and I think, that if terms of reproach must be used, they should be applied, not to those who teach men the real contents of the Bible, but to those who do not teach them.

But I will have no terms of reproach, said the Rector they are unchristian things, unreasonable, ungenerous, unmanly, foolish, and injurious. The world may call me what they choose, but I will not return reproach for reproach.

Very good, said Osborne; but if evangelism be the full and proportional development of Christianity; if it be wisely giving to primary truths the primary place, and to subordinate truths their appropriate place; if it be the honestly unfolding of divine truth in its various parts, doctrinal, spiritual, and practical, and the urging of it all on the attention of man as a responsible agent under an economy of grace; no wise and candid man can possibly object to it. I have been mistaken; but I hope to correct my error. No longer shall

The unprofitable moments roll
That lock up all the functions of my soul,
That keep me from myself, and still delay
Life's instant business to a future day;
That task which, as we follow or despise,
The eldest is a fool, the youngest wise;
Which done, the poorest can no wants endure;
And which not done the richest must be poor.

Undoubtedly, said the Rector, he only is wise who

makes religion his first and serious concern.

It

must surely be a dictate agreeable to reason, to make the welfare of a soul that shall never die, and the character of an eternity that shall never end, our great objects. If we wisely or, to use a favourite term in these days, rationally attend to religion, we shall study the Bible and follow its guidance, and care but little about the epithets which a proud, a thoughtless, and a sportive world may prefix to our

names.

Very true, said Osborne; it is but of little mo'ment what I am called and accounted here: the momentous point is,-Shall I be approved as a faithful servant of God in the last day?

CHAP. XV.

PREJUDICES AGAINST RELIGION.

SINCE I last saw you, said Osborne to the Rector, I have thought much, and read and conversed a little, about religion. General praise and general censure have but little weight with me; for where there is no discrimination there must be injustice. But I find that very strong prejudices exist against piety.

He, said the Rector, who attends to common conversation, and to some of our ephemeral publications, will become very familiar with the terms enthusiasm, schism, hypocrisy, melancholy, and so forth. Many, who ought to be wiser and to be better employed, conjure up a host of fantastic evils, and supply by declamation what they want in argument.

I heard a discussion, said Osborne, a few days ago, in which it was boldly maintained, that evangelical views of religion degrade the mind, fill it with the most unworthy thoughts of God and man, have a bad moral tendency, generate various wrong feelings, disorganize society, destroy domestic happiness, impose intolerable restraints and burdens, and, in short, pervert man and render human life miserable.

You have heard a very serious charge, said the Rector; but you cannot wish me to examine all the particulars of it. All such invective is the calumny of the ignorant or of the malicious.

When you compose a volume, said Osborne, I will be one of your readers: at present I shall be satisfied with a few sentences.

To controversy, said the Rector, I feel a strong dislike. It is commonly begun with rash zeal, conducted without wisdom or candour, and concluded with little or no benefit. To an antagonist I would concede what ought to be conceded: I would put the controverted point in a clear light, and advance my arguments. If those of my opponent were better than mine, I should be compelled to yield the point in dispute.

A legitimate process, said Osborne; most controversies, divested of extraneous matter, might be compressed into a small compass.

In the present case, said the Rector, I must beg my opponent to allow a distinction between doctrines and persons, between truth and its adherents. As to evangelical piety, (and all true piety is evangelical, for I suppose there are no such things as moral piety, philosophical piety, or deistic piety;) I must demand a distinction to be made between the thing itself and any crude statements of it.

No reasonable opponent, said Osborne, would refuse to make these concessions.

I then maintain, said the Rector, that there is nothing in sound religion, rightly understood and judiciously stated, to produce any of the effects which you have mentioned. The gospel may be misstated by its teachers, or abused by its recipients; but when it is purely taught and faithfully improved, it elevates the mind, purifies the heart, regulates the conduct, secures political and ecclesiastical order, inspires social concord and benevolence, and diffuses joy and happiness around. It ennobles man. Assertion, I admit, is no proof; but my assertion has as much validity as that of my opponent. But I grant that crude, feeble, and intemperate statements of truth produce harm; but what has this to do with the truth itself?

But why, said Osborne, do not those who are called evangelical adopt a mode of statement that is unobjectionable? Every thing among our clergy in general is cool and orderly.

The truths of religion, said the Rector, must be so taught as to address the dormant soul, or they are taught but to little purpose. If zeal be sometimes too ardent, and lead to some irregularity, let it be remembered that cool preaching leaves men in their moral slumber. I advocate no impropriety; but I must say, that a little of the fervour of a mistaken zeal is preferable to the stillness and insensibility of moral death. The right point unquestionably is, to adopt proper views, and to maintain them in a proper