Mormon Classics   |   Spalding Library   |   Bookshelf   |   Newspapers   |   History Vault

Lawrence Greatrake
To Alexander Campbell...

(Pittsburgh, 1824)

  • Pamphlet #1  (August, 1824)
  •     letter 1   letter 2   letter 3   letter 4   letter 5
        Addendum   To Baptists   To Unconverted

  • Pamphlet #2  (Nov./Dec. 1824)
  •     Introduction     Documents     Miniature Portrait
        To Religious Public     D. Philips' Letter

  • Transcriber's Comments

  • Campbell's recollections of 1823  |  Campbell's first reply (1824)  |  Walter Scott's 1824 pamphlet
    Campbell's 1825 reply  |  Greatrake's 1826 "Circular Letter"  |  Greatrake's 1826 Religious Notions
    1827 Harp of Zion  |  c. 1828 Dialogue First  |  1830 Parallel & Pioneer  |  1836 Lights & Shades







    A  Regular  Baptist.



    Eichbaum & Johnston.

    (note: title reconstructed from catalogs -- title page is missing)




    As you are acting largely, and writing voluminously, professedly for the public weal, it would be reflecting upon your intelligence, to suppose you ignorant of your being an object of curiosity, and your character and views, as a professed teacher of others, a subject of proportionate investigation on the part of that community for which you are ostensibly doing so much. Your own writings, as they sound the toscin of alarm against IMPOSTORS, and are designed to generate suspicions in our breasts of all that we have been wont to repose confidence in of human character, those writings, I say, must necessarily, in their full operations upon the minds of your readers, produce distrust in, and suspicion even of you, sir. Such, I must confess, has been, in a measure, their effect upon my own mind, that is, so far as to awaken my apprehensions that you are not altogether that champion for truth nor christian philanthropist for which you appear desirous to be estimated. Having weighed the sum of christian and ministerial character with which, in the course of my life I have had intercourse, in your balances, and found it almost universally wanting, I have since been making inquiry as to who and what you are, and what your credentials for the confidence you solicit as a reformer of abuses and orthodox teacher in the church of the Lord Jesus Christ? The field of reflection and inquiry which I have went over to come to some satisfactory opinion about you, I shall, in subsequent letters, with your permission, submit to your notice. In the examination thereof I indulge the hope that even you, sir, will admit, in my investigation of the interesting subject, I have both adopted and adhered to principles not less conformable to the gospel than they are natural -- principles, which the philosopher and christian have both admitted as constituting a legitimate standard of judgment in relation to all the character, the constituents of which are diffuse, as are those of yours. Those principles direct to a general investigation of life, "the whole area of action" for the obtainment of definite and correct ideas in reference to all equivocal character.   It will be to my regret, sir, that I shall not have it in my power to refer to that period of your life antecedent to your coming to these United States, and distinguishing the Baptist denomination by your connecting yourself thereto: nevertheless, I am of opinion that there will appear incident enough in the narration of your history since you have been in the Baptist connexion, to give some tolerable judgment of your intrinsic character. In the course of my remarks you will, most likely, see something of conjecture as to what was your character prior to your induction into the Baptist church: but those conjectures your intelligence will, no doubt, enable you to perceive are more nominal than real, being founded upon data which has always prevailed among mankind as furnishing authority for reference thereto in the investigation, as we said before, of equivocal character. However, I will not anticipate any of the features of my subject; they will appear to the best advantage in their regular connexion. I shall conclude this letter by observing, that as I have not anticipated the character of your principles, of your opinions, or of your motives in your voluminous addresses to the public, both oral and written, that I hope you will not impugn my veracity at present, when I assure you, that it is with the utmost reluctance, I enter upon the task which is now before me. In the performance of that task I have no other dictation than my own judgment -- no other excitement than the approbation of my own conscience; and no other wish than to elicit the truth as to your character in the relation you bear to the church of the Lord Jesus Christ; that church, being the object on which concentrates the most of my thoughts, the warmest of my affections, the strongest of my sollicitudes, and for which my heart's desires and prayers to God, do continually ascend. What evidence it is the privilege


    of mortality to give in this period of the world of love toward, and zeal for the prosperity of spiritual Israel, I profess in some good degree to have given. God forbid I should boast thereof -- I boast not, though gladly invite to any amount of investigation that may be deemed necessary to determine the truth or falsehood of the professions I have just made. I perceive the concluding paragraph is gratuitous. Ascribe it, if you please, to the caecocthis scribendi: if produced by that, you can, no doubt, feel proper sympathy for me under the infirmity, and exercise due forbearance. I simply add, that I profess to be, and sincerely am


    Having in my former lettergiven you to understand, that I shall only attempt to give an exhibit of your character from the most prominent incident of your history since you have been professedly a Bpatist, there will be, I conceive, several advantages accruing by bringing the same under a few general particulars. To them I shall give some degree of amplification, which though it may be deficient, will in the activity of your own mind, no doubt, be carried out to more just extent. I shall proceed then to notice, in the first place, the temper of hostility that you have elicited towards the Paedo-baptist church, (particularly the denomination from which you seceded) since you have been a professed Baptist. For the source of thos vehement hostility and its attendant declamation and vituperance, we do not pretend to furnish any specific cause; but intelligence and solid reflection, wherever its exists among the hearers or witnesses thereof, will be disposed to conclude, and I think with propriety, one of the two following cases to have originated it; namely, that you have received some personal pique, or experienced some severe disappointment, if not both, from the denomination or church to which you formerly belonged; or that you have a capacity for doing nothing else than rail, blended with vanity so insatiate as to seek gratification by this unenviable distinction. Charity forbids us to believe the worst of these two cases, and therefore we conclude the latter to be the cause. To be more plain, I would observe, that upon the supposition you had received the perosnal pique or disappointment from the church you have left, by which your resentments were inflamed, and your breast stirred to revenge, yet we must charitably conclude that the storm of your indignation would long ere this have been hushed to peace, unless it was known that you possessed the disposition of a Timour, Ghengis Khan, or of the Roman emperor who with his last expiring breath declared, "revenge to be sweet." FRom this you will perceive the propriety of my saying, that charity prompts to the conclusion, that your vanity, and not your revenge, goads you to unremitting declamation against your former church; that your attack is incessant because it is the only source from whence the impelling principle draws aliment. There are two other considerations which, no doubt, have a measure of influence upon you in the assault that you are carrying on against the Paedo-baptist church: the one is, that you conceive it gives you better security for the adhesion of the Baptist church to you, and again, it becomes in some, if not in all its detail, a source of revenue, both of which particulars we shall notice more fully hereafter. We shall fill up this sheet by exhibiting briefly the manner in which your vanity is gratified by the attack you are making upon the Paedo-baptist church particularly. And here we must notice some of the local features of the community in which you have laid out the field of your chivalrous adventures and "dauntless deeds." That community is in an infant state of political existence, as well as literary and religious research; it lays scattered and excluded from the multiple means of intelligence, which the other and more populous sections of the country enjoy, of that character and incident upon which is suspended the political and religious order or disorder of society.


    Being ignorant, in a great degree, of the Proteus of ambition, they are not likely to be sensible of his presence, until they feel themselves foiled in his meshes so far as to make the effort necessary for their extrication, so laborious and painful, as, perhaps, for a time to suspend all attempts thereto. The Baptist denomination constitute a considerable part of this community, and among them you have been pleased to cast your lot. And truly, thus far you may say, "that the lines have fallen to you in pleasant places, that you have a goodly heritage." It appears that a considerable part of the Baptist church in these western sections of the country have given the reins of dictation into your hands; that with agility of an arab (perhaps there are other points of resemblance between you and those descendants of Ishmael!) you have vaulted on their back, and are now exhibiting that agility in the management of your courser, and in the enjoyment of your self-complacency: while perhaps, your admiring Father cries out with one of old, "My Son, Macedon is too small for you." But take care you do not find your courser, in the end, more ungovernable than Bacephalus of your classical namesake. In the meantime, you resort to a mighty parade of your zeal for the Baptist denomination, by challenging to public disputation, any and every advocate for Paedo-baptism.  To the credit however, of the intelligence of the Paedo-baptists, there has appeared but two individuals among them, fool-hardy enough to enter the lists against you. In their entire destitution of any and every substantial weapon of defence, it must be condeded that they were men of ingenuity and address to maintain a seven days' combat with you. Having for the space of a week, on two different occasions, contended earnestly, viva voce, for baptism by immersion. The sum of your debates you have had put into the press, and sent forth to give just as much information as two apostles give us in less than so many verses, when they say, in reference to the mode, "we are buried with Christ by baptism," and of the subject, "if thou believest with all thy heart, thou may'st" be baptized. Hence, had your object been simply to establish the mind of the Baptist in the validity of baptism by immersion, or to make proselytes to that mode, nothing more was necessary than reference to the passages of Scripture we have quoted, or some other similar ones: for, if men will not hear Christ and his apostles respecting the truth, neither will they hear you. This I feel satisfied you have always been convinced of, from the incipient stage of your ministry, if not before. We must look then for some other motive, for your public disputations, and the publication of these controversies. The point, however, we have anticipated, and have suggested that vanity, and the prospect of gain, were the governing principles. Your auditors, no doubt, for the most part were astounded at your words of "learned length and thundering sound," and wondered how one "little head could contain all you know." The scene here alluded to, must have afforded a certain appetite of your mind, I mean your vanity, "a feast and a good day;" and we may say, I am afraid, that therein "you had much of your reward." Your debates being published, were received by a community, generally of small reading, as a mighty monumnet of your scholastic attainments, and erudite research. Whereas, in fact, you have only the merit of being a compiler, and embodying together the arguments and criticism of other men, of other times; a task which any school boy, with trifling attainments in language, would have done as well. But when appetite is sharp and strong, food, however coarse, is savoury! In addition to this accession of gratification to your vanity, you had a plum to gather from the publication of your debates; though it appears you have had the address to make the greater part of your friends believe that you were entirely disinterested in the publication of your debates; though it appears you have had the address to make the greater part of your friends believe that you were entirely disinterested in the publication thereof. Whether this be so, or not, shall be a subject of inquiry hereafter. For the present, we shall bring our second letter to a termination by informing you, sir, that even the more solid and pious of the Baptist church, and the intelligent part of the community generally, will regard your public debates, and publication thereof, as neither a mark of your personal piety, a benefit to


    the Baptist, nor an injury to the Paedo-baptist interests. On the contrary, it will be considered as an artful, and but too successful attempt to attract and fix the mind of the Baptist denomination upon subordinate principles of their faith, to the neglect of primary and essential articles, as well as to inflame and confirm the resentments of the Paedo-baptists against the former: add to which, it will be considered as an evidence that you have a capacity to do no "better service for Jerusalem," than to inflate the vanity of the one party, by indirectly exalting it to the skies; and justify the prejudices of the other by pouring out all manner of obloquy upon it; and that in so doing, you gain and secure your influence among the Baptists, who give you credit for zeal you do not possess, and reward you with their subscriptions, and their smiles. The subject will be more fully elucidated as you progress in the reading of the subsequent letters of


    Having noticed your opposition to the Paedo-baptist church, and intimated the probable causes thereof; in the further pursuit of your character I shall exhibit some of the impressions that your writings and your preaching, has had, and continues to make, upon the religious and irreligious part of the community to which they extend -- (perhaps I had better have said the professing and unprofessing parts of the community.) Good communications, you know, will have uniform and salutary effects, while evil communications will produce every versality of evil. The character of your own indigenous magnolia, is not better known, and its presence felt by exhilirating fragrance, than is the upias from its loathsome and poisonous effluvia: so the character of individuals, in your sphere particularly, is fairly ascertainable in all its essentail features, by coming to a knowledge of its effect upon those With whom it has estimation. That you have many admirers and adherents there is no doubt; that they have been sitting at your feet learning of you, and holding up to their view your character, as model for their imitation, is equally certain. -- Now, if the many of these individuals with whom I have been more or less acquainted, have not been most bungling scholars, they have been taught by you, and others more immediately your subordinates, a variety of sentiments, which, if not altogether new, is at least so in relation to their influence among the Baptist churches in America. And though it is in the chapter of probabilities that your sentiments may have been misunderstood, yet what is found as the views of your professed disciples, will necessarily be considered as the production of your labours, and correlative with your opinions. In the first place then, we notice, that among your adherents, pupils, or disciples, there are those who believe, and have publicly declared that a man by being baptized was made as holy as an angel! or which is the same thing, and to use the words literatim, that "he came out of the water as holy as an angel." -- Again it has been said by some of them, that "the Almighty had been tired of his own moral law for 1500 years, when he abrogated it by the New Testament dispensation, and that it is no longer a rule of conduct for the believer in our Lord Jesus Christ." -- Again, many of your adherents profess to scout the doctrine of the Holy Spirit's immediate influence in regeneration, as well as in all subsequent stages of Christian life, and to denominate the well known characteristic experience of spiritual Israel, a mere phantasy, or mass of mysticism. -- Again, they profess to believe that prayer is no duty, but rather an insult to the majesty of heaven. Such are some of the horrible brood of sentiments entertained and expressed by individuals who are recognised as under teachers to you, as well as others who are your joint hearers. Now, I do not exactly say, that these and other kindred doctrines are the offspring of your own teeming brain, but you are certainly and


