of atonement, as children to a father. But it is with childlike confidence they should come; such confidence as becomes a dutiful and affectionate child, who respects his parent, and treats him as the fifth commandment requires. It is not with such familiarity as a man approaches his equal, much less with such indecent freedom as a well bred man who respects himself would be ashamed to use towards any one, in the presence of others. To affect a familiar, talking manner, in our publick addresses to God, appears to us to betray as much a want of good taste, as it does of a want of right feeling towards God. It is adapted to disgust those who have a common sense of propriety, as it is to shock those who are accustomed to treat their Maker with

reverence.

20. Language of profaneness. When the name of God is used irreverently, we cannot but consider it a breach of the third commandment, even though it should be done in praying or preaching. And we cannot see how its frequent repetition, as a mere expletive, for want of something else to say, can be considered in any other light than as taking the name of God in vain. And when it is used in the pulpit, for the same purpose that it is used by the profane swearer, merely to give force and energy to the expression, we see not why it should be considered profane in the one case, and not in the other. Yet, we believe it is used, in these exceptionable ways, by many at this day. There is another species of language, which is sometimes heard religious addresses, which, to some, appears still more exceptionable, because it resembles the more vulgar sort of profaneness. It is the familiar use of the words devil, hell, cursed, damned, and the like, with the same kind of tone and manner as they are commonly heard from profane lips. We know not why one man should be thought profane, who says to others, in the streets, "go to hell, and be damned," and another, who uses the same expression, in

the pulpit, with the same tone and manner, an example of uncommon piety.

21. Disregard of the distinctions of age or station. The scriptures recognise these distinctions, and require us to regard them. "Honour thy father and mother," said God at mount Sinai, "Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head, and honour the face of the old man," was a repetition of the same law. The new Testament is so far from setting aside this law, that it is repeated there, with additional injunctions. Though Timothy was an eminent young man, and invested with high authority, the direction to him is explicit: "Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father, and the younger men as brethren; the elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity." It was one of the charges which our Lord brought against the Pharisees, that, under the pretence of discharging another religious duty, they set aside this commandment by their traditions. We cannot but regard it as an offence of the same kind, when men now, under pretence of Christian faithfulness, adopt the language of rudeness and disrespect towards the aged. Examples of what we mean, are such language as this, in the mouths of young men and boys: "You old, grey headed sinner, you deserved to have been in hell long ago"-"this old hypocrite,"

"that old apostate,""that old grey headed sinner, who is leading souls to hell,"-" that old veteran servant of the devil," and the like. We fear that young converts, and even children, have been led to believe, in some instances, that such language, respecting their pa rents and others, was commendable, and to think it a mark of faithfulness to use it boldly. We think, on the contrary, that the scriptures speak of it as a mark of great degeneracy, when "the child shall behave himself proudly against the ancient, and the base against the honourable."

22. Censuring, as unconverted, or as cold, stupid, and dead, those

who are in good standing in the visible church. We fear that many have been led to think that the spirit of censoriousness is a necessary part of the spirit of a revival, and that the best evidence of being awake is a disposition to cry out against the stupidity and coldness of others. But nothing is more different from those fruits of the Spirit which are enumerated in the scriptures. It appears to us an indication rather of spiritual pride, and self confidence; and when it accompanies a revival, we think it one of the greatest blemishes in the work, and one of the greatest hindrances to its progress. If we have reason to fear that others are in a cold, backslidden state, the temper of the gospel will not lead us to proclaim it abroad, nor to denounce them as unconverted, but to go to them in the spirit of meekness, and labour with them in private. It certainly will not lead us to denounce orthodox churches and pious ministers by name, as "in the way to hell," or as "Achans in the camp of the Lord," whose "character is as black as hell," and declare that "the interests of religion require that they should be put down." There is a method practised by some, of censuring others in prayer, which we regard as more exceptionable still, inasmuch as it prostitutes a most sacred duty to purposes of detraction. In praying that God would make a minister faithful, there is no need of using such expressions as plainly imply that both God and the world know him to be notoriously unfaithful. No Christian can object to being prayed for in a manner which exhibits the temper of the gospel; but, under that pretence to hold up to publick notice, as cold, and stupid, and dead, and perhaps as a hypocrite, or an apostate, one who is in regular standing in the church of Christ, we think no man in his sober senses can attempt to justify.

