method may make zealous partizans and bigoted polemicks, but it is little calculated to make enlightened and pious Christians.

But these are not the only objections to Calvinism. Its teachers instead of taking the lead of the age, actually fall in the rear ;in all that relates to taste, manners, feelings and information, they are at least a century behind the rest of the world. They come to us in the temper of another age, when metaphysicks were in vogue. And their theology has never yet been cured of that epidemick. They still ring the changes on those obsolete and abstruse subjects to audiences little able to comprehend them,-while the rest of the world has grown practical, and is returning to common sense, both in religion and philosophy.

This error of the Calvinists is not however peculiar to them. Ali Bey, the celebrated traveller, mentions a similar propensity in Mussulmen to intermingle metaphysical subtilty with theology, and to substitute refinements and jargon for the weightier matters of practical religion and morality.

Have you read the travels of Ali Bey, sir? I of course answered in the affirmative a little disconcerted, which however I be

lieve he did not notice. He then went on to pass a high encomium on my former journal, expressing astonishment at the variety of learning which he was pleased to say I displayed, not however without some affectation of knowledge, &c. &c. This charge was new to me; but I was obliged to assent to all. He even discussed the reality of the character in which I travelled! I soon took an opportunity to divert him from a subject so unpleasant, and to recal him to our former topic.

But have the liberals avoided the shoals on which their adversaries run aground?

Yes, sir, they have escaped those shoals. But alas! common sense has much to wrestle with before it can settle the vibrating scales of truth and error! The liberal party give the utmost liberty to private judgment and free inquiry. They inculcate Christianity as a practical religion—a system of morality and piety. Their teachers endeavor to keep pace with the rest of the world, to adapt their instruction to the present state of society, and the taste and feelings of their audience-avoiding metaphysical jargon on the one hand and melansholic bigotry on the other. They think,

since Christianity has become respectable and the condition of its professors comfortable, that they are warranted in assuming a corresponding cheerful countenance and voice; and in laying aside the quaint language of puritanism, and the lugubrious tone of primitive Christians.

All this is very well.-But every revolution tends to extremes. And the sun of truth has always had and always will have to struggle with the fog of human passions. You will not be surprised then when I tell you that the liberal party have not steered entirely clear of the quicksands. They have not used their liberty as not abusing it, with care not to make it a stumbling block for their brethren. Nor can it be concealed that they have given some colour to the charge of levity and skepticism in holy things. Vanity of vanities all is vanity;'" this is not true!" saith our preacher, not judging from consciousness probably. So the sentiment is correct no doubt there is nothing true but Heaven; could it not be inculcated in a better way than by reciting a popular song from the desk? And it may be very entertaining and even instructive to hear a judicious critique upon

that

but

the writings of an eminent author; but could not a teacher of religion take a more suitable time than the Sabbath for such a communication? If this is not the conduct of a sincere and conscientious Christian who has a tender regard for the feelings of his fellow men, neither is it the part of a prudent man or substantial partizan. The folly of shocking unnecessarily any general prejudice, much more of loosening the reverence for holy things, is so obvious one would suppose as not to escape the consideration of the most infatuated.

But fortunately no religion is answerable for the passions and follies of its adherents. Vanity and ambition are not peculiar to any sect, and furnish evidence against the persons in whom they appear, not against their opinions. There will always be in every party bold and aspiring geniuses, who to be conspicuous will step forward of their contemporaries, without regarding personal obloquy or the interest of their sect.

Upon the whole, it is impossible to view either of these contending parties with entire satisfaction. If the austerity of one offends us, we cannot shut our eyes to the want of solemnity in the other. In avoiding the

quaint and fanatical language imputed to the teachers of that sect, those of the other commit as great a fault when they couch their prayers and discourses in a novel and unnatural phraseology, and reject the simple and expressive language of scripture. Take the following extract as an example, from the works of one whose memory they justly delight to honor.

"It [charity] is that love which, as the apostle says, is kind and forbearing, which envieth not, which is not vain or proud, which doth not behave itself unseemly or with indecorum, but consults the feelings of others, which seeketh not its own advantage," &c.

Now this may be an improved version,' but it is certainly far inferior in pathos and expression to the old text which long acquaintance has endeared to us and rendered venerable.

It will require, I think, about one age more to bring these parties together ;-for one to arrive at, and the other to return to, the goal of truth. By that time the temporary evils will have passed away that attended the first couching of the mental eye. <What is now called innovation will then