    strongly suspected of having begotten them in their ductile pericraniums by certain secret intercourses; though under more public circumstances you have appeared rather to disown the progeny. If such sentiments, sir, are really the product of your system of theology, the results of your writings and your labours, you must have a mind circumstanced to enjoy them! and I can conceive your feelings of admiration and exultance, while you fondle with, and hang over them with a father's love and father's hopes, to be closely allied to the sensations of Milton's Satan, when for the first time he beheld his incestuous grandchildren, the progeny of sin and death, y'clept hell hounds. Whether, sir, you be, or be not, the teacher of such doctrines, is of little consequence, as long as they have the authority of your name. Of such sentiments, at least some of them, I am free to say, that they exceed the whole sum of blasphemies that ever I met with in the character of men or devils, and the propagators thereof ought to be known and hung upon the gibbets of public infamy.   But leaving every thing that cannot absolutely be identified as part of your opinions, speculations, and teachings, we will proceed to notice what is as tangible thereof as the leaves of your "Christian Baptist." You are then, in the first place, endeavouring to create universal distrust of the ministry, in all denominations, bating an occasional qualification in the admission of an individual now and then, as an exception to the degraded character you give of the rest. Those individuals that are your exceptions may be calculated upon as those of whom you expect to make partizans in your own scheme of operations; hence the occasional allusion to them in different and well timed expressions of panegyrick, becomes a stroke of policy, and not a feeling of charity. But for what, sir, is this almost universal attack upon the character of ministers made? the end in view is obvious; and that end is, that you may dissolve, if possible, existing connexions between pastors and people, and thus effect the first step towards making the latter your followers, or the proselytes to your system of theology, under the direction of your agents! and in thus doing, consummate the measure of your fame by becoming the acknowledged head of some new, though yet nameless sect. That you really believe, sir, what you intimate and assert of the dishonesty and selfishness of ministers, I do not doubt: the reason is, that you never had the necessary mental perception to see the real and spiritual pastors and servants of the church of Christ, and having met with many that were the reverse, and the constituents of whose character you could by natural affinity analyze, you have suspected the whole to be of the same base material. -- The subject we shall notice more fully hereafter. This spirit of distrust we know you are labouring to diffuse in every direction, and while it is evidently to the end, and for the object we have suggested; you have the effrontery to pass it off as a labour of love, an expression of disinterested zeal for the church of Christ. -- Again, we know that you propagate the doctrine of the church's independency, so far as to exclude all reference to articles of faith, and principles of order upon which they have been founded, (I am now speaking of the Baptist church) this your writings are uniformly understood to aim at. And really, sir, your attempt to disseminate this sort of sentiment, in the Baptist church in particular, demonstrates your very great attainment in impudence, or that you are extremely ignorant of the constituents of social unity and order, as I shall hereafter endeavour to exhibit. Can you suppose that any reflecting intelligent member of the Baptist church, will ever conceive favourably of that man, or have confidence in the purity of his motives, who attempts to destroy the very foundation upon which the denomination has risen to such imposing magnitude, in such fair proportions, and with such solidity? indeed, sir, the attempt on your part, or that of any other person, bears testimony of a radical defect in understanding, and can only leave you, (in the exercise of all possible charity) the character of the knight of La Mancha, or the phrenzied Swede. Do you not reflect that common sense will make the inquiry as to what faith and order, and under what human instrumentality the denomination of which you are now a


    member, has germinated, and grew to its present wide spreading dimensions? and are you not apprehensive that you will be considered as an officious intermeddler in the affairs of, or an empiric, offering your nostrums to, a body of whose health or disease, you have no judgment to exercise! can you be so superlatively vain as to conclude that that faith which has diffused vigorous spiritual life through the souls of tens of thousands, and even millions, within this 200 years past, and those principles of government, which has made them singularly united as prosperous, as churches, are to be overthrown by your puny arm? or to be abandoned, because you declaim against them? or to be exchanged for a system of your devising? a system without beginning, middle, or end; a chaotic mass of vain speculation, which neither yourself nor all your adherents have been able to give body, form or colour to! No, sir, no sensible and spiritual Baptist, will ever agree to surrender the faith and the order of the denomination into your hands, and give up himself to the guidance of your Will-o'-the-wisp theology. You are and have been for some years past, laboriously working upon a mere filament of that body; remote, and in a great degree unprotected, and endeavouring to separate it therefrom. But all that you have succeeded in doing has been to remove some part of an excresence, which perhaps, you had previously been one of the causes of producing: in doing that, however, you have necessarily vexed and tormented, to a certain degree, the whole body; and laid the part immediately subject to your operations under a temporary derangement. Not that it was your intention to remove the exceresence, no more than by the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Jews designed to make an end of sin -- on the contrary, you must have supposed that the filament of the body for which you have been labouring, as the nucleus of a new sect, was so amalgamated to the extraneous matter, which you and others had attached to it, that there was no danger of a separation. In this, however, you are deceived, and you are likely to have nothing for your pains, but the adhesion to you of such materials as would inevitably generate spiritual disease in every church where it existed. -- "Thus far thou shalt go and no farther:" to this end you may expect the great Shepherd and Bishop of the church to use you and your fraternity, like as the Babylonian idolatries were overrulled by God, for turning the Israelites therefrom.

    I shall here suspend my remarks for a moment, that you may have time to read, and mark, if not inwardly digest, what has been written for your consideration and your correction, by


    In my last I noticed some of the moral impressions made upon the minds of that part of the community which are to be considered, more immediately, your disciples. Having adverted to certain doctrines held by them, as well as to their general sentiments respecting church order and government, and in recognition thereof seen, what may be fairly considered as additional features of your own character: I shall proceed to raise some other characteristics of the same fraternity. For brevity and distinctness sake, I will fix your attention upon a solitary church, as a specimen of the whole, and as sufficient to afford you, a tolerably correct estimate of the general results of your labours. In this church there are two Pastors, or Elders, or Teachers, as you please: one of them occupies an entire sabbath, in expounding a certain part of the scripture to his flock, who are immensely delighted and edified, by the luminous, as they think, discourse; and run to and fro through their respective neighbourhoods to proclaim the erudition and the knowledge of their semi-pastor who last addressed them -- while he hies away to his worthy associate and fellow labourer, to tell him how his audience had been astonished at his learning, delighted with his commentaries, ravished with his eloquence, and


    established in their faith. He then proceeds to give his coadjutor a summary of all he had said in the course of the lecture, which is no sooner communicated to the former, then he very gravely tells him, that the whole of his views upon the subject are entirely different from his; and proceeds to give an exhibit of what he conceives to be the legitimate, and true meaning of the subject. Our lecturer no sooner hears the sentiments of his dear help-mate, than in true philosophical mood of indifference, he observes, well, brother A. if what you say be true, I must have instructed the people erroneously, but never mind, the people are pleased with what I said and I am pleased too; and as we, only, are interested in the case, I do not see that there is any occasion to take further notice of it. Besides, brother A. your charity ought to cover all such infirmities: add to which, you know not how soon you may stand in need of equal forbearance. And sure enough, sir, this intimation of brother A. turned out in the end to be a literal prediction; for it was not long before Elder A. had occasion to acknowledge, that he had found himself to have been in something of an error for a long time; having disbelieved in the influences of the Holy Ghost upon the human mind, subsequent to the apostle's days; but that now he thought it was a New Testament doctrine -- the word said so. And though he might not teach it, for fear of collision with his amiable brother, and out of reciprocal charity; yet he would believe in the doctrine, to the end I suppose, that his faith might be verbatim et literatem, as was that of the Jews of old, who considered themselves orthodox believers if they knew the number of words in the Pentateuch, and kept them stored up in their head; no matter who was occupant of the heart, one, or one legion of devils.
    But to proceed with our sketch of the character we have noticed -- leaving their personal difference in sentiment, let us follow them to the field of their public, social, and private ministerial exercises. Behold one of them going forth to the margin of the river, where a number of raftmen and others are engaged in their avocations: these are unregenerate, impenitent, perishing sinners, as you and I, sir, are by nature. To a posse of these characters, your Elder directs his way, and commences an harangue, by telling them, "that they are not under the law; that the ten commandments are abrogated, as well as the ceremonies of the Old Testament dispensation; that the world is full of priestcraft; that preachers of the gospel, as they call themselves, are only preaching for money; that himself, and the system with which he revolves round his splendid centre, is the true light." With a hundred other things of the same sort, and a thousand other, and different sayings, quite as irrelevant to the gospel. After having finished his address, his auditors separate from him, some saying, that he is a noble fellow, that he has extracted from their conscience, something like fragments of the law, that had been there all their lives, like thorns, when they devised, or perpetrated, what they had been taught were crimes. Others declare him to be truly an antinomian -- others understand him to denounce the doctrine of the spirit's influence, and to treat it as an idle notion -- others understand him as absolutely calling in question the divinity of Jesus Christ -- and a socinian present cries out, my brother -- while others believe, that in this single address, he has advocated, and rebutted all, and every one of these sentiments; together with many more. Are you not delighted, sir, with the clearness of this man's perceptions -- the intelligence of his mind -- the piety of his doctrines -- the solidity of his system altogether; when the exhibition thereof, produces no more opposition of views among his hearers, than just -- antipodes. Paul could rejoice that he was a father to Timothy -- But O! how superlative must be your joy to be the father of so many children as you are, of whom the above character is a specimen; how enviable must be the lot of your disciples to have provision made for their guidance, of such able leaders, and intelligent instructors. "Treading the crude consistence, half on foot, half flying -- o'er bog, or steep, through strait, rough, dense or rare; they swim, or sink, or wade, or creep, or fly." While, indeed, the hubbub of their jaring


    S. Rigdon with cigar  ( later image, not in 1824 pamphlet )

    notions and sentiments, carries forward the resemblance between their situation and that of the celebrated personage, to whom the above extract is originally applied, when he was groping his way through the chaos and old night. We will follow the same Elder of yours to the exercises of social worship. See him recumbent upon some three or four chairs, with his segar in his mouth; disposing of its smoke with one respiration, and going on by breaks, with a lecture, on some part of divine truth, with another -- or, standing up at the fire, mingling the fumes of his tobacco pipe, with a breath of prayer and praise issuing from the mouth of his professed brethren, while engaged in their devotions! but we will stop; nor wound any more the religious sensibilities of the children of God, by a further exhibit of the flagrant abominations, and blasphemous irreverence towards "him whom their soul loveth." Leaving your Elders, sir, we come to notice, briefly, some of the features of the character belonging to those we may call your lay-men; and well do we find established, in refering to this part of the subject, the prophet's adage, "like priest, like people;" the most of whom, connected with you, shew, conspicuously, that vanity rules in and over them. They are not so politic as you, sir; they cannot, indeed, put any restraint upon their ruling passion; but, under its influence, many of them, "play such fantastic tricks before high heaven," as, if not to make angels weep, at least to make devils laugh, and fill with sorrow the breast of every real christian; particularly those of the Baptist denomination, upon whom, their character and conduct brings the reproach of the wicked, the contempt of the wise, and pity of the good.  As two or three specimens of the whole fraternity, we remark -- here is a man who has borne the name, and made the profession of almost every sect in Christendom -- say, Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist, Universalist, Socinian: at last he comes to your society, professing to be a convert to your theology, (though that's all a gratuitous assertion, for mortal ken never yet discerned what it is) he says that he will join your fraternity, and at his induction deliver an address upon baptism. All this being acceded to, the time arrives when he is to be baptized: and at the water he delivers an harangue of five hours in length, or in other words, gives a recitation of what you have compiled, and published upon that ordinance, from the writings of other men. And to crown the inconsistency of the whole, you, sir, the would be star of the west; you, become his amanuensis, and the pitiful caterer to this vain man's vanity, by virtually professing, to be taking down notes of something new upon the subject, from what this speckled disciple of yours is saying: whereas, in fact, he is advancing nothing but what is as old as his great-grandfather. Now, sir, think you, that if this man had been a poor, humble, broken hearted sinner, as he ought to have been before he was baptized, that he would have had any disposition to obtrude himself upon the notice of men at such a time? particularly, after having exhibited such an unsettled mind through a period of many years, as he did, and such a fitful scene of profession and reprofession. Or sir, if you had been a regenerated man yourself, and a fit person to be a minister of the gospel, do you think that your thoughts, and your gratification, would have been in, or your time and labour devoted to, making a record of what this poor deluded man said about the mode of baptism? no, sir, you would not; but instead of this, your soul would have burned within you to make, if possible, the conversion of this man, had he been converted, the means, under the Holy Ghost, of making your auditors, or the spectators, humble penitents towards God, and spiritual believers in Christ Jesus -- and not merely proselytes to baptism. Instead of this, what has been done? the disciple has had his vanity gratified, by being the orator of the day; and rising (like an ignis fatuus from the bog) for a few moments, a little above the level to which nature designed him in the community, to sink again to the same place, confirmed in a delusion, perhaps, that shall only be dissipated in hell: (I mean by delusion, that baptism is salvation.) The vanity of the society to which he has connected himself, is gratified in being numerically enlarged; and your vanity, sir, was


    gratified, in being recognized, as the mighty agent by which this Jack-o'-the-lantern professor was caught, and safely secured within the pale of your society. Here then, is an expression of the vanity of your society; and the same is visible in nearly all your followers. If they read the Scriptures, it is only to get some additional notions about them, to the end, that they may gratify their pride and their vanity in the exhibition of these speculations. Their tongues are ever going like the pendulum of a clock, and with as much noise, almost, as the machinery of a steam engine; indeed, it is the fullest trial of the saint's patience to listen to them; and that is the best thing that results from their acquirements. Some of them say, they have been regenerated -- some of them say, there is no regeneration -- some of them admit, that part of their brethren deny the spirit's influence in any stage of the christian's life, but that they believe it, though they consider disbelief as nothing essentially defective in faith -- some of them say, that they would never have fellowship with teacher or laymen in their body, who denied the spirit's influence, and that none of their brethren do it; while others maintain, that the word is the spirit, and the spirit is the word, and that it is no matter whether there is any spirit or no:  meditation, social, family and closet prayer, are, for the most part, esteemed a matter of foolishness with them. I have, sir, you will perceive, made some exceptions among those who are your followers, from the character I have been briefly exhibiting of them. Deeply do I regret that I have to make such exceptions; I would that all who follow you were what I most solemnly believe, and feel well assured the greater part are, unregenerate persons: but I feel afraid, that there are gracious souls who have been led away after you, as Barnabas was by the dissemulation of false teachers in former times; they are given up, perhaps, to be buffeted by you, as Peter was by satan, to the end, that they may learn similar lessons to what he did. For them I feel, sir; and had it not been for them I should have never addressed a line to you, or thought more about you than any other unregenerated man; you are filling their eyes with chaff, feeding them with husks, and quenching their thirst with waters fouled to the most abominable stench. But I shall curb the feelings of my soul, until I come to address them in connexion with these letters to you; to spread out my feelings for them to you, would only be unintelligible jargon in your estimation. Having now given as much of an exhibit of the moral impressions, which your writings and your teachings, make upon the community that give heed thereto, as I deem necessary at present, I shall recapitulate that, together with the previous investigation of your character, in my next and concluding letter, in which you will have brought to a point the estimation in which you are held by