23. Praying for persons by name in an abusive manner. We see no particular advantage in calling out

the names of particular persons or places, in the midst of a prayer. We think, in ordinary cases, a sufficient degree of definiteness, as to the object of our petitions, can be expressed without it; and as it is unpleasant to some, and disturbs their devotions, we think it had better be avoided. But it is not the mere mention of names, that we principally object to. It is the manner in which particular persons are held up to view, whether with or without their consent previously obtained. If particular persons, who are conscious to themselves that they are in an unconverted state, ask to be prayed for in a publick assembly, it is to be presumed that they wish it to be done in a kind and affectionate manner, and not in the language of abuse. To array an impenitent sinner before a publick assembly, and describe his character in such terms as would convey to the hearers an idea that he is "an abandoned wretch;" to tell the Lord that a man prayed for "is full of hell, and his father was full of hell before him, and his grandfather was full of hell before him ;"—to apply such language to him on such an occasion, as could not be used elsewhere without being considered defamatory, is certainly without any justification from the example or the precepts of the Lord Jesus Christ.

24. Imprecations in prayer. We think the imprecations recorded in the scriptures, in which inspired men prayed for the judgments of God upon particular individuals, are no example for our imitation. They were uttered, no doubt, by those holy men of old, under the immediate direction of the Holy Spirit, and are not to be regarded as the expression of any malignant feelings. Doubtless we ought to pray that individuals may be converted and saved, in the exercise of submission to the divine will, and with a supreme desire that God would make that disposal of them that he sees most for his glory. But, to pray for an individual that he may be converted or removed, to ask God

to change his heart now, or else cut him off and send him to hell, to pray God "to seal the damnation of sinners this night," or to use any other language which has the appearance of dictating to God, and invading his prerogatives of mercy or judgment, we think entirely wrong, and inconsistent with that faith in God which the perfections of his character bind us to exercise.

25. Denouncing as enemies to revivals those who do not approve of every thing that is done. We are aware that differences of opinion exist among real Christians on the subject of revivals; and that different measures have been adopted by different men for their promotion. And we think that Christian charity would lead us to believe that both ministers and private Christians may be sincere in their professions of friendship to revivals, although their views of the best means of promoting them should differ from ours. We expect that those who differ from us in their opinions on this subject will express their opinions freely, as is their undoubted right; and we have no wish to abridge their right of so doing, or to control the exercise of it. And we have no disposition to represent them as enemies to revivals, because they differ from us with regard to the best means of promoting them. And we wish to caution those under our care against the indulgence of such a disposition towards any. We think if a revival should exist among us, and other professed friends of revivals should appear not to think so highly of it as we do, or should be slow in forming their opinion, it would not be wise to ascribe it to their unbelief, and to denounce them as cold hearted, and stupid, and dead, and enemies to revivals. And if they should make objections to any of the means we adopt for promoting the work, and should state their objections calmly, we ought not to try to "stop their mouths," but listen to their reasons, and give them all that consideration which the importance of the subject demands; and not imCh. Adv.-VOL. V.

mediately treat them as enemies, because they might not think as we do. We suppose that ministers and Christians have been sometimes denounced in this way, and some of the most eminent and successful ministers too, by ardent and inconsiderate men, from the notion that their objections would go to strengthen the hands of opposers, and encourage the enemies of religion. But we think the denunciations that are thrown out against such ministers and Christians do more to strengthen the hands of opposers, than all the objections which they bring. It is virtually telling the enemies of religion that they have such ministers and Christians on their side, in this matter; than which nothing is better adapted to strengthen their hands.Whereas if they were told what is true, that these are the friends of revivals as well as we, and only differ from us in regard to some of the mea sures we pursue, the attempt to claim them as allies by the enemy would be defeated and silenced.

