Elder Kerr, formerly of Richmond, was a master spirit in this refined animalism, or moving of the blood and passions He was one of God's called ministers, and for many years a choice spirit in the work of excitement. But a desire to go to Congress seized the revivalist, and he gave back his call to Heaven, resigned his license to preach to the church on earth and was found on the political arena, scuffling for the meed o political fame, rather than for the crown of life, which he had so long held out to his hearers as supremely worthy of their ambition. But having failed in gaining the lofty eminence of his aspirations, he asked for his "call" from Heaven and his license from the church, and is again on the Lord's side from a necessity laid upon him to preach the gospel;-not, however exactly like that necessity of which Paul spoke when relating his obligations to announce the word. Man, indeed, in his bes estate, is altogether vanity. The Baptists have, unfortunately filled their ranks with too many such spirits; and hence the difficulty of getting along by the force of truth without the impulse of feeling. They cannot keep up the excitement, and therefore not many of these converts live.

Let no one hence infer that we are opposed to feeling. God forbid! A religion without feeling is a body without a spirit A religion that does not reach the heart and rouse all our feelings into admiration, gratitude, love, and praise, is a mere phantom But we make feelings the effect, not the cause of faith and of true religion. We begin not with the feelings, but with the under standing: we call upon men first to believe, then to feel, and then to act. The gospel takes the whole man-the head, the heart, the hand; and he only is a genuine Christian who believes feels, and obeys from the heart the whole mould of doctrine delivered to us by the holy Apostles. A. C.

FALSE TESTS OF TRUTH AND ERROR-No. I. WELL balanced and well educated minds are generally not mor numerous than the peers of the realm, or the privileged orders of any community. We would not, however, be understood as intimating that the aristocracy of wealth, or of rank, embraces the intellectual of moral nobility of any country. They have, only in proportion to thei numbers, the chance of inheriting any portion of it. Still, as intellec and morality govern the universe, in all civilized society well balanced and well educated minds must exercise a formative influence ove human character, and, to a considerable extent, mould the fortunes o such as fall under their jurisdiction.

Men of great parts are not always great men. Indeed, I would rather say that men of great parts are generally but parts of great men. Men of this class are sometimes the greatest misfortunes to society. Such men were Voltaire, Volney, Rousseau, Paine. And were it admissible, in this sectarian age, to speak of party leaders, either in philosophy or religion, with the same freedom, it would be easy to adduce a crowd of examples. But this invidious task we decline; and only say, that men of extraordinary parts must always be men of very ordinary parts: for, as the organs, or parts by which the mind operates, occupy a given space, the extras must all be taken out of the ordinaries. Many of the English bards, from Biron back to Savage, most happily illustrate this nice point. Their great parts left no room for the other parts which are essential to a perfect mind. Hence, what are called the eccentricities (rather the follies) of some who have the reputation of men of genius. Indeed, so common is the observation that persons distinguished for any extraordinary attribute have something odd or wanting, called "eccentricity,” that those who would be distinguished, whether Nature has distinguished them or not, first set about acquiring the eccentricity of a man of genius. This is, alas! too easily obtained; and hence so many acquire the folly, without securing the wisdom of great men.

According to the true science of the human mind, it consists of a given number of powers or attributes. These all must be fully developed according to their value or functions in forming a perfect mind in its intellectual and moral nature: for, according to the old school, an extraordinary memory has often associated with it a very ordinary judgment; and an extraordinary judgment, a very ordinary memory: and so of other powers.* And, according to the most erudite phrenologists, those heads are the best that are freest from extraordinary bumps: for as there cannot be lofty mountains without deep vallies, or great elevations without corresponding depressions; so there cannot be large protuberances on the human skull without adjoining indentations. But enough of this, as we all agree that a truly great man is not a man of a few great parts; but a person all whose parts are on a large scale, and no one of them either developed or educated at the expense of another.

“Smart men” have been the nimblest errorists in the world. They are too smart to think long or deeply on any subject. They regard study as prosing dulness, and as an infallible evidence of the want of brighter and piercing intelligence. They bring forth first, and travail The most extraordinary memory that I ever saw was the property of an idiot!

afterwards. Indeed, were it not for their exuberant leniency to their own errors, which fortunately always happens to be in the direct ratio of their censoriousness towards those of others, their lives would be one protracted scene of repentance But, fortunately for their present. peace, while they file on wires of brass the peccadilloes of others, they bind up their own faults and blunders with the gossamer of the morning.

Persons of this class are the worst guides of the public mind that can be selected. They are so in every department of thought; but most of all so in religious matters. Like the moon, they give but little light, less heat, and are subject to many changes. A few preachers of different religious denominations have fallen under my notice, who are perfect models of this character; but I will not name them here. They reason a good deal; for they are "smart men:" but they reason most fallaciously. I have found some instances in our own community that more demand our attention. But as I should not name these more than those; and as I would correct, if possible, the same faults in all, I have concluded, without any personal allusions whatever, to write a number of essays on False Tests of Truth and Error, and on fallacious modes of attacking error, and of defending truth. These essays must be short; and, therefore, but one topic for one essay. For the present we select

THE POPULARITY OF A TENET.