    In recurrence to what I have written, you will perceive, I mean to be understood, as saying, that you never gave the Baptist denomination any evidence whatever, that your becoming professedly a Baptist yourself was the "answer of a good conscience;" on the contrary, there is much reason to believe, that you left the Paedo-baptist ranks, and joined our denomination, from sinister and selfish motives. The whole series of your disposition and conduct toward that body, since you left them, must forcibly impress the mind of every close observer of human character, with the conviction, that mingled vanity and rage drive you on in your assault thereof. This conviction is deepened, when we take into notice, (and what is solemnly true) that no Paedo-baptist church, possessing any thing of the power of Godliness, could ever derive any edification, or satisfaction under your ministry, though you were to be as laborious as Luther. This is a sentiment, in which every regenerated, spiritual man under the heavens, I know, will unite with me. Whatever ability they may concede


    to you, as a teacher of ecclesiastical history, or Biblical critic, they will all unite in saying, that however much you may amuse and instruct the head, you have no access to the believers' heart. You know not any thing of the history of that, from the dawn of regeneration, to the completion of its salvation in the beatific vision. Think, sir, on that! ten thousand thousand persons of different denominations of christians, and many of them in every respect your superiors in natural gifts, would, if they knew you, declare simultaneously, that you know nothing about the "Heavenly Gift." Yes, the best spirits in even the denomination to which you now belong, consider you still dead in trespasses and sins, yea, they know it. As a man of some sense, such a circumstance, if true, must have a solemn impression upon your mind, however much you may appear to hector above all human opinions. The second particular to which we recur is, the subject of your public disputations and writings: in all of which, every intelligent man, and humble disciple of the meek and lowly Jesus, will perceive that you sacrifice to the idol self; and all the character that we challenged, as witness to your unregeneracy, will unite in declaring, that your professed zeal for one denomination is without knowledge, and your hostility to the other but beating the air; that both combined, demonstrate that you are radically ignorant of what are the essential constituents of every christian church. Were you not ignorant of these things, sir, you would never dare to level such unqualified anathema against the Paedo-baptist churches, particularly against that denomination from which you seceded. The most common placed mental integrity, would constrain you to neutralise the obloquy that you have poured upon it. Yea, policy would have prompted you to have done it -- for we Baptists, generally, are not so bigoted and ignorant, as not to know, and acknowledge to the praise of sovereign grace, that there are, among the Paedo-baptist churches, tens of thousands of blood-bought, heaven-born, heaven-bound souls: with them, in all the essential relationship of the gospel, we have refreshing fellowship; with them, grow up in essential faith; with them, twin in love, until we shall be forever one visibly and invisibly, on the glorious head. Yes, and from the ministry of many of them, we Baptists receive the word of divine truth in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, again and again. We know, and feel assured, that they are pastors after God's own heart, and made overseers of the flock of Christ by the Holy Ghost.   I say, we Baptists, in general, know and feel assured, that there are many, even of the Paedo-baptist ministers, that bear this interesting relationship to us: and you may rest assured, that you might as well attempt to shake the foundations of the earth, as our confidence in them. We dare not call that common or unclean, which the living God has made clean, "by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" such character, let me tell you, sir, will always be transcendently higher in our estimation, as regenerated spiritual Baptists, though they should not observe one ordinance of the New Testament, than that like yours, though you had a "throat of brass, and adamantine lungs," worn out in contending for our ordinances, which we know to be truly gospel ones. I have mentioned sober facts, sir -- you may dispose of them as you please. The third particular to which we refer, of what has been addressed to you, is the effect that your controversies have upon the Baptist denomination generally; and that is, they draw off their attention from fundamental principles of Godliness, to that which, abstractly considered, can never give them estimation in the sight of God, or man. And little do you know of human nature, in its unregenerate or regenerate state, or you would never dare to engross the attention of mankind so much upon the subject of an ordinance: indeed, were you truly an evangelical minister of the gospel, you could not do it. But as we have said, your evident ignorance of every spiritual feature of the church of Christ, must in a measure, plead your apology for spending all your time in making the door of the house creak. Nevertheless, you must admit, that it is possible the noise may be productive of disturbance, to even your own family at times; and that they must, one and all, feel mortified to perceive it


    is publicly noticed, that one of their household can do nothing else. If you, sir, should succeed in proselyting four-fifths of the Paedo-baptist denomination to the Baptist order, what would be the consequence? why, that our denomination would become incrusted with that much more wood, hay and stubble! for I take upon myself to say, that until God and the Holy Ghost makes you a different, and a new creature, that no truly spiritual Paedo-baptist would ever cast in his lot among a people, of whose character he was to judge by that of yours: no, not if he was never to have connexion to the church militant. So then, all we can calculate upon of proselytism is, of those from whom we had far better be separated. On the other hand, many alas! very many of the Baptists, it is to be feared, are, under your auspices, only solicitous to be known by a name, not by a life. If the spirits of departed saints can take cognizance of what transpires here on earth, it appears almost impossible, that those devoted, holy, and laborious servants of the cross, who in sweat, in tears, and groans, and even blood, laid the foundation, under God the Holy Ghost, of the Baptist church in this hemisphere; I say, one would suppose it almost impossible for them to be calm spectators of such desolation, as you are bringing in upon that spiritual vineyard for which they were spent to the last pulsation of their lives. But an attempt to make application of sentiment to you, sir, I am afraid, would be as unavailing as to extract sunbeams from cucumbers. The fact I wish to fix upon your attention is, that you are destroying much of the power and life of religion, in the Baptist denomination, by fixing their attention upon and engrossing their minds with subordinate articles of their faith; and that is one of the results of all your debates, writings and orations. Literally, then, you may say, that your "zeal will eat them up."
    The next particular that we shall recapitulate of our previous remark is, that your vanity is gratified, and your pecuniary interest advanced by the whole circle of your doings, and that these combined are the grand controling principles from which you act. You pass for a man of vast comprehension of mind, and great attainments of knowledge; upon the same ground that what we call a common stone, is considered a wonder in some of the southern sections of the country, and gains the appellation of a rock, or that Gulliver passed for a giant among the Lilliputians. But, sir, whatever may be the amount of your knowledge, which I venture to say is nothing extraordinary, your judgment is certainly miserably defective, or you would never have supposed, that your intrinsic character could remain hid from the eye of men of experience, under the flimsy veil of your sectarian zeal; and that they would not perceive the "Caesar aut Nihil" was your motto. While men of sense will readily discern the ambition of your projects, those of the most common placed ability, in business calculation, will be enabled to furnish themselves with conclusive testimony, that by the publication of your Debates on baptism, and your mere sounding "Christian Baptist," you wheedle the Baptists, and others of the community, out of as much money as would cover the salary of nine out of ten, at least, of the Baptist ministers.
    I shall here enter into a brief calculation of the pecuniary advantages resulting to you from your publications. In the first place then, we have your first Debate upon Baptism, in a volume of about 200 pages. Of this book, I should say that its publication did not stand you more than 37½ cents per volume. This I say with the fullest conviction that it is a fact, unless you choose to pay extra prices for the work, which is not likely to have been the case. As a particular evidence for the correctness of the foregoing assertion, I may observe, that about the same time you published your first Debate on Baptism, I was interested in the publication of a book, altogether superior in materials to yours, of 360 pages, and that did but cost 45 cents per volume; add to this, my book was published in a part of the country, where the price of labour and material for making up a book is 33 1/3 per cent. more than it is in Ohio, where you published your first Debate -- For the said first debate you charged 75 cents


    In the publication of your second Debate, I take it upon me to say that you did, or that you could have published it at an expense not exceeding 50 cents per volume: and for that your price to your friends is #1.25 The number of copies that you had printed of the first was 2000, and you sold the copy-right for 500 dollars. I will suppose that the whole of both debates will be sold by the middle of the year eighteen hundred and twenty-five. From this data we shall have the following exhibit to give of the case --

          "Dr.                             Publication of Debate on Baptism.                             Cr.
    “To 2000 copies of Debate with Mr. Walker, at 37 1/2 cents per copy,        750  00
    “To 6500 copies of Debate with Mr. M'Calla, at 50 cents per copy,            3250  00
    To incidental expences of distributing said Debate, including contingent losses,
    say 12 1/2 cents per volume,                                     .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . 1062  50
    “To balance, .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .   4862  50
                                                                                                                                  $9925  00
    "By 2000 copies of Debate with Mr. Walker, at 75 cents per copy,            1500  00
    “By sales of 6500 copies of Debate with M’Calla, at $1.25 per copy,         8125  00
    “By sale of copy right of Debate with Mr. Walker,       .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  300 00
                                                                                                                                 $9925  00
    “By balance, .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  .  . $4862  50”

    Now, sir, it appears that you have made the sum of 5000 dollars, within a fraction, clear profit, when your books are disposed of; this we suppose will be done by the middle of the ensuing year, at which time there will have been five years elapsed since the debate with Mr. Walker. This will show, that you have been writing and preaching and debating upon the ordinance of Baptism, (a scrap of our faith,) without any inducement whatever, but your zeal for the Baptists and regard for the truth, excepting, the mere sum of 1000 dollars per annum; which in the western country, where you live, is equal to 2000 dollars in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, or Baltimore! Where did this money come from? did it not come principally from the Baptists? it did, nor have they had any better value for it than you suppose them to receive by sending their dollars to convert the Laplander or the Hindoos. So much, sir, by way of redeeming our pledge, to prove that you are not the disinterested champion for the truth that you profess to be -- that your eye sometimes is directed to the glittering clifts of Potosi. It is perfectly natural, sir, that you should attempt to persuade every body, that you are governed by no sordid motives in any thing that you do: but really, sir, it is "passing strange" that men should be so credulous as to believe you, with such facts staring them in the face; it shows that they are prone to "swallow without pause or choice, the total grist unsifted, husks and all," so that it is sweetened with a little adulation, of their civic, their moral, their intellectual worth. We shall say nothing at present about your "Christian Baptist," as being a source of revenue to you; if you have, however, even a thousand subscribers, for that, I will undertake to prove, that you clear 300 dollars by it per annum; and even that sum is more than nine out of ten of the Baptist ministers of these western states get per annum; perhaps I might be safe in saying, that it is twice as much as they receive. What! envy them a paltry $150, when you get 100 to 1300 dollars -- what, deem them overpaid by 150 dollars, who preach all the glorious truths of the gospel, and who labour incessantly to inspire spiritual life and universal holiness into the church, when you receive 10 to $1300 for mere disquisition upon an outward ordinance! or things allied to it! Nor does it escape observation, that you are giving evidence, that you consider the present stage of your operations but the mere seed time in pecuniary results, that you calculate, e'er long, on throwing a considerable part of the religious community around you into such a state of anarchy, as to make any kind of order


    that you may dictate desirable. In such an event you would know, no doubt, how to fix your price for your interference. You have, no doubt, a full account of all costs. Here let me say, sir, that while from my soul I abhor all extravagance, luxury, and covetousness in the ministers of the gospel as much as you, or any other man can, on the other hand I must say, that the manner in which you declaim against all pecuniary compensation to the ministers of the gospel, proves, in itself, without referring to many other evidences that exist, that you are absolutely ignorant of the essential relationship subsisting between the pastor after God's own heart, and the flock of the Lord Jesus Christ, and as a man, destitute of the spirit of the living God, who alone can give adaptation to the office of the ministry; or indeed, make one jot or tittle of efficient application of the Salvation of Christ to the human soul; as such a man it would be a futile attempt on my part, to furnish your mind with any just perceptions on that subject. Till God the Holy Ghost does it, the subject in any and every form of language, would appear but foolishness in your eyes. All this remark, a spiritual people and a spiritual minister, know to be true, to whatever denomination they may belong; and you may as soon expect to allure the living to the embrace of a putrescent carcass, as to draw the "Israelite indeed," the truly lively and devotional believer, from the pastor of his choice, to such a character as you are among ministers.
    The next thing we shall refer to of our remarks, is, the effort you are making to render obsolete all forms of faith and church order. In this attempt of yours we must positively consider you a fool, or designing to disorganize, and overthrow all social compact in the religious community. We have already expressed our conviction, that it results from your design to produce anarchy; that in the end you may dictate what shall be faith and order, and your own terms for which that shall be done. We may pause, to decide whether there should be pity or indignation felt toward you. Certainly you ought not to calculate upon offering such an insult to the understanding of sensible men in the Baptist denomination, as is found in your proposition to lay aside their faith and order, without expecting their contempt of their frowns; this circumstance itself demonstrates to every reflecting mind, that you are no Baptist; only after the will of the flesh! no, nor ever have been.
    The next feature of the subject that we have brought to your view, which we shall retouch is, the general character of your adherents, or disciples, (teachers and pupils;) in view of which, are you not rather abashed at the motley group! teachers advancing sentiments and doctrines one day, that they gainsay another -- acknowledging that they had been for years instructing others in the gospel of Christ, while disbelieving the very fundamentals of it themselves; and even in the concession of their ignorance themselves in the past, giving no jot or tittle of evidence, that they even now believe in, or feel the truths they have been ignorant of. Teachers, of whose views no definite opinion can be formed, by learned or unlearned; whose hearers say, alternately, that they are Antinomians, Sandeminians, or Socinians, and in the aggregate, that they cannot tell what they say, or know whereof they affirm: while their immediate adherents say, away with all forms of faith and order; we will be freemen; we will read and think, and judge for ourselves -- our Elder thinks one thing, we another -- we had such and such views yesterday -- to-day we have different ones -- and tomorrow we calculate upon having opinions at variance with all we have heretofore entertained: this they call the liberty of the gospel -- a mark of mental independence -- the evidence of their growing in the knowledge of the Scriptures. They profess to feel great satisfaction in reading the Bible, to have much peace and joy in their attainments of knowledge. Now, the truth is, that in every stage of their experience, the pride of their minds, the vanity of their hearts, being gratified, is the sole cause of their satisfaction. Indeed, the whole of your fraternity, from the first to last, including yourself, sir, are flatterers of each other -- they say, that there is no teacher like you -- you respond, there


    is no people so well instructed and intelligent as them. You recollect, I suppose, who "obtained a kingdom by flatteries." Bear in mind also, that it is written upon good authority, "he who speaketh flattery to his friends, even the eyes of his children shall fail" -- and that the characteristic of an evangelical minister is, "not to use flattering words;" for, that is to be considered, and set down, as "a cloak of covetousness" after fame or emolument, or both. Now, it is not my wish to be understood as disapproving of all possible devotedness to the perusal of the Scriptures: on the contrary, I think your fraternity worthy of imitation in this particular; but I wish to be understood, as saying, that, generally, they read for no other object, and no other end, than to grow wise in their own conceit: and you know it is written, "that there is more hope of fools," than such characters. You will, I persuade myself, look over the address of the Baptist churches appended to these letters; in that you will see some of the contrast which I conceive the real and the spiritual believer bears to the characters of your adherents. For the present I relieve your attention, with simply observing, that it was not for your sake that I have made a recapitulation of my former remarks in this last letter, but for the sake of those whose minds may not be so well disciplined in recollection, as yours.
    N. B. I shall trouble you with a few lines more, rather than swell the last letter to greater dimensions.


