the mistakes or errors of a man's head, to the wickedness of his heart; or to censure him as a wicked man, because he differs from us in opinion. We have the happiness of believing, that there are many other adequate causes of error in sentiment beside the depravity of the human heart; and, in our opinion, it is not the part of christian condor, to infer the wickedness of a man's heart, from effects which may be rationally accounted for, on other grounds, or from other causes. The opinion, that all error in sentiment is the fruit of criminal affections, is itself, in our view, a very great error; yet we should be unwilling to say, that this is always the fruit of a wicked heart. We can however say, that we hardly know of any error, which has higher claims to be so considered; for we know of none more injurious in its tendency, or which has occasioned more mischief among christians. In his own view, every man's sentiments are right; and if he have been led to believe, that all error in sentiment proceeds from wickedness of heart; as soon as he perceives, that his neighbour dissents from his opinions, he is prepared to view, and to treat him as a criminal. If his neighbour have adopted the same opinion, in respect to error in sentiment, a foundation is laid for mutual criminations, alienations, reproaches, and even persecutions. To this prolific error, we may trace the alienations, and disingenuous treatment, to be seen among christians of different sects, at the present day; and to the same malignant source, we may trace the innumerable persecutions, and martyrdoms, which have taken place since the crucifixion of our Saviour. Nor are these, which have been mentioned, all the evils to be imputed to that error. As he, who has adopted it, is naturally confident, that his opinions on other subjects are according to truth; and that those opinions, which are in opposition to his own, are wrong and wicked; he will, of course, fortify himself against every thing, which has a tendency to shake his confidence in his own infallibility. To be informed that any particular book was written by one, whose opinions were different from his own, will often be a sufficient reason for refusing or neglecting to read it; or, at least, to read it with care and candor. For the same reason, he will refuse to hear perhaps the most instructive and pious preacher; or, if he hear, he will take effec tual care not to be profited by what the preacher may deliver. On the same ground he will think himself authorised to censure the writings and the characters of others, without any other evidence, than mere hearsay, that they do not agree in sentiment with him. Thus every ray of light, which may rise in the church, will on its first appearance be reprobated as heresy. So the light of reformation from popery was denounced as heresy, the reformers as heretics, and their followers as deserving of death. On the same principle, our forefathers were compelled to flee from England, and to seek an asylum among the savages of America. Many professed christians of the present age, can look back with abhorrence on the injurious treatment the reformers and our forefathers received, and yet act towards dissenters from their own opinions, on the same intolerant principles. By the voice of history they are admonished of their own liability to err, and of the possibility that they themselves may be in the error, and those in the right, who are treated by them as heretics; and by the voice of the gospel they are warned of the danger of assuming the prerogatives of the Judge of the world; yet as though it were impossible for them to err, and as though the prerogatives of the Lord Jesus had been transferred into their hands, they can censure, not only the opinions, but the characters of their dissenting brethren. If, instead of assuming the prerogatives of Christ as a Judge, they would assume the meek and benevolent temper, which he displayed towards his erring disciples, it would be happy for themselves and for society in general. We rejoice to find that there have been learned, liberal, and enlightened men, of various sects, who have seen and lamented the evils we have mentioned; and who have dared to speak in favor of free inquiry, and to express sentiments of candor and friendship, towards such as have differed from them in opinion. The more this temper and practice is cultivated, the more rapid will be the advances in the knowledge of the scriptures, and the more will christian love, harmony, and peace, prevail in the world. It is not christianity which leads professors of different sects to hate, despise, or reproach each other; and it is high time that this truth should be understood by all, who bear the christian name. By keeping at a distance from each other, by refusing to read with candor each other's writings, and by opening their ears to idle tales, reproachful observations and misrepresentations, good men of different sects may be led on from step to step, until each shall view his brother as little better than the Prince of darkness. But if, instead of this disingenuous course of proceeding, these same persons would mutually act on christian principles, they might find in each other, not only grounds for mutual charity, but for mutual esteem and complacency. We cannot but lament, to see good men needlessly subjecting themselves to such restrictions, in regard to their intercourse one with another, as are at once injurious to their own happiness, and to the happiness of all within the circle of their influence. Their children, almost as soon as they are capable of dintinguishing their right hand from the left, learn the party names of distinction among christians, imbibe the prejudices of their respective parents, and grow up with feelings of disrespect, if not of real hatred, towards such as dissent from the opinions of their guides. Instead of being taught to view error in sentiment as a misfortune, they are taught to view it as a crime; and each child takes it for granted, that his pious father and mother are in the right, and, of course, that those who are of another persuasion must be very wicked people. Before children are capable of judging of the questions in debate, or even of understanding what they are, they are capable of being strongly prepossessed against those who dissent from their parents. These prepossessions may operate as an injury to them, as long as they live, and perhaps for ever. If, instead of this malig nant influence on the minds of children, they were formed by the precepts and examples of their parents, to tender, kind and respectful feelings, how happy would be the effects on the rising generation! Nothing, which it may be in our power to do, will be considered as too