With some the popularity of a tenet, either in philosophy or in religion, is a test of its truth; with others, it is a proof of its error. They are both wrong-decidedly, essentially, and radically wrong. He that makes the popularity of a tenet a proof that it is true, and he that would make it a proof that it is false, are equally deceptions and fallacious

reasoners.

In the first place, all new things are unpopular. Things that are new and strange are, of course, received but by few; or, in other words, truths the most popular now, were once as unpopular as the grossest errors could now be. The popularity of a tenet is, then, a pure accident. So is its unpopularity.

But, in the second place, the attributes of truth are all essential attributes; for truth is immutable and eternal. The progress or prosperity of a tenet is always, or may be purely accidental. But that which is a pure accident of any subject is no part of its nature, as it may be with or without it. Therefore, the popularity or unpopularity of any tenet never can prove it true or false.

There is, however, to many minds, a more obvious process of proof. I allude to the history of tenets. Every received truth, in science or religion, has its own true history. So have all the errors in the world.

、

That history teaches,-(and what is history but philosophy teaching by example?)—I say, history on all her pages declares, that the present most popular truths and errors, either in science or religion, were once unpopular; and that the popularity of any particular tenet is, in all cases, the work of time; and, for the most part, of causes extrinsic to itself.

To keep within our own favorite subject, religion, we would observe that the most popular truth in all Christendom-nay, among Jews, Turks, and Christians, is one that was in the time of Abraham the most unpopular in the world. Need I say that this truth is, There is but one God? It has been growing in popularity for almost four thousand years. Among Christian truths, that Jesus is the Christ promised in the Old Testament, is now most popular. It was at first believed by but one person, and for several years by but a few individuals. The same may be said of his death for our sins-of his resurrection for our justification-and of all the great tenets of the whole New Testament. Now either we must admit that popularity can convert truth into error, or error into truth; or admit this great truth, that the popularity or unpopularity of any tenet is a mere accident, and never can be adduced in argument for or against it, as a proof of its truth or error.

Error is like truth in this respect; for it, too, at first, is unpopular. That Mahomet is a true Prophet was once unpopular in all the East. Now it is believed by a hundred millions and more. All the errors of Popery-the supremacy of the Bishop of Rome, transubstantiation, worshipping of images, and prayers to and for the dead, &c. &c, were once most unpopular. The polytheism of the Pagan world was introduced by one person: now it is the most popular belief on earth.

I have regretted to hear some of our brethren speak of their principles as if they ought to be admitted, if not wholly, at least in part, because of their unpopularity. Our opponents were recommending their tenets because of their popularity. This, I presume, drove them into the opposite extreme, as extremes beget extremes, and they balanced the account by doubting the truth of all popular tenets; and were on the precincts of offering unpopularity as a test of some of their principles.

The Mormons say, "Many are called, but few are chosen;" "Strait is the gate of life, and few there be that enter it," &c. &c. These and a hundred other texts they urge as proof that their tenets and their Bible are divine! Indeed, though I would not run into another extreme, I strongly incline to the opinion, that, in regard to tenets long propagated, especially if they have passed through a fiery ordeal, if they are not popular they are not true. But this needs to be well ,uarded; and, therefore, I would not say that if they are popular they

must needs be true. That all the items of the Christian faith-such as the advent of the Messiah at the time appointed-his miracles, doctrine, life, death, burial, resurrectioh, ascension-the resurrection of the dead, future judgment, &c. &c.-the one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one body, one spirit, one hope, one God and Father of all, &c., &c. are universally admitted through all the length and breadth of Christendom; and, therefore, the most popular truths in it I rejoice to know. But unfortunately there is one thing very unpopular-not the assenting to the tenets of the Apostles, but the living according to them—not the admiration of virtue, but the practice of it.

If I suspected that any one would interpret the word popular by the standard of any recent sect-such as the tenets of Episcopalianism, Methodism, Presbyterianism, Quakerism, &c. &c. or what identifies and distinguishes these, I would protest against such a limitation of the word. That the shibboleths of a party should be popular as the party, is saying nothing worthy of regard. All tenets are popular among all those who embrace them, though there be not a thousaud

persons.

But, perhaps, more is already said than the occasion demands, and more than enough to satisfy the most zealous or jealous of popularity or unpopularity—that neither the one nor the other can rationally or logically be regarded as a test of either the truth or error of any science or religion. A. C.

Wilmington, N. C. Nov. 21, 1838.

sorrows."

MORALITY OF CHRISTIANS-No. XII.

NEVER was oracle more true than that which saith, "They that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in perdition and destruction; for the love of money is the root of all evil; which, while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith and pierced themselves through with many Travellers in India tell us, that as they approach the temple of that modern Moloch-the idol Juggernaut-the road, for many miles distant, on either side, is strewed with the spoils of death. The bones of the pilgrims, bleaching on the plains, spread all around, indicate the multitudes that have immolated themselves at the shrine of this insatiate monster. As evident it is to those who wear the spectacles of Revelation, and look through the glasses of Law and Gospel upon society, that equal multitudes in this country immolate