    In view of what I have exhibited of your character, from the fairest ground of conjecture, and from the face of your doings, since you have been a professed Baptist, together, with the notification, that the same estimate is formed of you by far the greatest, if not all the really spiritual and intelligent part of the Baptists that have knowledge of you; from these circumstances combined, I say, one might hope, that you will fall a little from the loftiness of your self-complacency. Perhaps, in the reminiscences which the consideration of the subject will produce, the language of the prophet may come up to your mind, where he says, "Thy terribleness hath deceived thee, and the pride of thy heart, O thou that dwellest in the clefts of the rock, that holdest the height of the hill; though thou shouldest make thy nest as high as the eagle, I will bring thee down from thence, saith the Lord." Confident that you have an undue and deleterious influence upon the Baptist church, I would wish to see it destroyed. To this end I am now writing to you; believing that nothing is necessary to the accomplishment of the object, but to rouse the minds of the Baptists around you to an investigation of your character, similar to that which I have given an outline of -- "the death of reflection, is the birth of all wo;" and when churches sleep, the enemy will sow tares. Hence, good will to the Baptist cause, and not ill will to you, sir, moves me to address these remarks to you for the public eye. I am fully persuaded, that you are every day sinking the character of the Baptist church in these western states, both in the estimation of the truly religious and irreligious. All you do, all you say, together with your satellites, is fathered upon the regular Baptist church -- doctrines however horrible -- practices however corrupt -- observances however foolish -- inconsistencies however numerous -- and speculation however absurd, incongruous and versatile, that prevail in your fraternity, are all set down to the account of the Baptist denomination. Does not the blush crimson and burn your cheek, sir, when you see the mental dishonesty, the moral turpitude that is implied in the fact of your having threw around you the habiliments of a Baptist profession, to the end, that you might, unsuspectedly, propagate sentiments and doctrines directly at variance with, and disgraceful to the Baptist church! but "vengeance belongs to God." The Lord rebuke thee in the chambers of


    your own conscience; then you will be the first to acknowledge, that of such character, and such conduct it may be truly said, "O full of all subtlety, thou child of the devil, will thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord." I assure you, that I entertain no idea of moral superiority over and above you by nature; that in an unregenerated state, I know myself capable of practising all the trick and manoeuvre that you have been practising, to get a name in the world; that the pride of the human heart in its native language, is in accordance with Satan's, when he says, "better to reign in hell than serve in heaven." The principle that appears chiefly to govern you, is, what the world in its severest judgment, calls "the infirmity of a noble spirit;" but then, you must not be surprised if others should feel somewhat indignant while suffering under the devastating freaks of that "noble spirit;" or, if they raise a warning voice to their neighbours of its presence, particularly when it comes dressed in long and flowing Phylacteries, with disinterested zeal -- universal reformation -- absolute equality -- and consummate perfection written thereon.
    You are, sir, a citizen of America; and as such, free to worship God after the dictates of your own conscience, to profess to believe, or not to believe, in any, or every part of the Bible -- to advance whatever doctrines you please in the community, unless in hostility to the known laws of the land. But you are not at liberty, sir, to profess a connexion with any religious denomination when you are advancing doctrines diametrically opposite to theirs. What head of a religious family is there in the community, but would feel indignant, were you to enter his house, and having gained some general ideas of his family affairs, go forth into the world, and make use of that information as an evidence, that you were his son, or otherwise nearly related to him! and how would his indignation be increased if he found, that you were passing yourself off as his son, while living in the practice of theatrical buffooneries, or any other kind of habits at variance with that respectability of himself and family, which you were refering to, and making use of, to command attention from, and influence with others! certainly, every man would conceive you deserving of rebuke for taking such unjustifiable liberties with his good name: indeed, it would be fairly considered as the worst species of robbery -- and can similar conduct be more authorised because it is practised on a large body? certainly not -- and here is the particular point on which I found all my reason for considering you deserving of public exposure. Come forth, sir, to our view, what you really are! but not as a genuine Baptist -- for you now are, and have been trying to overthrow the faith, the order, and the ministry of that for years past. Come out then, sir, in your real character, and with your real sentiments -- tell us candidly, that you do not believe in what we emphatically denominate regeneration, or in the Spirit's special influences at all -- tell us that you consider a man eligible to baptism without one word of inquiry as to what God has done for his soul, and upon his bare declaration that he believes -- tell us, that you do not believe the moral law of God to be a rule of life for the believer! -- tell us, that you do not believe that preaching the gospel since the completion of New Testament revelation has the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ -- tell us that you have no fellowship with any forms of faith or church discipline -- tell us, that you have no confidence in the exercise of prayer, as a means of grace, or estimation of it, as a believer's privilege: and that in proof thereof, you have been entirely neglectful of it even in your own family for years past -- tell us these things openly, declare them explicitly, and merit the name of a candid man. You are at full liberty, and under positive obligation to do so. You will then give the public a reasonable pledge, that you are governed by no sinister, no improper motives. The Baptist denomination will then be answerable for the palpable inconsistency of holding connexion with a man whose sentiments are in direct opposition to that faith and order which they hold up to public view, as the foundation of their spiritual hope, and bond of their visible existence. Had you done this, sir, at a proper time, no one would have


    had any cause to reproach you; and multitudes who now shun you as a deceiver, would have been pleased to have met with you upon principles of ordinary intercourse, and interchanged the feelings of social amity -- among whom, sir, I assure you with the utmost sincerity and truth, I may mention myself; believing as I do, that as a natural man, you have a good share of those attractions of mind and manners, which biguile the tedium of life, and smooth its rugged path. Before I close, indulge me with permission to repeat, that my own judgment dictates solely and wholly, in this address to you: that if my wretched heart does not deceive me, I have had the best motives in endeavouring to pourtray your character, as being opposite to what you profess it to be, under the name of a Baptist! Upon a review of what I have written, I do not think any injustice is done to the subject. I am sensible, however, that infirmities will ever characterize me in all I attempt to do while in the flesh; and that iniquity belongs to my most holy things. I have endeavoured to write with death, eternity and judgment before my eyes; and to keep up an earnest desire and prayer in my soul, that I might not unnecessarily inflict any wound upon your feelings, or that of any other person. You are, sir, and all whom I have adverted to as like you, in these letters, my fellow man, fellow immortal, and fellow sinner. If you and they are under the fatal mistake, and in the awful darkness that I believe you to be, the foregoing address may be made use of, by that God who delights to make use of the weakest things to accomplish the greatest of purposes, to your essential benefit; as I hope he will to the benefit of his people in the Baptist church, where your influence is felt. At all events, I feel satisfied, that my soul is big with inexpressible desire, that you and all who drink into your particular views in religion, may realize the overshadowing and indwelling power of the Holy Ghost, who can only make an effectual and saving application of the name of the Lord Jesus Christ to your precious souls. I now take my leave of you sir, after informing you that my real name I wish to conceal in reference to this publication; not that I want to avoid any responsibility connected with what I have written. No; my name is at your service through the medium of the printer hereof, when you may think proper to demand it in proptia persona; provided, you gave a fair reason for having it communicated to you. I have not written to you without counting the costs. It has been severely painful to my feelings while speaking in any respect harshly to you -- but, sir, you have struck, and are striking at my faith. "'Tis my glory, the lifter up of my head" from every billow of affliction -- yea, more, 'tis the glory of the Baptist denomination. And well it may be; for without any qualification, it makes Jesus Christ all and in all of the sinner's hope; it gives to the adorable three in one, their respective, proper and full share in the salvation of the elect. Moreover, many of that denomination, together with myself, not only charge you with attacking our faith, (this had it been done openly we could, we must have borne) but it has been done insidiously by you. "There's the rub:" this consideration perhaps, has roused more resentment in writing to you than I ought to have felt. But in perfect coolness I now tell you in my concluding sentence, that my pen is but the echo of ten thousand voices when I say, that you ought to be divested of the name of "the Christian Baptist," and known by that of "the Theological adventurer."



    To the Regular Baptist Churches, scattered throughout the
    Western Section of the United States.


    As many of you as read the foregoing letters to Alexander Campbell, will, I hope, be disposed, in justice to him and to yourselves, to give every possible investigation to the subject of which it treats; and like the noble Baerians, "search if these things be so." Yes, brethren, search, search his whole life as far as possible; it is high time he should be fully known to you, for he is either your very zealous, though ignorant advocate, and therefore wants your Aquila's and Priscilla's to direct his zeal according to knowledge, or he is an enemy in disguise and ought to be exposed. -- You cannot, brethren, but perceive, upon a most common-place notice of this man's life, since he has been among you, that you, as a denomination, have been made the citadel of his safety, while throwing the shafts of his hostility at other denominations; particularly at that one with which you most assuredly stand in the greatest degree of fellowship.
    The question then is, whether Mr. C. represents your feelings towards the Presbyterian and other Paedi-baptist churches, against whom he "breathes out threatenings and slaughter?" if he does, let us know what cause they have given for this interminable rage. But I need not put this sort of question to you, being fully persuaded that your greatest partiality is towards that very church which Mr. C. appears to hate with the most deadly hatred. It is but reasonable that it should be so; for with all their spots and imperfections, they approach the nearest to what is your glory as a denomination, I mean experimental religion and solid piety. Perhaps, brethren, you are indulging yourselves in a little merriment, by allowing Mr. C. to go out in your name to challenge, and even attack, with his single arm, the formidable phalanx of the Paedo-baptist churches. Indeed, brethren, apart from other considerations, and it is really amusing. You have an exhibit of the freaks which human vanity can play, and how it can make a man fancy himself a Hercules, and push him forth in quest for adventures for his prowess, when indeed, he is but a pigmy; and that he can draw out from the deep leviathon with a hook that his own fingers have fashioned. But, brethren, you will, I hope, seriously reflect, that the animosity which Mr. C. exhibits towards the Paedo-baptists, will be regarded, at least very generally, as your feelings towards them, so long as he shall have a name and place among you. Think, I say, seriously, of that brethren, and judge you, whether it is not taking away from you the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit! if it is not getting you the character of a tribe of Ishmaelites, whose hand is against every one, rather than the name of a church of the Lord Jesus Christ, walking in the fear of God, the comfort of the Holy Ghost, and living peaceably with all men. Then, the next question is, will you indulge your humor, or gratify the vanity of Mr. C. at the expense of that good name of yours, which has been like ointment poured forth? besides, brethren, you may rely upon it, that no man, much less any body of men, ever familiarized themselves even to the fighting of dung-hill cocks, or little surly curs, but what found themselves gradually warmed up to fighting temperament! hence, saith the wise man, in the maturity of wisdom, "leave off contention before it be meddled with; cast out the scorner and contention will cease." Now, brethren, the proposition I have just advanced, is known to be true to every one of any observation on human life. It was by the exhibition of different kinds of fighting among bests and men, that ambitious demagogues and wiley politicians of old, were wont to brutalize the feelings, and render ferocious the disposition of the common people, to the end, that they might be prepared for all manner of violence and rapacity that their leaders might see


    fit to direct them to. You will understand, that these demagogues pretended to have only the pleasure and amusement of their fellow citizens in view, in the exhibitions alluded to. Now, the same or similar causes will always produce similar effects. It makes no difference where the contention goes on; in church or state, in city or family: when men see contention and fighting, as we said, they begin to wax warm on different sides of the fray -- the breath quickens, the pulse doubles, the eye rolls, the hands clinch, the fist smites, almost unconsciously to themselves. Ah, and this Mr. C. knows right well too: and having had you for two or three years spectators of his own personal combats, or familiarized your minds to a view of his own fightings, you will find, perhaps too late, that the object contemplated by Mr. C. was to prepare you for dissentions and fightings among yourselves; to the end, that he might share the spoils by making you a divided people. Already, brethren, it is to be feared, that many of you are much more ambitious to make it known,that you have a variety of Greek prepositions, Latin verbs, and Hebrew roots in your heads, than the incorruptible seed of divine truth abiding in your hearts. Already many of you are disposed to content more for the faith once delivered to the saints, in noisy, empty words, than by a well ordered life, and a holy conversation. Is this not the case? or if you refuse to answer that question, at least, brethren, solemnly and prayerfully inquire of your souls, individually before God, soul! soul! of what profit to thee is the spleen and declamation of Alexander Campbell or any other man against any body of people? does, or can it ever add one jot or tittle to the spiritual prosperity of the church to which I belong? If it is evident that no benefit results from attention thereto, it is certainly both foolish and wicked to have the fleeting moments of our fleeting lives, occupied therewith: then, brethren, if you do not wish to have Mr. C's animosity towards other denominations chargeable to you, you must learn him to be quiet.
    You have, brethren, in your church, a justly regulated observance of the only two ordinances of divine appointment in the New Testament dispensation, binding in common upon all the disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ; they are Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Before any person is entitled to the first, you professedly believe, that "he must be born again;" -- born of the adorable Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ; or to use the apostle's strong and comprehensive language upon the subject, he must experience "the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" that to baptize any one who does not give evidence of this change of heart (not a change merely in the head,) is awful presumption, abominable blasphemy, and a deed of darkness, which is emphatically to mimick the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ. Now, brethren, the next inquiry is, whether or no Mr. C. has ever given evidence that he is a regenerated man? if he has not, then you must necessarily consider him an "evil tree," and you know, upon good authority, that "an evil tree cannot bring forth good fruit," neither towards God nor man, spiritually. You may as soon, and as reasonably expect to gather grapes from thorns, or figs from thistles, as any real and spiritual benefit from the services of an unregenerate man; be they ever so numerous and extensive, they will amount to nothing more, as respects the church of Christ, than the many things which Herod did. Now, I say solemnly, and in the fear of God, that there is great, if not unqualified reason to conclude, that Mr. C. is an unregenerated man. The reasons for my believing so you will have seen in the preceding letters addressed to him. One solitary circumstance, however, of the many which I have noticed as evidence of his unregeneracy, is all that I deem necessary to settle the point with you: that is, there is every reason to conclude from his writings and orations, together with the general sentiments of his adherents, that he does not so much as believe in the Spirit's immediate influences upon the soul, in the first, or any following stage of the believer's life.
    I know, brethren, that it is said, with some degree of plausibility, that there is reason for suspending judgment on Mr. C. in that respect, because many good


