standings, perplexity, and confusion? Ought we not rather to believe, that our kind Father will ever adapt his instructions to the faculties he has given us?

Let me ask, why is it that a revelation has been made to man, rather than to inferior animals? Is not this the plain answer, that man is a rational being? Is not the possession of reason the very ground, on which this signal benefit is conferred upon our race; and can we suppose then, that revelation contradicts reason, that it calls us to renounce the faculties which prepare us for its reception?

very

It is indeed wonderful that any person acquainted with christianity, can imagine that this religion is unfriendly to the exercise of reason. The fact is, reasoning, reflection, inquiry, and

the most serious exercise of our intellectual powers, are demanded by christianity; both that we may perceive its truth, and that we may attain to a just apprehension of its doctrines.

Let me ask the intelligent christian, why he believes christianity to be from God? Have you had, my friend, an immediate com. munication from heaven, which has relieved you from all trouble of inquiring into this subject? Has a sudden beam darted into your mind, or has a loud voice proclaimed, that christianity is divine? No. You have been obliged to examine the proofs of this religion, to inquire into its original, to study its spirit, to trace its influence. In other words, you have been obliged to reason about it, and reason has taught you to receive it as from

God. Thus the great question, whether christianity be true, has been entrusted by God, to the decision of human reason. This is a very weighty consideration. This does not look as if reason were to be renounced. Let it be remembered, that christianity appeals to us as rational beings, that it comes to us with proofs, and commands us to weigh them. It asks to be received only upon serutiny, only because it offers arguments sufficient to convince an unbiassed understanding. Is it then conceivable, that christianity contradicts reason, the very principle to which it thus makes its appeal, to which it addresses the proofs of its divine authority?

If we next consider some of the arguments on which christianity rests, we shall have further proof of the sentiment we wish to establish. Why do we believe christianity to be divine? We answer, because we see it to be worthy of God; because it bears the impress of his wisdom, rectitude, and goodness; because it breathes a spirit so excelent and pure. Now if this language be just, if christianity claim belief on the grounds here stated, then it follows, that this religion would forfeit its claim and be unworthy our reception, were its doctrines clearly to appear, after the best use of our powers, repugnant to the divine perfections, or to any clear principles of truth or duty.

Is it said, that we are too ignorant to judge in any case of the inconsistency of doctrines with the character of God? Let us imagine a christain, who holds this sentiment, disputing with a Ma

hometan-The latter asks him for his objections to the Koran. -He answers, your Koran is full of incongruities; it is often at war with the perfections of God. The indignant Mahometan replies, Presumptuous man! dost thou,a child of yesterday,presume to fathom the wisdom of the Infinite, or to pronounce on this or another doctrine, that it is inconsistent with those attributes which thou canst not comprehend?' I see not how this reply is to be evaded, if the principle assumed by the christian be cor

rect.

I have thus endeavoured to shew, that the exercise of reason is the proper and appointed method of attaining to a belief of the heavenly origin of christianity. I now proceed to show that, from the manner in which christianity is communicated, we must continually employ upon it our reasoning powers, if we would acquire an accurate knowledge of the instructions which it offers. Christianity is not conveyed to us in language so precise that it cannot be misunderstood. The true meaning does not always glare upon us, so that it must be seen unless we obstinately shut our eyes; but great care is often necessary to discover it. Christianity is not handed down to us in a regular and systematic form, in a few connected propositions. It was conveyed by Jesus most frequently in familiar conversation, which grew out of the circumstances in which he was placed. It was often conveyed by the apostles, in epistles or letters adapted to the condition of individuals or churches. And these

conversations and letters have been transmitted to us in a language, which is no longer spoken. Must they not of necessity be attended with obscurity? Nothing is less formal and precise, than the manner in which christian truths are communicated. They are expressed, now in bold and glowing figures; now in short and pointed proverbs, familiar at the time, but no longer in use; now in allusions to customs, the traces of which can hardly be discerned. Need I tell you, that such writings, as have now been described, require the exercise of reason, to determine their import, to separate what is local from what is of universal application, and to assign the proper limits to every expression? Sometimes a variety of interpretations will offer themselves, and we must select one from the number. But how is this selection to be made? The only answer is, we must employ our reason; we must inquire which interpretation agrees best with the views of the writer, with other portions of scripture, with the divine perfections, with experience and common sense; and we must not hesitate to reject an interpretation which is inconsistent with these, although it may be suggested by the literal and most obvious sense of the words. Without this exercise of our reasoning powers, we shall continually pervert the scriptures, lose the sense in the sound, and be led into a thousand absurdities.

