we trod the earthwith heavy heart and downcast eyes, groaning beneath a weight of sadnessindescribable. Loss of faith in Christ, even with men of a naturallycheerful and hopeful spirit, renders life a burden too heavy to beborne. Hence for years before we fully regained our own faith inChristianity, we encouraged others to cherish theirs. An infidel oncesaid, that the Christian's hope, if false, was worth all this world'sbest truths; and we felt the truth of the remark, and shrank fromattempts to take from men the inestimable treasure. And now we wouldrather die than shake or undermine the faith of any Christian soul onearth. To the work of cherishing a belief in Christ in our own heart, and nurturing it in the hearts of others, we consecrate our life, ourall. We would rather live on a crust, in a mud hut, with faith in Godand Christ, than feast on all the dainties of the earth, in the palaceof a king, with the hopelessness and gloom of the Atheist. 

We have no disposition to exaggerate; but we are constrained to say, that if all the wisdom and all the virtue on earth had dwelt in one man, and if that one man had presented a revelation of God with a view tosupply the strongest, the mightiest, the most touching, the most tender, the most varied, and the most irresistible inducements to renounce allselfishness and sin, and to live a pure and godly, a holy and a useful, a divine and glorious life, that revelation could have assumed nobetter, no more perfect or effective form, than that which is presentedin the revelation of God by Jesus Christ. We feel, while we contemplateit, that it can have no fitter or truer name than that bestowed on it bythe Apostles, 'The power of God to salvation to every one thatbelieveth. ' And we are reminded of the words, 'We all, with open facebeholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the sameimage from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord. '

Of course the destruction of this belief can operate no otherwise thanas an encouragement to evil, and a discouragement to good. The loss ofChristian belief in God can be to the virtues and the graces of theheart and life, but as a blight to plants and flowers. The Christianbelief makes it summer to the soul, giving birth, and power, and fulldevelopment to all that is godlike and glorious in human character. Theloss of that belief is winter to the soul; killing with its frosts eachform of life and beauty, and making all a waste and desolation. 

There have been three great disbelievers in God in our own countryduring the present century, all of whom have written books denouncingmarriage, and counselling unbounded sensual license. If their counselswere generally taken, the result would be a state of society as horribleas that portrayed in the beginning of Paul's Epistle to the Romans, anda return to faith in God alone could save the race of man from utterextinction. But we will not dwell on this dreadful side of the subject. We know the effects of the light and warmth of the sun; and we maysafely be left to infer the horror, the misery, the world-wide ruin, andthe utter dreariness and desolation that would follow if the orb of daywere extinguished, or for ever and utterly withdrawn. Religion is thesun of the spiritual world; it is its light and life, its joy andblessedness; and its extinction would be the death and destruction ofour race. 

While belief in God is favorable to virtue generally, it tends also toproduce displays of superior excellence; of unusual courage, perseverance, and endurance. The believer in God may brave the mostappalling dangers. His feeling is, that he who is for him is greaterthan all that can be against him. It is no vain boast in him to say, 'Ifear God, and know no other fear. ' It is natural that he should say, when threatened by mistaken or malignant men, 'You may kill me, but youcannot hurt me. ' The Christian believer can afford to be a martyr. Whenexcited by ungodly or inhuman opposition, he naturally displays themartyr's courage. He can bear too to suffer disrepute. He can trust hisreputation to his omniscient and almighty Friend. He can bear to lookwith patience both on the adversity of the good, and the prosperity ofthe bad. He knows the fate, --he sees the end, --of both. The Judge of allthe earth will do right. He knows no evil but sin. He knows no securitybut righteousness. 

And Christian faith is a fountain of all conceivable _comfort_. It is acomfort to feel secure. It is a comfort to feel strong. It is a comfortto feel assured that we are beloved of God. It is a comfort to feel thatwe love Him in return. It is a comfort to believe that the universe hasa Head, a Lord, a Ruler. It is a comfort to believe that we are notorphans, fatherless inhabitants of a Godless world. There is pleasure inadmiration and reverence. There is pleasure in feelings of gratitude. There is a pleasure in tracing the wonders and beauties of creation to aliving, loving Creator. It adds to the pleasure of science to believe, that behind the wonderful phenomena which we behold, there is a GreatUnseen from whose all-loving heart they all proceed. It is a pleasure tobelieve that our ways are ordered by infinite wisdom. It is a pleasureto believe that our sorrows are known to an almighty sympathizingFriend. It is a pleasure to believe that our kindred and friends have ahelper greater than ourselves. It is a pleasure to believe that our lotis appointed by an infinite Father; that we shall not be permitted to betried beyond our strength; that in every temptation, a way will be madefor our escape; that nothing can harm us, however painful; that nothingcan destroy us, however terrible; that all things work together for ourgood. In short, there is no end to the strength which a Christian beliefin God is calculated to give to our virtue, or to the consolation whichit is calculated to impart to our souls. 