    meaning people are held in doubt; alternately believing that he does, or that he does not acknowledge a belief in the doctrines alluded to. O! heavens! and has it come to this pass, that Baptist churches will suffer themselves to wait six or eight years to ascertain whether or not some other of their ministers believes in the Divinity or Godhead of Jesus Christ! What next? wait six or eight years to inquire whether or not some other of their ministers acknowledge the being of a God! What next? wait to the end of our lives to know whether or not we are to have any part of our faith admitted as the truth; and quietly sink into hell, while in the attitude of humbly waiting upon Mr. C. and other innovators, for something which they may call believing. It ought not to be a matter of question for one moment, with any regular Baptist, or any real and spiritual christian, as to who and what that man is, who, as a minister of the gospel, even neglects to preach the doctrine of the new birth by the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven. No, nor will it be a matter of question with any intelligent, spiritual christian, of whatever denomination they may be! they will one and all pronounce him to be an unregenerated man, and an impostor. We repeat, that there is no necessity of his saying in so many words, he don't believe in it; if he does not preach it, he virtually denies it, and ought to be estimated accordingly! The Devil, brethren, is never so dangerous, as when he assumes the form of an angel of light, and comes into the churches with great profession of zeal for ordinances, and some part of the truth: but not the whole truth. You will recollect, the Lord Jesus Christ has admonished us, that not every one that even says Lord! Lord! unto him, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven: as if he had said, you already know, that he who denies ,e to be the Lord Jehovah, has no saving knowledge of me. I now tell you what shall surprise you even more, that there shall be many that shall give me every name of honour and distinction, as God over all, who, nevertheless shall not enter into heaven. Brethren, if the Devil was to be permitted his choice of devices against the Baptist churches, I should expect it to be exhibited in a flaming zeal for their ordinances, and earnest vociferation of the name of Christ, as Lord, Lord. He knows that they love the ordinances, and are delighted to hear the name of Jesus exalted. Under these circumstances, suppose him to select an instrument for the infliction of some disastrous injury upon you: it would be of an individual of the best outside appearance, and one that would have the most untiring zeal for the minutia of your faith, as the Pharisees of old had for mint, rue, and cummin; and your attention to which, he would praise and commend you above all others, and insensibly lift up your minds in pride, and a disposition to measure and compare yourselves with those around you; contrary to the command given us to know no man after the flesh, but to judge, if we would judge correctly, by the fruit of the spirit; which is, love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance. He would be full of exclamation of "Lord, Lord, we prophecy in thy name:" that is, not denying the eternal power and God-head of Jesus Christ, but readily acknowledging him to be the King of kings, and Lord of lords; the Almighty's Fellow, and Father's equal; Creator, Upholder, final Judge, and Disposer of all worlds; together, with the admission of his being the end of sin, by the sacrifice of himself, and the Lord, our everlasting righteousness. Here, however, he would stop; having charmed your ears with these great swelling words, and words without knowledge, he would have you to repose upon these abstract truths; because, all these things you might hear, and read, and historically believe, to the end of your lives, and be damned as certainly as Satan himself is! Wherever there is a ministry that stops here, you may rely upon it, that there is a devil in, and destruction following it -- it is Satan transformed into an angel of light -- it is hell moving to deceive, and make a prey of the human soul, in its master stroke of machination. To accomplish that, it will


    be no marvel if the Devil, in some instances, gives up all reference to pecuniary considerations; particularly, if it is likely to give his doings the greater appearance of good intentions. However, he generally makes a liberal compensation to his agents, in some way or other; and if he does not permit them to touch the fleece of the sheep, he will, perhaps, give them a fat flourishing ewe from the goat-herd.

    But to return to the subject immediately before us: and, of all such ministry, we must say, that it is but an illustration of the words of the Lord Jesus Christ already quoted; namely, "not every one that saith Lord, Lord unto me shall enter into the kingdom of heaven." No, brethren, we profess to believe, that God the Holy Ghost, only, can make a saving application of the gospel of Christ to our souls, by its immediate, enlightening and regenerating influences: that without this, the gospel is but a dead letter. We profess to believe, that the adorable Spirit, proceeding from the Father and the Son, is the great, the glorious, the soul refreshing promise of the New, as Jesus Christ was the promise of the Old Testament. What think you then of the man, as a minister in your denomination, who never preaches this doctrine? Who, at best, is all equivocation in his remarks upon it? and who, in truth, does not believe in it? Are you going to call such a one, brother! can you as ministers and people, possibly consider yourselves at liberty, to welcome to your churches, and place in your pulpits, a man entertaining such sentiments as these? a man, that will tell you, there is no Spirit to regenerate and quicken in righteousness: no Holy Ghost for those who ask it of God: no Comforter for the saints now: no Spirit to make intercession for them with groanings which are unutterable; or, to bear witness with their spirits, that they are the children of God; and to seal them heirs of heaven. O! brethren, what a rent is here made in the rock of your salvation! the heavens being shrouded, the sun of righteousness is hid from your eyes, the stars of glory's firmament vanish from your view. What cruelty, injustice and fraud is there contained in the attempt to fill your hearts with unbelief in this glorious doctrine. I repeat, that it is the master stroke of hell's machination against your souls! that as many of you as indulge in any such sentiments, you have reason to consider yourselves reprobates; and that if you die in this state, you must inevitably be damned. So, then, you were under delusion, when you thought, that God the Holy Ghost convinced you of sin, of righteousness, and judgment to come; when you saw and felt, your hearts all deceitfulness and desperately wicked; when you were broken and contrite in spirit; when you felt your souls to draw nigh unto the grave, and your lives to the destroyers. You were under a delusion, then, when you thought that God, by the Holy Ghost, gave you the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness. You have been under a delusion, then, in the thousand instances wherein you thought, that you found fellowship with the Father and Son, and communion with the Holy Ghost. You have been mistaken when you have thought that at a throne of grace, in prayer and supplication, God has lifted your souls from a sea of trouble, to a peace that passed all understanding: from awful wickedness, to a joy unspeakable. You have been mistaken too, when reading the Scriptures, you thought you saw, in a moment, a glory, and fulness, and loveliness, in the salvation of the cross; and through the august agency of the Holy Ghost, that surpassed the power of language to describe, and greater than you could ever have acquired, through a life of ten thousand years, unoperated upon by that Spirit who reveals the things that belong unto Christ. You then, and all the precious souls, of those highly intellectual, gifted, holy and spiritual men whose memories are embalmed in hymns, and psalms, and spiritual songs, as well as other impressive, soothing, sanctifying writings; you, I say, and they, have been under a delusion, a phantasy of the brain; for Mr. C. says so. Ah! Mr. C's master is a bold and impudent accuser; he had the audacity to tell the Almighty to his face, that he did not believe in his servant Job's experiences; neither in that of


    "Joshua and his fellows," whom he followed to heaven, to deride and accuse as fanatics. And you, my brethren, are to expect Satan, and all unregenerated men, to treat your holy things as swine treat pearl. "The natural man understandeth not the things of the spirit, for they are foolishness to him; neither indeed, can he understand them, for they are spiritually discerned." He may, nevertheless, talk or write with as much volubility, energy of language, and splendour of conception, about the Lord Jesus Christ, as did Eliphaz, Bildad, and Zophar, converse with Job about the Almighty. Yet they could never say, with Job, that they knew "their Redeemer lived." And in the end Jehovah rebuked them for their empty declamation about himself; and his wrath fell upon them while he told them, "ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath." Job felt that he knew the Almighty, for he had his spirit in his soul. The others were full of confidence, that they knew Jehovah as well as Job! but the latter knew they were deceived. And God made it manifest they were so in the end. Parallel to this, is the case between those who have, and those who have not the spirit of God in these days. They may both talk or write equally well, in a certain degree, of Christ; but those who have the spirit will know that the other is blind, when he says he sees, and sinking to hell when professing to be soaring to heaven. Of the latter character, I feel but too much afraid Mr. C. is. But you will make it, I hope, a subject of due inquiry: and if it is so, will you, can you, dare you profess fellowship with such a man? will you suffer him to blaspheme the Holy Ghost (for it is nothing less than blasphemy,) by preaching to you in the name of Jesus Christ, without reference to the glorious office of that adorable Spirit, in the economy of salvation? alas! so far as you do so, it is ominous of the most fearful and disastrous consequences to your unity, peace, and spiritual prosperity. Whatever may be the scene of trial, of confusion, and of temporary sacrifice of your personal feelings; you are called upon, by every consideration of fealty to Jesus Christ, of obedience to his precepts, of honour for his gopsel, of regard for his cause, and the welfare of Zion, as well as respect for your personal religion, to tear off and cast from you, as a deadly viper, every individual infested with those desolating sentiments.
    You will, I say again, it is to be hoped, make proper inquiry upon the subject before you. You will not only find the heterodoxy we have mentioned, to be chargeable to Mr. C. but that many of his fraternity, who are less wary and intelligent, have, in many instances, the effrontery to laugh at, and make derision of your professedly, and really essential experience as christians. The broken and contrite spirit, the new heart, the disquieted and cast down soul, the groaning intercessions, the fears within and fightings without; together, with all that proves you to be of the number of God's people, whom he has "chosen in the furnace of affliction," and who "have fellowship with the Lord Jesus Christ in his sufferings;" all this is considered by them, as the price of a misguided and distempered brain. So, also, are the opposite circumstances in your new and spiritual life; wherein, you have refreshings from the presence of the Lord, when his candle shines bright upon your tabernacle; when you feel that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost, that he is imbuing all your thoughts, and affections, with the constituents of his glorious kingdom; whereof, is joy unspeakable, peace that passeth all understanding of the unregenerate mind, love to God, all vehement and devouring; views of the adorable person, and work of Christ, as mediator unutterably ravishing and glorious; and under which views, your souls become clothed with humility, meekness, gentleness, patience, and all the bright hues that characterize the "garments of salvation." All these things, in the history of your life of faith are estimated, and spoken of, by these formalists, as was the power and influences of the Holy Ghost, through the instrumentality of Christ and his Apostles, spoken of by the Jews. In the latter case, there was a sinning against the Holy Ghost, for which there was no forgiveness; and in the former case, it may be said, "Behold, ye dispisers


    and wonder and perish: for I work in your day, a work in which ye shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you." Mr. C. and his followers do not believe in this work! therefore, "they shall all likewise perish;" unless that spirit, against whom they are doing despite shall make them wise to salvation. Brethren, I have dwelt longer upon the subject, than I contemplated to do: but its vital importance to a saving knowledge of Jesus Christ, will justify all my remarks. Indeed, take it away from the Baptist church, and I would as soon have a connexion with a body of Socinians, or a club of Deists, as with them. The question returns; is Mr. C. and his followers chargeable with such views as we have stated? and if they are, well may we exclaim with Jacob of old, (Jacob, brethren, was an Israelite, indeed -- the first of all the Israelites: and what made him an Israelite? prayer! noon-day, midnight, fervent, effectual prayer! are you Israelites, indeed!!) "O my soul come not thou into their secret; and unto their assembly mine honour be thou not united."
    Brethren, I shall occupy but little more of your time, having had your attention to what I consider the great, the conclusive, and absolute evidence, that Mr. C. and those who think like him, are unregenerated people. And I have yet to learn, that any body of people, calling themselves a regular Baptist church, ever admitted, that an unregenerated man was fit material for church-fellowship, much less to be a minister of the church of Christ. With an aspirant after worldly fame, however, with one who would be the founder of some new sect in religion, the character of the material of which it is to be formed, will be of secondary consideration. The first and important point will be, to get the material, and then follows the work of bringing it together and giving it some semblance to the church of Christ. To the mind of the real and spiritual Christian, however, all those limitations of the work of God, the Holy Ghost, will bear no more resemblance to the reality, than does the clumsy, half-human, half-brute idol of the Hindoo, to the beauty of a well proportioned man.
    Brethren, let me beseech you, by the mercies of God, again to ask yourselves, individually, as churches, if Mr. C's controversies about baptism, have done you any real service? if they have made, one thought more holy! one affection more spiritual! one moment of your lives more heavenly and happy! Did Mr. C's preaching to you ever humble, and abase, and empty you, to the, and, that you might learn, experimentally, (not speculatively or notionally) the fulness treasured up in Christ. O, did it ever make you feel, (not merely think or say) that you are nothing, and Christ is all in all. Does he by his orations, or writings, clothe your minds with solemnity, fill your hearts with hungerings and thirstings after righteousness; expand your breasts in mighty supplications to the God and father of our Lord Jesus Christ, by day and by night; wean you from the world, and make your conversation to be in heaven! in a word, has he ever done any thing to diffuse the power of godliness in your hearts as individuals? to promote your peace, unity and spiritual fellowship as churches? or your essential beauty and glory as a denomination, by making you conspicuous among the sects in the christian world, in holiness unto the Lord, and not in mere talkativeness and vain contention with men. On the contrary, has not his verbose disputations about the ordinance of baptism, been of serious injury to you individually, by making you think more highly of yourselves than you ought to think; and by lessening your prayerful attention to essential faith, hope and charity -- "to the things that accompany salvation," and that make the possessor meek and lowly in heart. Does not his preaching leave upon your minds the conviction, that he addresses you exactly upon the same principle, and to the same end, that an attorney speaks for his client, or that an office-hunter harangues at the hustings! that is, that he may "rise to shine" -- that he may appear great by putting all others below his own level. Yes, brethren, you know, that however much Mr. C may have amused, or even informed your minds by his preaching, he never was the means of sending any of you in Godly sorrow to a throne of grace; he never made you humble nor self-abased, nor