From these remarks on the manner in which scripture is communicated, we learn the error of those, who say, that the

first and obvious meaning of scripture ought humbly to be received, and that to depart from this, because it may not suit our ideas of what is right and fit, is to bend the scriptures to our proud and carnal reason. But if it be pride to depart from the first and obvious meaning of scripture, where is the Christian on whom this crime is not to be charged? Hear what the sacred volume says. "If thy hand or foot offend thee, cut it off." "If thy eye offend thee, pluck it out." "If any man sue thee at law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." "If any man hate not his father and mother, he cannot be my disciple." Here are plain passages; but who is contented to receive them in their first and plainest sense? Where are the Christians, who present themselves to our notice, with only one eye and one hand, with out garments, and without any natural affection? You should remark, that these passages are found among the practical parts of scripture, where as much precision is certainly to be expected, as in the statement of doctrines; and yet, what christian does not feel himself bound to explain these passages with a certain latitude? Who does not see, that reason and common sense are as necessary guides in the interpretation of scripture, as of any other volume?

Many of the remarks just made will apply with equal force to those, who say, that God is an incomprehensible being, and that we are therefore not to reject a doctrine, because it interferes with our conceptions of his character. Suppose that I take with

me this principle, and open my Bible? I very soon read that God repents, and now that he is furious, and now that he has hands and feet-I ask, the Christians, who have told me that 1 am incapable of judging of what is repugnant to the divine perfections, whether I must understand these literally? They answer with one voice, No. God is immutable and spiritual, and these passages are therefore to be taken in a fig. urative sense. Were I disposed, might I not borrow their own language, and say, 'Presumptuous men! dare you pronounce on the perfections of God? Because your feeble reason cannot reconcile repenting, fury, and hands and feet to the attributes of God, will you rashly affirm that they cannot be reconciled? These attributes are incomprehensible, and may therefore be consistent with what appears most opposite to them in the judgment of erring man.'

It is hoped that these remarks will show, that christianity requires no renunciation of reason. To be christians, we need not cease to be rational. There is no such hostility as many seem to represent, between reason and revelation. Revelation addresses its proofs and instructions to reason. Both are God's gifts, both are beams from the same source of light, both are consistent, and both designed to conduct us to perfection and immortality. Let it be remembered, that I am speaking of reason, when exercised with seriousness, deliberation, and impartiality. Will any say, that this deserves no respect, no confidence? What then becomes of the great doctrines of God's existence and of

the truth of Christianity? These 'are conclusions of reason, and must stand or fall with the faculties, by which their evidence is discerned.

I am sensible that those, who hold the language, which we have endeavoured to combat, sincerely think that they honor God, when they receive interpretations of scripture opposed to reason; for this, they say, is to exalt divine wisdom above their own. But to me it appears, that we honor God more, when we employ our best faculties on his word, with patient and serious attention, and seek to derive from it the most consistent, harmonious, and exalted views of his character and will. How do we discover our regard to the honor of a respected friend? By slowly admitting any thing, which throws a shade on his excellence, and by seeking and joyfully receiving those explanations of his language and conduct, which consist with the high character we ascribe to him. A regard for God's glory will make us anxious to place him before our own and others' minds in the most venerable and attractive light, and will lead us to distrust any interpretations of scripture, which carry in them a repugnanсу to any of his attributes.

Let me conclude these remarks with observing, that the honor and influence of christianity are connected with the refutation of the érror, that this religion is at war with reason. This opinion has often exposed its truth to suspicion; and what is worse, it has prepared many christians to admit gross absurdities, as doctrines of revelation. Their minds have indeed revolted against the sentiments imposed upon them; but they have been silenced by the reflection, that their understandings are infinitely incompetent to judge of God and his operations. They have been addressed, as if the merit of belief were exactly proportioned to the incredibility of the doctrines proposed. To this principle we owe the extension of many errors, which have tarnished the lustre of christianity, and exposed it to contempt. We ought to feel that christianity will be suspected and disregarded, just in proportion as scripture is interpreted in a manner, which shocks the clear and established principles of reason and conscience; and that one important method of recommending this religion is, to show that it is a consistent and "reasonable ser, vice."

(To be continued.)