Let those be discouraged with the slow progress which the gospel has made among this people, who overlook the promise that "at the name of Jesus every knee shall bow." Let them tremble who go forth to fight the Lord's battles, and imagine that missionary labor may be unaccompanied by prayer and faith.

Spare not your prayers for the East, either for Jews or nominal Christians. The latter are in a most deplorable state, having lost the spirit of genuine Christianity, and substituted superstition in its place. The salt has lost its savor, and is good for nothing but to be trodden under foot, which is done by Jews and Mohammedans, who look with utter contempt upon the Christianity with which they are acquainted.

May the Lord soon break the chains of superstition and terror, and free their captives, that the Church may again triumph in her Redeemer.

estine, Poland, and Hungary, and will well account for the ignorance and fanaticism which prevail among the Jewish people in those countries. But in Germany, Holland, etc. the Rabbies are required by the government to be liberally educated, and in the most important places the services of the synagogue are frequently performed in the vernacular tongue. In Prague, Berlin, Hamburg, and Vienna, the synagogues are furnished with organs, and hymns are sung and sermons preached in the language of the country. The modern systems of popular education in Europe have also embraced the children of the Jews, and are accomplishing a great improvement in the intellectual state of that peculiar people.-EDITOR.

ARTICLE X.

A BRIEF REPLY to the “REMARKS" OF ALEXANDER CAMPBELL IN DEFence of the DOCTRINES OF "CAMPBELLISM:" Am. Bib. Repository for April, 1840, Vol. III. p. 469, seq.

By Rev. R. W. Landis.

To the Editor of the Am. Bib. Repository:

REV. AND DEAR SIR:

THERE are a few things in the article of Mr. Campbell, recently published in the Repository, which seem to require a brief notice from me.

In your notes upon his "Remarks" you have said almost every thing that was necessary to be said. And I only regret that the exceedingly unfair dealing of Mr. C. has rendered it necessary to occupy so much space of your valuable Repository with a discussion like the present. But that great good has already resulted from this discussion, both in England and in our Western States, I am happy to learn; and this reflection inay perhaps reconcile those of your readers, not immediately interested in its details, to its continuance through a few pages more.*

Since I have learned that Mr. C. charged me with misrepresentation, I have given my authorities a patient and careful examination; and am fully prepared to sustain every proposition asserted in my essay, in respect to the distin

In respect to the occasion of my furnishing the original Essay which was published in the Repository for January and April, 1839, you appear, yourself, to labor under a slight misapprehension. [See your letter to Mr. Campbell, Bib. Repos. April, 1840, p. 470.] My proposal to write for your work was as follows:-I named to you eight or nine different subjects, upon either of which I was willing to furnish an article. Campbellism was the subject selected by yourself, as the most interesting and important, and was accordingly made choice of by me. Hence I could not have had personal resentment to gratify, as Mr. C. has alleged.

guishing views of Mr. C. and his followers. The treatment which I have received from Mr. Campbell in his "Millennial Harbinger," where he has exhausted the vocabulary of coarse invective, was not unexpected by me, when I undertook the exposure of his system. Pulchrum est accusari ab accusandis. But with his epithets and personalities I have nothing to do. There are not a few instances in his "Remarks" (besides what you have in your notes pointed out) of a characteristic want of candor; especially those pertaining to the title-page and various editions of his New Testament. These, and whatever else may require to be noticed, shall be attended to in their order.

66

The first matter in his " Remarks" which demands attention, is on p. 476. Mr. C. speaking of my essay, says, His chapters are four : 1st, On Faith; 2d, The Doctrines of Campbellism on Regeneration; 3d, Unitarianism of the Campbellites; 4th, The translation of the N. T. adopted by the Campbellites." Here we have, in a small matter, a proof of Mr. C.'s ability to evade a point. My essay is divided into four chapters, it is true. But he has divided the first into two; and dropped all mention of the second; that he need say nothing in answer to the important statements there made. See also p. 502. He has not in all his "Re. marks" even referred to that chapter; though he professes to give "an accurate and true representation of his views" in all those points upon which he has been assailed, on the pages of the Repository. See p. 476.

Immediately after this (p. 476-480,) follow his views of faith. In respect to all the really important statements of my essay here quoted by Mr. C. on this point, he employs the following language. "We do indeed plead guilty of this charge. It is a true bill." "Very good." "To this I fully subscribe; and the person that does not, has need to examine himself," etc. And he enters upon a long defence of his views as exhibited in my quotations. The reader will please to notice this. Is it not strange that Mr. C. should employ so many pages in justifying the views which I charged upon him, and then complain that he had not sufficient space to notice all my "slanders, misrepresentations," etc.?.