    comforted your souls when "enduring the fight of affliction," in which, and to which, it hath pleased God to choose his truly believing people. Instead of this, brethren, he has attempted to rob you of the only "comforter" that you can possibly have in this life of tribulation -- I mean, the adorable, the condescending Holy Ghost, without whose influences, your souls will become impoverished and lean, your minds vain and arrogant, your hearts hard and impenitent. O, brethren, hell triumphs most fearfully over you, if any of you have given up your belief in the spirit's influences. God grant, that it may not be to demonstrate that you are reprobates; but, to teach you how foolish, and how beast-like you were in giving heed, for one moment, to the blasting, withering, damning doctrines of innovators upon the faith of God's elect. You know, brethren, that there is a veil upon the hearts of the Jews, so that they cannot understand the coming of the "Son of Man," though he is the great burthen of all the ceremonies and prophecies of the Old Testament, and though the very day of his being "cut off for the sins of the people" is therein predicted. Yet these Scriptures they always have, and do continue to read incessantly. Exactly similar is the case with Mr. C. and those that think as he does, in reference to the New Testament! those that do not receive the spirit's influences, are no more benefitted by reading the New, than the Jews are in reading the Old Testament. They might both read to eternity and still be in darkness! or, as an Apostle says, "ever learning, and never able to come to a knowledge of the truth." Six millions of Jews, however, are ready to rise up and declare that they do understand the Scriptures of the Old Testament, and that the Messiah is not yet come. But this only shews how blind and deluded are their minds; and that they are capable of asserting, and even swearing to a lie. And if six million of Campbellites, or more properly speaking, Glassites and Sandeminians, were to swear that there was no Holy Ghost now, to operate specially, and immediately upon the human soul, it must only be considered as an evidence, that they were equally as blind and wretched in their spiritual condition as the Jews! ah, and just as consistent and pious would it be, for professors of religion to go to a synagogue to learn gospel truth, as to an assembly of the Sandeminians, or those denying the doctrine of the spirit's influence!
    But I have digressed, and no wonder, for the subject to which I unintentionally returned, is so awfully and essentially important, that I could write the same things to you about it a thousand times, if, peradventure, I might succeed in stirring up your pure minds to a proper concern about it. I was saying, that Mr. C. in his preaching or writings, makes you not more holy, more humble, more heavenly minded, or spiritual: but, as numbers of you have told me, he appears to darken counsel by words without knowledge! he confuses and perplexes your minds! he disquiets your souls! troubles your hearts, and causes you to call in question all that the blessed Spirit of your dear Jesus has done for your precious souls! so that you have been led to abandon your closet devotions, your family prayers, and all hope of keeping up a holy and sensible communion with your God. Alas! this is "making havoc of the churches" indeed! The cruelties of Saul of Tarsus were tender mercies compared to this. Flee then, "ye prisoners of hope," flee from this plague, pestilence and famine, that is stalking forth in your churches! turn to the strong holds of God's elect, the salvation of your souls through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth! this is the strong hold, this is the only hope of every true believer, of his ever being made mete for the inheritance of the saints in light. By this he feels sensible, that "the love of God is shed abroad in his heart," and without this he knows that all men would lie, if they said they loved God, or knew any thing of his love in their souls! Again, brethren, is not Mr. C. attempting to destroy your confidence in your ministers, and to have you lay aside your church order and discipline? What is this for? Suppose for a moment that you have done it, and we will soon shew you the object in view. Well, all is still! Mr. C. has commanded, and the Baptist churches around him have silenced their ministers:


    they have threw away their discipline; they are one and all searching the scripture for themselves. Nobody but Mr. C. dare put a foot, or move a tongue among them as a minister. But there soon appears some difference of sentiment: the low murmur and muttering of contention is heard! Mr. C. has calculated upon this: he knows that it must arise: he secretly fosters and promotes it: it grows, it rises, it rages to such a calamitous extent, that at last it is agreed on all sides to refer the differences to Mr. C. that he shall be umpire; and that rather than endure such feud and confusion, they will submit to whatever Mr. C. may say is faith and order. And thus he becomes your rabbi, your master, your pope, your antichrist. There -- that is what Mr. C. is after, or something nearly allied to it. And I challenge the whole history of mankind, in their political, social, and domestic compact, to prove, that that must be what Mr. C. or any other man designs, when either shall make a proposition to cast away known principles of union, and rules of order among any body of men. I say, I appeal to the whole history of mankind through past ages, and to every living person around us, of sense and observation, to prove, that such a proposition must be coupled with the design specified, or that the proposition itself must come from a fool! but Alexander Campbell is not a fool -- ergo, Alexander Campbell's design must be as above represented. Brethren, with such a proposition before you, a proposition to surrender your faith, your ministry, your discipline, you ought to rise in holy indignation, and respond --
    "No, sir, we shall not trifle with our own souls, nor with the militant existence of our denomination in this manner! The glorious sum and substance of the gospel scheme of salvation is found spread out incidentally through the scriptures of the Old and New Testaments; our venerated and pious brethren, who have preceded us in the pilgrimage of this life, have brought together and embodied, all the grand outlines of that sovereign, finished, everlasting, special and spiritual salvation: and connected therewith a clear, sufficient and gospel exhibit of the discipline necessary for the well being of the church militant. Both have been tried, and re-tried a thousand times told, and compared and re-compared with the scriptures in instances without number, and never found other than pure gold! It is only when it is subjected to the moral breath of unregenerated men, that it becomes dim! and in this very incident, we have warning given us of the presence of impostors! we shall therefore retain our precious faith as a "measuring line for that part of spiritual Jerusalem which we constitute; and our discipline, for those unrenewed, refractory, innovating and ambitious spirits which the Devil may be permitted to send in among us, to try our brotherhood and fellowship, as well as patience and forebearance;" for, as it is written, "there must be also heresies among us, that they which are approved may be made manifest among us." We shall not, sir, confide in a man who shall make us any such proposition; we shall not gratify him by joining him in spouting and blowing, like so many grampus whales, against other denominations, and as if it were the whole sum of our business and happiness in this life. We shall not, sir, believe that man a Baptist at all, or deserving the name of a Baptist, who, in public, creates the spirit of general contention, and in private of local animosities; who would have us renounce our well known, clear, solid, and glorious faith, for his, which no one can define or understand. We will not, sir, throw ourselves into a sea of tumult and confusion by giving up our discipline and order, to the end that you may have an opportunity to pull us out, or do something in our behalf, and to prevent our drowning, for which we should be compelled ever after to bow our necks to the yoke of your arrogant dictum, and pay you your price. We will not confide in the man who calls in question the general character of our ministers, who serve us, for the most part, for less than what clads them comfortably, and in many instances for less than what really hides their nakedness, whether of seasonable or unseasonable clothing. We will not support that man, who is evidently unable to raise himself by any intrinsic merit, and therefore resorts to the prostration of the


    character of others, that he may get a pedestal on which to perch his own insignificant self in ephemeral distinction. No sir, we will do none of these things; and besides, for what would you have us rise with you in this hubbub of solicitude for the conversion of the Paedo-baptists to our order? are their ministers the designing, selfish, covetous, luxurious and effeminate creatures that you have represented them to be? and is it these characters, forsooth, that you want to bring in among us!! is a dipping in the water to change them? it must be you think so! or, you intend to bring them into our denomination dripping with all their existent loathsomeness! and is this, sir, your kindness, your zeal for us!! ah! sir, do not be surprised if we tell you, that suspicion of yourself begins to flitter o'er our minds! But you would proselyte not only ministers, but people, one and all, in the Paedo-baptist churches to our order. Now is it, or is it not true when the prophet says, "like priest, like people?" We have no doubt but what you, by this time, think the saying is correct; indeed your own writings accord therewith: then, sir, as an additional expression of your loving kindness and tender mercies to the Baptist denomination, you are putting forth all your energies for the purpose of proselyting the ministers and people of the Paedo-baptist churches to us, stinking in all that filthiness, heterodoxy, pride, luxury and unregeneracy, in which you have been, and still are holding them up to our view!! O, if this be an expression of your zeal, what must be your opposition! if this be an expression of your love, what would be your hatred! We have somewhere read that "the tender mercies of the wicked are cruelties;" and really, we think, if you did, or do mean us well, we are likely to have no better evidence of it than the wicked give us of mercy. Seriously, sir, ascertain if you are not under some similar and fearful mistake, in regard to your service for us, that Saul of Tarsus was, when he thought, that by going to Damascus and making havoc of the church, he was doing God service! Saul was quite as great, scholastic, and intellectual a man as you, and yet he was subject to this awful delusion; that is, he denied Jesus Christ of Nazareth! -- you, the Holy Ghost from heaven! -- "par nobile fratrum." Think, sir, we say, upon this subject: go down and tarry a little season at Jericho; at least, until you have a few scattering hairs of testimony for to shew us, that you are a regenerated man! As for us, sir, we shall proceed to make proselytes of the Paedo-baptists by the use of entirely different means, to what you have been using: our weapons shall not be carnal but spiritual, and thereby mighty to the pulling down of the strong holds of sin and Satan. We will, sir, through the spirit of Christ strengthening us, rise and shake ourselves, as a denomination, from the dust, and put on the beautiful garments of salvation -- we will out-pray, out-labour, and out-love, our Paedo-baptist brethren, in the gospel of Christ; we will be ambitious to set them an example in all manner of Godliness, to demonstrate ourselves to be holiness unto the Lord! in unity, peace and concord among ourselves. This shall be the method to which we will resort, to make them take knowledge of us, that we have been with Christ and learned of him, that we love one another: and by which, we will compel them to inquire after, and adopt, every minutia of our faith. Thus we will manifest to them, that we have, and enjoy, the fellowship of the Father and Son, and the communion of the Holy Ghost. Holy Ghost! O glorious, blessed and sanctifying bond of union between all the regenerate on earth, and all the ransomed before the throne of God and the Lamb. Yes, yes, we will manifest to our Paedo-baptist brethren that we are full of the Holy Ghost! this will allure, will constrain, all that are spiritual among them, to seek and solicit a name and place among us. And as for the many, alas! too, too many among them, that are not spiritual members of the church of Christ; we want them not: the Lord knows, we have enough dead weight, of that sort; as much as we can very well stagger under. Take, sir, and welcome, from both denominations, all the latter description of material, if you can: -- should you get it, there will be no lack of slime and brick to make yourself a Babel Tower, equal in height, if



    not in base, to the mountain Cotopaxi. Take it all, sir, you know how to manage such material as that; but do not meddle with the "lively stones," until the spirit of our God shall have made you a workman therefor. To attempt to do any thing to, or for them, until you are thus prepared, will prove like the officiousness of Bruin, in brushing away flies from the human face: you will be more apt to injure than preserve! We shall, sir, exercise the spirit of prayer on your behalf; and should God the Holy Ghost, of whom you appear to be entirely ignorant, convert your precious soul, you will then be welcome, to our arms, to our heart, to our all! We shall rejoice over you, more than over ninety and nine persons that need no repentance; yea, we will "joy over you with singing!!"
    Ye ministers and people of the Baptist denomination, let some such sentiments be expressed by you towards Mr. C. immediately, and towards every one whose religious views are what his are. Never, never can you tamper with such glaring errors without the most pernicious of consequences. -- O! by all that is adorable in the God-head! by all that is precious in the blood and righteousness of Christ! by all that is connected with the glory of God the Father, the exaltation of the Son, and the honour of his gospel! by all that is essential to the peace, purity, and welfare of the church of Christ at large, and of your own souls individually; I conjure you, to cast out, any and every one from your connexion, who is an unbeliever in the adorable Spirit's special influences, in and upon the soul of every real believer. Yea, though an angel from heaven should gainsay the doctrine, be true to your blessed comforter; and tell, e'en an angel, that he lies. Ah! the apprehension trembles in my heart, that many of you have been living, days, and weeks, and months, without the "communion of the Holy Ghost." O! mournful circumstances! O! miserable state! No marvel, then, if you have your doubts and fears about the reality of the subject, as part of the christian's experience. Grieve not the Spirit any more; return to seek his presence, you shall find it. THE LOVE OF GOD SHALL THEREBY, ONCE MORE be shed abroad in your hearts: your peace be as rivers, and your righteousness as the waves of the sea! Satan shall fall, like lightning from heaven, and hell recede from you, detected, exposed and defeated, in its direful master-stroke of machination against your souls!! Full, then, will be the cup of his joy, who, on earth, will be known to you only by the name of



    A Word to the Unconverted.

