inary" in this city, it is said that “the change of the day, however, is rather to be gathered from the practice of the christian church, than as clearly enjoined in the New Testament.... We have then good example and strong propriety in behalf of our observation of the Lord's day as a religious festival, though not as a Jewish Sabbath." Neander, the most distinguished ecclesiastical historian of any age or country, says that, "the celebration of Sunday was always like that of every festival, a human institution; far was it from the apostles to ordain it as a divine command; far was it from them and the first apostolic church to transfer the laws concerning the Sabbath to Sunday. But perhaps as early as the end of the second century a false transfer of this kind had been introduced," etc.

We would cordially recommend to our author to consult the history of the church on this subject, and especially to meditate upon the language of St. Paul, Rom. xiv. 6. which we will here give in the paraphrase of Dr. Doddridge-" One man, that is a Jewish convert, esteemeth one day above another; he thinks their Sabbaths and new moons and yearly fasts and feasts have something inviolably sacred, and that the observance of them is matter of perpetual and universal obligation. 'Another educated among the Gentiles, or more tho

roughly instructed in the design and genius of christianity, esteemeth every day alike, without any regard at all to the Jewish institution. Let every man freely enjoy his own sentiment."

But our author finds, under such laxity of principle, great laxity of practice; and he has given two instances of very "grievous Sabbath breaking" by Universalist clergymen. One is convicted on his own confession, after the fact, of traveling from Verplank's Point to New York on Sunday, in order to be present at the religious service in the evening! Another with premeditation and afore-thought, actually left New York on Sunday Evening in order to reach Rochester by Wednesday morning to attend a religious Convention there! There was no minister to supply his place in New York and he preached on Sunday, it seems, that he might sin with impunity, in this heinous way, on Sunday evening. And what makes the case worse, this same Universalist now affirms that he never had occasion to travel on Sunday without finding orthodox clergymen enough for company!! We hope our author will in the next edition (?) of "Universalism as it is," take pains to exculpate the two disciples. who traveled to Emmaus on the Lord's day, and also inform us how our Lord himself happened to be in their company. They were all guilty, we fear, of violating the christian Sabbath.

In regard to Baptism and the Lord's Supper, it is well known that Universalists differ in opinion among themselves. Baptism is practiced to a considerable extent among us, though it is far from being universal. Many maintain that water baptism was not designed as an ordinance of perpetual obligation. John the Baptist himself said, "I indeed baptise you with water unto repentance; but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, etc., he shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost and fire." From this it appears that John's baptism and that of Christ's widely differ; and when we remember what St. Paul tells us, that "there is one Lord, one faith, one baptism," and consequently but one that is essential; when we hear him, the great apostle to the Gentiles, solemnly affirming, "I was not sent to baptise but to preach the gospel;" it must be conceded that water baptism is not indispensable to the christian. At present, however, neither the faith nor the practice of the Universalist denomination can be regarded as fixed on the subject, and liberty of conscience and private opinion is indulged without bigotry on the one side or contempt on the other.

The Lord's Supper is with few exceptions regarded with more consideration, and the frequent observance of it is becoming more and more general. Notwithstanding this fact, which

is obvious to every body in any degree acquainted with Universalism, our author has the hardihood to say, "The day is not far distant when, notwithstanding the efforts of a few among them, the ordinances will be almost or quite unknown." What the practice ten or twenty years hence, shall be among us with respect to water baptism, we will not attempt to foretell, but confident are we that the establishment of churches wherever it is possible, and the due and frequent celebration of the Lord's Supper will then be universal. At present Sunday is generally kept as strictly by Universalists as by the mass of their christian neighbors, notwithstanding our author's uncandid remark that "in Universalist families generally, and especially among the more wealthy, it is the gayest of the seven." We now enter a new field. Having exhibit

ed "Universalism as it is" in theory, our author now proceeds to make an expose of its practical results-its "fruits." This chapter is introduced very sweetly with the touching lines of Watts, running thus:

"From thoughts so dreadful and profane,

Corrupt discourse proceeds;

And in their impious hands are found

Abominable deeds."

From such a motto one would expect a chapter of crime and blood. The reader will however be somewhat disappointed. The method adopted by our author is rather peculiar. Tired of

generalities and hard names, it seems, he here resolved to condemn Universalists out of their own mouths. Hence he has brought together extracts from all the complaints that Universalists have ever made of their own coldness, indifference to the things of religion, short-comings, imperfections, errors, etc. etc. He has carefully picked up every ill-natured remark, which any one of us has ever made, respecting our practices and conduct, and the whole is arrayed in one fearful chapter. All the recommendations to greater purity, devotion and holy living are referred to in order to show that these things now have no existence among us.

The conclusion which every candid mind would form from the whole mass of evidence presented in this chapter would be that, Universalists are by no means so good as they ought to be, or as they would be, if they acted consistently with their faith; and that we ourselves are fully aware of the fact, and industriously engaged in pointing out our errors, and exhorting one another to walk worthy of our vocation!

This it must be confessed, is not so horrible as was to have been expected in the outset. Our author, we believe, has mentioned no cases of murder among Universalist ministers, nor indeed among the people; and, so far as we remember, not even one case of seduction and adultery, which are of so frequent occurrence among