much, to remove the unhappy prepossessions, which now disgrace the christian world; and to cultivate in all, that candor, moderation, forbearance, humility and love, which are so uniformly recommended and required by the gospel. "Let not this weak, unknowing hand And deal damnation round the land, EXTRACT FROM DR. CAMPBELL'S SECOND LECTURE ON "SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY." "Ay, but the teacher we assign him, say they, is celebrated for knowledge and piety, and is of great reputation among the orthodox, as an orthodox divine. As to his knowledge and piety, are we to sustain ourselves perfect judges of these accomplishments, or have not pedantry and hypocrisy sometimes imposed even upon the generality of men? But, admitting that the character you give him were in both respects perfectly just, do even these qualifications, however valuable, secure a man against error either in doctrine or practice? Have not several, whom in charity we are bound to think both knowing and pious, maintained in many instances opposite opinions, each extremely positive as to his own, and ex tremely zealous in defence of it?- universally agreed, insomuch, that it would seem to be entitled to the privilege of an axiom or first principle, to be assumed without proof? Quite the reverse. There is nothing, about which men have been, and still are more divided. It has been accounted orthodox divinity in one age, which hath been branded as ridiculous fanaticism in the next. It is, at this day, deemed the perfection of orthodoxy in one country, which in an adjacent country is looked upon as damnable heresy. Nay, in the same country, hath not every sect a standard of their own? Accordingly when any person seriously uses the word, before we can understand his meaning, we must know to what communion he belongs. When that is known, we comprehend him perfectly. By the orthodox, he means always those who agree in opinion with him and his party, and by the heterodox, those who differ from him. When one says then, of any teacher whatever, that all the orthodox acknowledge his orthodoxy, he says neither more nor less than this, "all who are of the same opinion with him, of which number I am one, believe him to be in the right." And is this any thing more than what may be asserted, by some person or other, of every teacher, that ever did or ever will exist? "Words," it was well said by a philosopher of the last age, "are the counters of wise men, and the money of fools." And when they are contrived, on purpose to render persons, parties, or opinions the objects of admiration or of abhorrence, the multitude. are very susceptible of the impression, intended to be conveyed by them, without entering at all, or even inquiring into the meaning of the words. And to say the truth, we have but too many ecclesiastic terms and phrases, which savour grossly of the arts of a crafty priesthood, who meant to keep the world in ignorance, to secure an implicit faith in their own dogmas, and to intimidate men from an impartial inquiry into holy writ." Illustrations of passages in the New Testament, which refer to climate, places, offices, sentiments, manners and customs among the Jews, in the time of our Saviour. 11. Matt. ii. 18. "In Rama there was a voice heard, lamentation and weeping, and great mourning;-Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted, because they are not." THE Evangelist applies to the slaughter of Bethlehem, the figurative language of Jeremiah, in reference to the seventy years captivity of the Jews in Baby lon. (See Jer. xxxi. 15.) To give an idea of the grief which this captivity occasioned, the prophet introduces Rachel, rising from her tomb, and weeping at the sight of the distress of her descendants. The tears of the living were not enough to bewail their misfortunes. He calls to his assistance those of the dead; and above all, of Rachel, whose tomb was in the way through which they passed, when they were led to Babylon. In view of the murder of the infants of Bethlehem, Matthew avails himself of the same thought and expression. Not far from Jerusalem, on the way to Rama, and near to Bethlehem, was Rachel's tomb. Who then does not perceive, that this application of the language of the prophet, to a Jewish ear must have been highly appropriate; and to a Jewish heart, not wholly divested of virtuous sensibility, deeply affecting? See Beausobre and L'Enfant's Introduction, p. 263 and 265, and Beausobre's Diss. xi. sur les evenemens les plus memorables du Nouv. Test. 12. satisfactory illustration of the text. By all the Jewish enemies of christianity, the title of Nazaræan, or Nazarene, was applied as an expression of contempt to our Lord, because he had resided in, and therefore came from that city; and the circumstance of his having lived there, was one reason why they rejected him. Now the Evangelist says, that the reason why he dwelt in Nazareth was, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, he shall be called a Nazarene. But where is this prophecy? Chrysostom thought that the passage was lost. But Jerome and others remark, as it is indeed most probable, that Matthew does not refer to a particular passage, but to what several prophets had said in effect; and from the reference to the prophets, says that father, it is evident, that he did not take the words from scripture, but the sense only. The prophets may therefore be said to have predicted, that he should be called, or that he should be a Nazarene, when they said that he should be despised, and reproached, and rejected; (See Psalm xxii. 6, and Ixix. 9. Isaiah liii. 3—5. Zech. xi. 12, 13.) And he certainly was, among other reasons, because he had resided in Naza Matt. ii. 23. "He came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, he shall be called a Nazarene." Nazareth was a small town in Galilee, about twenty seven leagues from Jerusalem. It was built upon a rock, on one side of which was a precipice, from which, we are told, its inhabitants would have thrown our Lord, because he upbraided them for their unbelief. How contemptible the place was, in the opinion of Jews, appears from the inquiry of Nathaniel, can any good thing come out of Nazareth. reth? And scarcely less, from the more general expression of the Sanhedrim, or great council of the nation, art thou also of Galilee? Search and look; for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet. In this national sentiment of the Jews, we find, I think, the most Some have thought that the word Nazarene was derived from a Hebrew word, which signifies a branch; and that the name, in its application to our Lord, implied that he was that true branch, of which Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Zechariah have spok |