    My Dear Fellow Sinners,

    You also are interested in the foregoing subject; you have your perceptions of, and reflections upon, the professing character in the community. You are often astonished to find men, who profess to be new creatures in Christ Jesus, and to have the whole complexion of their moral character changed, evidently acting from similar motives, and upon the ground of the same calculations, that you do, when pursuing the wealth, the fame, the pleasure of this world. Such discoveries, in many instances, produce a uniformity of accession to the inherent unbelief of your hearts, and precipitate you, from step to step, down an awful declivity of unblushing profligacy, until, matured in a reprobate mind, you sink into the arms of everlasting death. Others of you are, however, persons of too much intelligence and maturity of judgment, to suffer your minds to make up an estimate of any thing from its general abuse. You see every day, and every hour, around you, the most shameful pervertion of the common bounties of providence. Food, the most necessary and nutritious, and drink the most grateful and refreshing in their use, are turned into curses by the gluttony and sensuality of mankind: together, with a thousand others of God's earthly gifts. From this shameful conduct on the part of mankind, in their use of the "mammon of unrighteousness," you are led to suspect them, as being capable of abusing and perverting "the true riches," even the blessings of gospel grace and salvation! and as you see men on the one hand, amassing wealth by every means their ingenuity can devise, to the end, that it may at last be said, that they are rich and independent, or that they may command the attention and the envy of their neighbors, by an ostentatious style of living; so, on the other hand, you will see many men who accumulate largely of knowledge, profane and sacred, to the end, that they, by the exhibition thereof, may be envied, admired and applauded. Now, in the former case, you see the greatest possible difference between a man's accumulating temporal riches for the mere gratification of his avarice, or vanity; and the acquirement of that same wealth, to the end, that he may do as much good therewith, as the indigence, helplessness or affliction of his fellow-man would furnish him an opportunity for. In both cases, there is an equality as respects wealth: but here the resemblance ceases. In all other respects that wealth only proclaims the meanness, selfishness, and depravity of the one, while it serves as a mirror, to reflect the noble character of the other. This sort of rule, many of you apply, and with the utmost propriety and sagacity, to those individuals who present themselves before you as the ministers of the gospel. Quick as thought, you ask yourselves -- is this man, or that, intelligent and qualified to teach others? you find that both of them are sufficiently qualified, equally well informed. Now, if one of them has studied, and attained to his capacity for teaching, to the end, that he may really be a blessing to your souls; you will soon know and acknowledge it from the style of the man's address; and though you may not believe in what he says, yet you will readily concede, that he gives evidence that you may become "rich." In the other case, you perceive with equal quickness, that the man has no other object in the exhibition of all he knows, than for to leave an impression upon your minds, that he is a learned and gifted man; and to constrain you, to occupy your thoughts about, and employ your tongues for the proclamation of his "magnificence," in literature. It will be for you


    to judge, who are acquainted with Mr. Campbell, which of the two characters is applicable to him as a preacher of the gospel. Should he appear to be of the latter character, you can never allow yourselves, with the least safety, to receive, with any deference, his opinions upon those things that belong to your everlasting peace. If you have ever understood him to say, either in his preaching or his writings, that the ordinance of baptism has any tendency to wash away sin, or to infuse holiness into the soul of man, he has said that, which is at direct variance with the Baptist faith; and if he has said it as a Baptist, it is a foul slander upon them -- or, if he has said, under the name of a Baptist, that there is no Holy Ghost to operate especially and essentially upon the souls of sinners in conversion, he has denied the faith of the Baptist church -- or, if you have understood him as saying, that the moral law of God is not a rule of conduct for the believer in Christ; that also is contrary to the Baptist faith. If he has said that prayer, after a man has believed, or professed to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ; is not a duty, and a mark of saving faith, that also is in opposition to the sentiments of the Baptists. If he has said, that preaching the gospel since the apostles' days is gratuitous, and unauthorised by the Lord Jesus Christ; that is likewise foreign to the faith of the Baptist church. And if he has advanced such doctrines as the foregoing, while professedly a Baptist, what confidence can be placed in his honesty or veracity. Could you consider that man your friend, who was reporting things of you, by which you would become disgraced in your own estimation, and that of others? who gave currency to sentiments as yours, which you had disavowed, by the most solemn profession of contrary opinions before God and man. Then turn off your eyes from beholding "vanity" in Mr. C. or any other person of the same character, and remember, that he who bids him, God-speed, is a partaker of his evil deeds. Look to the great teacher of Israel, who will teach you as no man ever taught, and make you wise to salvation, not to vain jangling. If there be, then, any truth in the Son of God, or in the Sporit of God, or in the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and all that we have been wont to esteem as holy men in all ages; if there be, indeed, any truth in them, then we say, that you must, one and all, be born again: born of the Spirit, made new creatures in Christ Hesus by the washing of regeneration (not by the washing of water) and renewing of the Holy Ghost. You must come to Jesus Christ, not as a mortal man, and mere verbal professors; but, as poor, helpless, broken herated sinners; with the Publican's penitence in your souls, and his language on your lips: as labouring, and heavy ladened sinners -- for such characters, only, has Jesus bod welcome unto him as a saviour. The depravity of our natures, and the condition of our being, as the children of apostate Adam, is so tremendously awful, that, when God the Holy Ghost gives the soul, by nature dead in trespasses and in sin, to feel it, the strongest mind is confounded, the stoutest heart sinks in fearful despondency, the most herculean body trembles, and groans issue from the most stubborn breasts. This, my dear fellow sinners, is feeling sick: this, is the preparatory step to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ, as the great physician, he having said, "that the whole," or those that think themselves so, "have no need of a physician, but they that are sick." There are many professors (mr. C. among their number) who have an historical knowledge of human depravity, and nothing more. This the devils also have -- they know, that heroes, for the most part, have been but butchers, and murderers of their species -- conquerors, curses -- patriots, impostors -- legislators, demagogues -- statesmen, tyrants, and the whole world is but a scene of deception and wickedness. This much, many professors know of sin, and there their knowledge ends: but this knowledge never has, nor never will bring a poor sinner upon his knees, to cry out, "God be merciful to me a sinner." Never will one of the human family be brought to such circumstances of true repentance, and Godly sorrow, until the Spirit of the living God "convince of sin, of righteousness and of judgment to come." Then every man sees, ah! and feels, in the bitterest of anguish, more


    sin and desolation in his own soul, than ever he saw in the character of all other men, besides! it matters not, what sphere the man fills in life, the highest, or the lowest; he may have a Newton's predigious intellect, or be limited to the humblest mental capacity: whenever he is savingly convinced of sin, he will FEEL himself the chief of sinners, and become "a mourner in Zion:" nor ever cease to be a mourner, until a perfect and everlasting restoration of his moral character, to the image of Jehovah's holiness, is communicated to him in the beatific vision. I say these things, in contradistinction to, and refutation of, Mr. C's loose, indefinite, and unprofitable notions of sin. O! be wise and ask of God to give you a knowledge of yourselves; to make you feel the nature and effect of sin in your souls; then you will cry out to Jesus with indescribable emotion of solicitude, and in an import of language which [no] unregenerate soul can conceive of, "save Lord or I perish." Then you will know, the unmeasurable difference between talking, or writing, about sin salvation, and realizing understandingly their essential character; then, you will find the fulfilment, in your own experience, of the promise of the Most High, by the mouth of the Prophet, to all true and spiritual believers in all ages of the world, when he says, "as for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the Lord; my Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put into thy mouth, shall not depart out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from henceforth and forever." Then shall you know and feel, "that if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his;" be he who, or what he may, in the estimation of the world. Then you will know and feel. "that the Spirit beareth witness with your spirits that you are the children (not the apostles or prophets) of God;" and that thereby are you enabled to "cry" understandingly, "Abba, Father;" that you know not what to pray for as you ought, until "the Sporit makes intercession for you, with groanings with are unutterable," and that thereby, your minds become established in the conviction that you "are born of God, because you have the witness in yourselves." Under the influence of this adorable Spirit you will learn, that that is a lying and mischievous Spirit, who says, that prayer is superfluous, and unavailing with the believer; and that it is nothing less than bold, and blasphemous contradiction of God, who has said that "the prayer of the righteous is his delight." In a word, my fellow sinners, the guilt of the best of you, is so great, that the blood of Jesus Christ only can remove it. Your debt to the holy law of God so infinitely great, that the righteousness of Christ can alone justify you. If it were possible that you believed in these things, and could stop here, it would just barely deliver you from hell!!
    But there is another part to the "finished" salvation of Christ. That is salvation from sin, by the enlightening, sanctifying, blessed influences of the Holy Ghost! these two parts make up the whole. God has joined them together, the universe shall not separate them. Whoever knows truly, any thing of one part, knows also something of the other. Whoever pretends to know any thing of the one part, and denies the reality of the other, is a deceiver, or awfully deceives himself. Turn then my fellow sinners, turn your thoughts to God the Holy Ghost, to quicken in righteousness your souls, now dead in trespasses and sins; and to cleanse, purify, and adorn you for the mansions of eternal glory. Trifle not with the few, and fleeting moments of your existence on earth, to gratify your curiosity, in hearing what new thing there may be broached, in the lawless imaginations of unregenerate men, touching the Gospel of Christ. Trifle not with your souls, by putting them in fearful jeopardy upon the issue of any man's doctrines, or teachings, when Jehovah has made such ample provision for your being taught infallibly. Above all, trifle not with the doctrine of the Holy Ghost's influence; your rejection of this, and damnation must be an inevitable consequence! a voice from heaven proclaims, louder than ten thousand thunders, that, "whosoever hath not the spirit of Christ, is none of


    his:" that though he may say he is, and a thousand others assert that they believe he is Christ's, that is, a believer in Christ, yet the Holy Ghost by the mouth of an apostle gives him, and them, the lie: "let God be true and every man a liar" -- down, down then upon your knees as penitent sinners and humble supliants! be you who you may, you are not too good, too wise, too great, to render the assumption of such a character, and resort to such a posture before God unnecessary. And O! the boon, the boon, that heaven may bestow you, in the gift of the Holy Ghost!! this is the "drop serene" that will purge your minds from all mist and error, and reclaim your immortal souls from the power of sin! the indwelling of this spirit in your souls shall elevate you in moral grandeur above the level of an angel! without this spirit in your souls, whatever you may vainly think of yourselves, or others may vainly think of you, as christians, without the adoreable spirit in your souls, we say, you are, at best, but as whited sepulchres, which, though beautiful without, within are full of all uncleanness. My fellow sinner, I have done -- I would say more -- I could say no less. Spirit of Jehovah, now do thine office!!






    Alexander Campbell;


    being a supplement


    The Letters of a Regular Baptist.




    (note: title partly reconstructed from citations -- title page is missing)




    I have now before me your Review of my letters, together with that of your friends in Pittsburgh, by the pen of Mr. Scott. There is no complaint to be made in the presentation of the former; but, really, I have felt somewhat dissatisfied with the procrastination of the latter. Whatever may have been the rapidity with which it was conceived, (of which rapidity I am informed its worthy author has boasted) it has been of provokingly slow delivery. The conception, however, I hope is esteemed so far perfect, that you will not be averse to my considering you to stand sponsor for it. Whatever the design was that it was written for, you have my best wishes that it may prove, beneath your pillow, more soothing than the Homer 'neath the febrile head of him who wept for worlds to conquer. It is not for the purpose of vindicating my own character that I take up my pen again to address you. No, I should, most likely, let your review of my letters, together with that of your coadjutors, pass by unnoticed, as so much trash, which the stream of time would carry in a few days to oblivion, was there nothing more to result from it than that. But you have presented me with such a fair opportunity, of inflicting another blow upon you, that I cannot let it pass by unimproved, and retain a conscience void of offence. This is an honest expression of my disposition toward you; and you may rely upon it, I shall use all lawful means to destroy your influence in our church. Not more determined was the spirit of Amalchir's son in opposition to the Roman, than is mine to you, as a Baptist minister. My right to oppose you may be, as it has already been, disputed; my inability manifest, but my disposition shall not be questioned. In view, however, of all this breathing of hostility to you as a Baptist preacher, I feel the current of christian good will toward you as a man, flowing through my heart. If this case presents a problem in morals which you, or your friends, cannot solve, it only proves, that you and they know nothing of the subject of morals, above the principles of nature; and that you and they conceive, sin to be opposition to you, and virtue and goodness to consist in agreeing to all you say and do. Then, take care how you give me the name of your "enemy and your hater," for they are idle, and they are false words, and you shall be called into an account for them. I hate, with perfect abhorrence, many of your sentiments; I deprecate your influence in the church of Christ as one of the greatest curses that can befall her: and yet, the language of my heart is, Lord Jesus! destroy the enemy of thy Zion, but save the soul of my fellow man.
    In your review of my letters, you have exhibited much of the venom of the serpent, but I am afraid nothing of the harmlessness of the dove. Was there nothing but falsehood, prejudice, &c. in them; no one redeeming quality whatever, ah, sir, do you not perceive that it must be sooner or later manifest to all, and what is already evident to many, that the existence of your own character depends upon your destroying the character of those who oppose you. Alas, then, your reputation is "hair hung" indeed; for I, though a stranger, isolated and unconnected with any living soul in my attack upon you, shall be able, single-handed, to make a breach therein which you will never be able to repair.
    From the circumstance of your having obtained my real name, as author of letters addressed to you over the signature of "A Regular Baptist," and given publicity to that name, you have reduced me to the unpleasant task of saying something about myself, and in vindication of my claim to that measure of veracity, in the absence of which I cannot reasonably expect to be read, in my further remarks, without unfavourable prejudice against me. Do not be suprised if, in this part of my subject, I should appear somewhat at fault. My character, I am aware, is one of the minims of nature, and in the attempt to speak of it I shall, perhaps, exhibit as much awkwardness as you would do in