On page 478, there is another exhibition of the arts of controversy. He says, "Mr. L. has imposed upon his readers by putting into my mouth words which I never uttered,

and which he can nowhere show in my writings." Now the words which he has charged me with putting in his mouth, and which he has copied, (pp. 477, 8,) are, as Mr. C. himself knew, a quotation from Dr. Jennings' account of the debate.* But Mr. C. solemnly denies that he ever used such language as is attributed to him in this quotation. Now let the reader, if he would learn the value of these disclaimers of Mr. C., just turn to the quotation itself, and compare it with the following passage from a work of Mr. C. written after all those from which I quoted in my essay. "Faith never can be more than the receiving of testimony as true, or the belief of testimony; and if the testimony be written, it is called history-though it is as much history when flowing from the tongue, as when flowing from the pen." Christianity Restored, p. 111. There is not only a real but a verbal resemblance between these quotations on the point referred to.

On p. 478, there is a similar manœuvre. On p. 100 of my essay, I made a quotation entirely and verbally accurate from Mr. C. He admits the quotation to be correct, and defends the doctrine it contains. And yet on the same page, and in reference to the same quotation, he says, “Mr. L. is too indiscriminating a reader of my works, to be depended on in his quotations, or comments." Are these the methods by which Mr. C. professes to be searching for truth?

In your note on p. 480, you have said every thing which was necessary to be said, in exposing Mr. C.'s evasions of

* In Mr. C.'s Reply in the Harbinger, (Oct. 1839, p. 486,) he makes some exceedingly coarse reflections upon me in respect to this matter. He calls it "an unmanly, unchristian," and "most jesuitical attempt," and repeats the epithets. But why should Mr. C. thus lose his temper, with what, by a little reflection, he must have seen was either a misprint, or at most a lapsus calami; for his own writings are notoriously full of wrong references? I regretted very much the mistake in the aforesaid reference, but not having an opportunity to read the proof, I could not correct it. Instead of reading thus, "Vide Debate, p. 32, 33, etc. ut supra," I intended it should appear as follows: "Vide Jennings' Debate, p. 32, 33, ut supra.' And why should Mr. C. be thus angry merely at a wrong reference, while the quotation (as I show above) most accurately expresses a sentiment which he openly avows?

SECOND SERIES, VOL. IV. NO. I.

18

the point at issue. But in respect to the extracts which he makes from his writings on the following pages, I have only to request your readers to compare them with the extracts upon the same matters, contained in my essay, (pp. 101108,) if they would see fairly exhibited a few of his palpable self-contradictions.

The following passages of his "Remarks" (pp. 484, 5,) I must present in full:

"I am no less travestied and caricatured," says he, "no less misrepresented on the subject of remission of sins as connected with baptism, than on the subject of baptism as connected with the whole process of regeneration. Mr. Campbell and his friends teach that immersion in water is absolutely essential to forgiveness of sins.' The most charitable construction I can put upon this, is that Mr. L. does not understand his own language, or select his terms with discrimination. Absolutely essential to forgiveness! This is equal to 'no baptism, no forgiveness,' in time or to eternity, for man, woman, or child. I never formed, uttered, or wrote such an idea. Have I not repeatedly said, that neither faith, repentance, nor baptism is absolutely essential to the future and eternal salvation,' for then infant salvation would be impossible?" And in his Harbinger, p. 492, speaking in relation to the same matter, he says, 'A more flagitious perversion I have never met with.'

Now if the reader would see the grounds upon which I based this imputation, let him read pp. 102, 105, 106, of my essay. Compare also the above disclaimer with the following declaration from his "Christian Baptist," Vol. VII. p. 163: "Under the former economy blood was necessary to forgiveness; and under the new economy water is NECESSARY, Or take the following from a late work of Mr. C. already referred to, “Christianity Restored:" "All these testimonies concur with each other in presenting the act of faith-CHRISTIAN IMMERSION, frequently called conversion— as that act, INSEPARABLY CONNECTED WITH THE REMISSION OF SINS; or that change of state, of which we have already spoken." "The forgiveness of sins, or a change of state, is NECESSARILY connected with that act of faith called Christian immersion.'" "No person is altogether discipled to Christ, UNTIL he is immersed.' p. 202. And yet, in the face of Heaven, Mr. C. has solemnly affirmed that he never formed, uttered, or wrote such an idea," as that "immersion is absolutely essential to remission."

66

And as to the salvation of infants, pædobaptists, etc., (which is also referred to in the foregoing quotation,) the