26. Female prayer and exhortation. It is our earnest desire that the female members of our churches should feel the importance of the situation in which God has placed them, and be active and diligent, in their own sphere, in promoting the cause of Christ and the salvation of souls. We regard it of great importance that they should have meetings by themselves, for prayer and mutual exhortation; and that in all those situations in which God has made them the head, they should not shrink from the discharge of those duties to which Providence shall call them. In promiscuous meetings, however, we do not think God has made it their duty to lead, but to be in silence. Where a female is the head of a family, or the teacher of a school, we have no doubt it is her duty to lead their devotions, in the absence of a suitably qualified individual of the other sex, rather than to have the worship of God omitted. But, were the female members of our churches to be pressed out of the sphere which 2 P

God has assigued them, we fear, that although some good might be the accidental result in some instances, it would so diminish their power of doing good in general, as to prove a great calamity to the church, and a great hindrance to the prosperity of religion in the world. And we would put it to those who think that female praying in promiscuous meetings is lawful in itself, whether, since they do not think it is positively commanded, and others think it is positively forbidden, they are not bound to lay it aside, by the rule of the apostle to forbear eating meat, if it were a cause of offence to his brethren.

27. Loud groaning, speaking out, or falling down, in time of publick or social worship. We have no doubt that strong feelings of the mind sometimes produce involuntary effects upon the body; and that persons who are greatly agitated by strong passions of any kind, may sometimes feel unable to restrain themselves from outward expressions of their feelings. But we think such things should be discouraged, and that individuals in such cases should restrain themselves as much as possible, lest disorder and confusion should be introduced, to the great dishonour of the publick worship of God. And we apprehend, that, if such outward expressions of feeling are indulged but a short time, they will grow into a habit; and instead of being the expressions of real feeling, will be the means resorted to for the purpose of exciting feeling, and will rather increase as the ardour of real feeling diminishes. And we think, that, to speak of groaning in prayer, or the observance of any particular posture, as any mark of extraordinary engagedness or humility, would be rather adapted to encourage hypocrisy and imposture, than to follow the sober decisions of scripture, which lay the whole stress upon a right disposition of heart, without which no service is acceptable to God. To pray for some as "too proud to kneel," might lead such as do kneel,

to think they are of course humble; and to connect the idea of falling prostrate, and rolling about with a still higher degree of humility and engagedness, we think would be to establish unhappy associations, and encourage superstitious and extravagant notions. Let convenience, de cency, and solemnity, regulate the posture of worship, but let no posture be substituted for right feelings of heart.

28. Taking the success of any measures, as an evidence that those measures are right, and approved of God. It is common to say of the measures adopted for promoting a revival, when they are successful, that God blesses those measures; and the conclusion is easily drawn, that, if God blesses any measures, it must be that he approves of them, and that those measures cannot be wrong. We think that this principle is highly dangerous in its tendency; and, at the same time, from the plausible appearance it assumes, that there is great danger of its becoming extensively prevalent. Truth is the instrument which the Holy Spirit employs in the conversion of sinners; and if he should sometimes make it effectual to that end, when exhibited in connexion with much error, or with much that is wrong in the manner and circumstances under which it is presented, it would by no means indicate that God approved of the error, or of the manner and circum stances under which the truth was exhibited; nor that much more good would not have been done by the same truth presented under different circumstances. That the end justi fies the means, is a principle which belongs to the school of infidelity, and not to the school of Christianity. And though the best and most impor tant end should be proposed, it must be pursued only by such means as the scriptures authorize. To take it for granted that success is an evidence that the means used to attain it were right, would be to set aside the Bible as a rule of conduct, and would over throw, in its turn, every precept of