But what can be sadder than to be without God, and without hope, in aworld like this? With all our science how little we know! How terriblethe thought that we have no unerring guide! With all our powers howfeeble we are! How terrible the thought that we have no almighty friend!And vast and numberless as are the provisions that are made for ourhappiness, how often we are thwarted, how prone we are, even in themidst of plenty, to be dissatisfied; and how soon we may perish! And howsad the thought that there is no restorer! Is it strange that, whenfaith in God is lost, the value of life is felt to be gone?

We have no harsh word for the doubter or the disbeliever, but we raiseour warning voice against the dangers which beset the way of youth, andcounsel all to consider well their steps. 'There are ways which at timesseem right unto men, but the end thereof is death. ' 'The fear of theLord is the beginning of wisdom, and to depart from evil isunderstanding. ' Science has advanced; arts have multiplied; governmentshave changed; and many are tempted to believe that the principles ofreligion and virtue are exploded. But woe to the man that yields to thetemptation. His days shall be darkened with grief; and his heartdistracted with horror. But peace and purity and joy shall be the lot ofthe faithful Christian. The light of life shall shine upon his path. Thewisdom of the Holy One shall be his guide; and, living and dying, heshall be secure. 

12. The Christian has the highest, the happiest employment. He works inthe spirit of eternal love. He works for the highest and the holiestends. And he works in hope. He sees the harvest in the ploughing of thefield, the coming crop in the scattered seed. The result of his laborsmay come slowly, but he can afford to wait. The Lord reigneth; and theplans of His eternal love can never fail. 

And all things rich and beautiful are his. The earth and its fulness arehis. The heavens and their glories are his. All sights of beauty, allsounds of melody, all emotions of wonder, all transports of delight arehis. There are no forms, no elements of bliss from which he is excluded. All the innocent pleasures of sense, all that can delight the soulthrough the eye, the ear, the taste, or the feelings; all that is richin art; all that is rapturous in song; all the pleasures of science andliterature, all are his. 

And all earth's blessings, all pure and harmless pleasures, he can enjoymore truly and more fully than other men. While his faith in God givesgreater beauty and glory to the universe, his hope of immortality givesgreater sweetness to his earthly life. The brightness of the eternalworld throws a celestial radiance over the present, and gives to earth aportion of the blessedness of heaven. 

A FEW TESTIMONIES OF GREAT MEN IN FAVOR OF CHRISTIANITY. 

We live in the midst of blessings, till we are utterly insensible oftheir greatness, and of the source from which they flow. We speak of ourcivilization, our arts, our freedom, our laws, and forget entirely howlarge a share of all is due to Christianity. --_Coleridge. _

There never was found in any age of the world, either philosopher orsect, or law or discipline, which did so highly exalt the public good asthe Christian faith. --_Bacon. _

As the man of pleasure, by a vain attempt to be more happy than any mancan be, is often more miserable than most men are; so the skeptic, in avain attempt to be wise beyond what is permitted to man, plunges into adarkness more deplorable than that of the common herd. --_Colton. _

Since the introduction of Christianity, human nature has made greatprogress; but it has not got in advance of Christianity. Men haveoutgrown other institutions and systems, but they may grow for ever andnot outgrow Christianity. --_Channing. _

I have lived long enough to know what I did not at one timebelieve--that no society can be upheld in happiness and honor withoutthe sentiment of religion. --_La Place. _

It is heaven on earth to have one's mind to move in charity, to rest onProvidence, and follow truth. --_Bacon. _

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are most essential. In vain would that man claimthe tribute of patriotism, who should labor to destroy those greatpillars of human happiness; these firmest props of virtue. And let usnot suppose that morality can be maintained without religion. Whatevermay be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds ofpeculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expectnational morality to prevail in the absence of religiousprinciple. --_Washington. _

I have carefully and regularly perused these Holy Scriptures, and am ofopinion, that the volume, independently of its divine origin, containsmore sublimity, purer morality, more important history, and finerstrains of eloquence, than can be collected from all other books, inwhatever language they may have been written. --_Sir William Jones. _