    endeavouring to take the superficies of a mustard seed: besides, I must confess, it is one of my former idols, from which I have in a great measure became weaned: I have put it out to nurse! into the hands of a better nurse, I trust, than myself. Whatever violence therefore is offered to it, I expect its foster parent will duly protect it from, according to his promise, Psalm xxxvii. 6.! Many a scalding tear, many a rending groan it cost me, e'er I could become reconciled to put the dear idol into the hands of even a God; though I found every body so busy and officious in nursing the bantling, that I have often, and again, nearly killed myself in my efforts to extricate it from the tenacity of their loving embraces. Hence, if any missiles are thrown at it now, such for instance as you have been casting, I am in a great degree, if not altogether unmoved; believing, as I do, that he to whom I have committed the care of it, will safely keep it against that day, when its price will be above rubies. But I have connexion with those, who are more sensitive upon the subject than myself, and for their feelings I am disposed to have some respect, and therefore find an additional incentive to take some notice of what you have imputed to me of falsehood, prejudice, and injustice against you in my former letters; add to which, in taking a bird's-eye glance of your reviews, I shall derive some additional colouring for continuing the portraiture of you, which it is my particular object to do.
    In reference to your review, the first thing that commands attention is, your implied complaint against me for giving you an extrinsic and intrinsic character. -- Why, sir, marvel at, or complain about this? every moral unregenerated man has it -- he is a whited sepulchre "without," but "within" full of uncleanliness. Every mere professor has it -- a form of Godliness, but not the power. Many Deists, Socinians, &c. have an excellent extrinsic character, and for it they are to be esteemed in human society, who, inwardly, or intrinsically, are black as hell, being enmity itself to the God of the Bible -- to the doctrine of the Holy Ghost's transforming influence. The complaint which you make then, on account of the distinction that I made in your character, implies your ignorance of essential, vital, living faith; or that principle of internal holiness, upon which, all the vast difference between the character of the man of nature, and the child of grace, turns! Sir, there is not an infant of days in the kingdom of Christ, but what would detect, your characteristic ignorance of spiritual things, in that very complaint!
    In the next place, you complain against me for not going over more of the "area of your action" than the last four years. Well, I did not profess to take notice of you at all, until your connexion with the Baptist church -- that is fourteen years since. And from the 21st to 31st year of your age, you tell us, that you was in retirement. Your own words are, "a person that refused, as I have done, offers of connexion with popular sects, and of places of public and conspicuous eminence in the cities of Philadelphia and New York, who could take his Bible and the plough and sit down among the hills of western Virginia, and from the age of 21 to 31, move in the quiet vale of retirement seeking in no one instance to make himself more conspicuous than his immediate duties and business required, affords, we conceive, but few evidences that his ruling passion is the love of fame." * Here then, sir, we find you ten years in seclusion, and four years out of seclusion, that makes up the fourteen years that you have been in America, or attached to the Baptist church. So, that it appears, from your own history, of your life, that there has been but four years of it public; those four years I have taken as much notice of as I could, without writing down your orations; and yet, you whine and complain because I did not give the history of more of your life. But why, sir, do I notice this circumstance at all? The object us

    * May not the Mussulman use the same argument to prove 'that Mahomet was not an ambitious man' that wily and lying prophet was ten years in seclusion too -- ergo, Mahomet was an humble man -- Mr. Campbell is an humble man.


    to show, one out of a thousand instances, of your contemptible and puerile attempts, to enlist the sympathies of your readers on your behalf, by twisting and wiredrawing every thing that is said about you, into an expression of injustice. This is one part of your system of operations; the western hills reverberate with the cry of yourself and your partizans, of persecution. Exactly parallel to this vociferation of yours, in this part of the country, has been that of the Socinian on the sea-board for some years past. To listen to piteous yells, and look on their crocodile tears, you would have supposed, that fire and faggot was at their heels, with a whole host of inquisitorial devils to dance around their funeral pile; whereas, in fact, at that very time they were secretly congratulating each other, upon the credit they obtained with multitudes for charity and liberal feelings, and in seeing their underhanded, double dealing, deceptive practices get footing in society and prosper. But the "pious fraud," as they called all this, was after a time detected, and the actors thereof sunk into contempt; as will also your various tricks to enlist the sympathies of the community to yourself. As an earnest for the truth of what I am now predicting to you, as well as an evidence, that some think widely different of my letters to you, to what you and your adherents do, I insert the following extract from a communication made to me respecting those letters. The person, (who is a Baptist minister) after speaking of the letters, as a just chastisement of your vanity and cupidity, observes --
    "No doubt we shall soon hear of bitter complaints against the manner in which he is treated; though it were almost impossible to conceive of any other way in which he could be noticed. How is it possible to treat a public defamer and denouncer of impostors in any other way than in ascertaining the right which he possesses to be considered pure and unimpeachable? "A Regular Baptist" deserves the warmest thanks of the religious public for laying before Mr. Campbell the views for which he and they entertain of him. And Mr. C. has a right to be grateful to him for giving him an opportunity in his again indulging in his darling theme of controversy and self adulation. We are glad to see the masterly strokes and masterly language of the Regular Baptist; those clear and luminous exhibits of Mr. C's vanity and cupidity, must be apparent to all but those, who having eyes, will not see. What is so forcibly demonstrated in this pamphlet has long been the decided conviction of all the thinking part of the community, acquainted with Mr. C's writings. The awful consequences resulting from Mr. C's abominable system (if so chaotic a mass may be called a system) of blasphemies, irreligion and levity, is but too apparent wherever he has possessed any influence. Like the smoke issuing from the bottomless pit, it has darkened the moral atmosphere wherever it has touched. We trust, therefore, that this corrective will be extensively read, and that some of those deluded by the mother of abominations, may again be restored to the fold of the flock, and that others, who are in danger of being led astray, may be preserved from being ingulphed in everlasting ruin."

    Here then, sir, your croaking about injustice and persecution against you from the publication of my letters, was anticipated as a matter of policy in your proceedings: and you also learn sir, that I am in possession of sentiments of approbation of my letters from persons who give full evidence, in the intelligence of their conceptions, and perspicuity of their language, that their opinions are worth publishing: that, one individual approver of my letters, is worth a whole host of those you have arrayed in opposition to me -- but to proceed. In the next place, you complain that of all the actions of your life and all the words you have spoken or written, not one is adduced as proof of my favourite position, i. e. that you are an unregenerate man. Well, sir, it may be, that you think that I have, in my former letters given no evidence, from your actions or writings, to that effect; others, however, think differently. Had you ever been taught in the school of Christ, you would have known what this axiom among christians means, namely, That, though a man give no evidence that he is an unregenerated man, still, there may be entire destitution of evidence, that,


    he is regenerated! there -- puzzle your brain with that position; scan it to the best of your ability, and you will, in so doing, furnish additional evidence, that you have no spiritual perceptions. That I did not make any quotations from your writings to prove your heterodoxy or unregenercy, is true; believe me, however, it was not because I was altogether ignorant of your writings, but it was to the end, and for the purpose of seeing you guilty of so much temerity as to deny, directly or indirectly, the existence of such evidence upon the face of your writings, of your heterodoxy and unregeneracy. This you have been guilty of by indirectly accusing me of not bringing such evidence from your writings, and asserting, that nothing in your writings would authorise the character I gave of you, as an unregenerate man. The great burthen of my design, however, in my former letters was, to prove that you were no Baptist nor Baptist minister, essentially; and if you think there was lack of evidence to establish that point, allow me to encourage you to hope that atonement, to the full extent of your desires, will be made in my present address.
    You next complain that my letters were anonymous, "and to be ranked under the very common and general head of anonymous abuse; and as such, you were not bound to notice them; for who knows not that the ebullitions of anonymous foes carry their own condemnation in their preface?" Pen-doughty man! what madness possessed you to write such a sentence, when you had in your pocketbook a copy of the following written condition which I left in the hands of the printers of my letters, to the end, that you might never dare complain of anonymous abuse from me! to wit:
    Messrs. Eichbaum & Johnston,

    Gentlemen -- Having referred Mr. Alexander Campbell to you conditionally, for my real name, as the author of letters addressed to him over the signature of "A Regular Baptist," and by you printed, that condition is, That Mr. C. pledge you his word, that any thing exhibited in those letters, &c. as a fact, is false, and that he wants my name for the purpose of taking legal measures to prove the falsehood! no other consideration will reconcile me to let my name be known.     Very respectfully yours,
        August 17, 1824.                         A REGULAR BAPTIST.

    ==> The above condition was left in our hands, and agreed to at the time the name was given to Mr. Campbell.     Eichbaum & Johnston.

    Now, sir, did this carry the appearance of anonymous abuse? because I had no disposition to obtrude my name on the public vision, did it therefore follow, that the above condition was not equal to all that you had a right to demand of me, as a writer to you, upon the principle of justice? But further, on the next page of your review you observe, in reference to this condition, or rather, you mutilate and pervert this condition is this way. "It is true that he (Regular Baptist) promised or prophesied in the conclusion of his address to the Baptist churches in the west, that while on earth he would 'be known to them only by the name of a 'Regular Baptist.' In his letter to me, he was kind enough to appear willing to give me his real name on presenting to the publisher a 'fair reason' for demanding it. But when I called on the publisher he presented me with written * conditions, which the 'Regular Baptist' had given him, which precluded him from giving up his name except upon such conditions as the civil law would oblige him to give it up, or suffer prosecution." By this, sir, you evidently designed to impress the mind of the public with the idea, that it was your threatening me, or the printers, with civil prosecution, by which you came to the possession of my name; and that I did my utmost to keep it from you, and was terrified at the idea of your prosecuting me; whereas, my written conditions exactly called for a prosecution! Again, in the first part of the last extract from

    * Why did you not give the written conditions to the public? you took a copy of them.


    your review, which I have made, you insinuate, that I wanted my name to be known, as a matter of gratification to my vanity; your words are, "It is true, that he either promised or prophesied in the conclusion of his address to the Baptist churches in the west, that while on earth he would be known to them only by the name of a Regular Baptist. In his letter to me he was kind enough to appear willing to give me his real name on presenting to the publisher a 'fair reason' for demanding it." Now, sir, what consistency, what characteristic consistency, there appears in these two parts of the extract. Do you imagine that any unprejudiced reader of the condition alluded to, will for a moment doubt, but what I was really anxious to keep myself from public notice, and yet determined to do justice to you? then you may ask, why I offered the foregoing lengthy criticism upon the case, if it is so clear? I'll tell you why; it was for the purpose of shewing, one of a thousand instances of your metaphysical cunning; a cunning corresponding with the jesuitical bent of your intellect; and which, from defect of more exalted mental faculties, you commonly employ to extricate yourself from the difficulties in which your plodding mind and intensity of passions involve you. And are you, and your friends, silly enough to suppose, that you can dupe the intelligent mind of your readers into a belief that your cause or your character can be good, when you have to resort to such subterfuge and violation of the sentiments of your opponents? You observe in the same paragraph to which I have been alluding, that I am "the Rev. Mr. Greatrake from Baltimore, or somewhere thereabouts." Who authorised you to give me the appellation of Reverend, or what did you do it for? was it not another of your "little things," designed to move to laughter the little minds that gather around you as their oracle, as crows gather around carrion? as the spectre said to Brutus, so I say to you, in reference to who I am, that you shall know more about me, if my life is spared, hereafter.

    The next thing that we have to notice of your review is, your declaration, that I am "hired by a party, who were excluded from a regular Baptist church, at least by a church which at the time of their exclusion, was recognised as such." Now, after the exhibition of the following documents, in reference to the above assertions of yours, we may well exclaim, O tempore! O mores! when you are a censor morum and an ecclesiastical Reformer. Here follows the documents:
    "At the request of elder L. Greatrake, the church took into consideration the following assertions of Alexander Campbell in his 'Christian Baptist' No. 2, vol. 2, in reference to this church, and the said Elder L. Greatrake -- to wit: 'This gentleman, (meaning our pastor,) is at present hired by a party, who were excluded from a Regular Baptist Church, at least by a church which, at the time of their exclusion, was recognised as such.' Wherefore, resolved, that this church utterly disavow having hired the said elder Greatrake to be their pastor; on the contrary, this church do authorise their elder, if he thinks proper, to say publicly, that we feel confident, that be, our pastor, is many scores of dollars out of pocket in attempting to do us service in the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. And furthermore, we utterly deny the latter assertion of Alexander Campbell, wherein he says that we are an 'excluded party from a regular Baptist Church.' On the contrary, we have the best of testimonials to prove the reverse; and we do authorize our pastor, to make use of any part of the testimonials he may deem proper, for the purpose of publicly refuting the statements of Alexander Campbell."

    "Done by order and in behalf of the church, at their church meeting for business.
            Signed,                 W. H. HART.
    "Whereas, a request has been made by certain individuals of the Baptist Church in Pittsburgh, according to a resolution of the association, for a committee of five neighbouring churches to meet at Pittsburgh, on the 11th October, 1823, to consult on certain points of doctrine, which have occasioned misunderstanding


    between the members -- We, the undersigned, do agree, that there is just ground of complaint against the doctrines protested against by certain members of this church; and that all the members who adhere to the doctrine on which this church was first constituted, be considered by us the existing Regular Baptist Church in Pittsburgh."
        "          JAMES FREY,             RICHARD B. CHAPLIN,
        "          CHARLES WHEELER,     WILLIAM PRESTON,
                    JOSEPH PHILIPS,        WILLIAM CLOWES,
                    GEORGE B. CRART,      JOHN COUCH,
                    EPHRAIM ESTEP.
    The foregoing is a true copy. Attest --                   W. H. HART, Church Clerk. Pittsburgh, November 15th, 1824.

    Washington, July 18, 1823.      
    Dear Sir --

    I am requested by brother Summer [sic - Sumner?] to write a few lines to you, relative to the existing difficulties in the Pittsburgh church, the circumstances of which you have been made acquainted with.

    The doctrines professed by the brethren whose names are prefixed to their letter to the church, are the doctrines on which, I believe, the church was constituted, and which are professed by the regular Baptist Churches on the continent. The doctrines which they say are now preached to them, I believe to be anti-scriptural and calculated to destroy vital piety, and to introduce a system of cold, speculative and unfeeling religion. The doctrines they contend against are those which occasioned much controversy between Dr. Fuller and the Sandamenians, and which you will see fully exposed in "Fuller's Strictures on Sandamenianism." Although I extremely regret these doctrines should be propagated amongst our churches, yet I feel confident that they will not meet with the approbation of our brethren generally. We must lift up our voice against them. As you assisted in the constitution of the church, and from your age and experience, are able to afford the brethren council, I wish you to write to the church, or visit them. It is my opinion that these brethren ought not to withdraw from the church, but to influence them to examine the scriptures on these points of doctrine.

    My family are all in tolerable good health, and wish to be remembered to you all. I remain, dear brother, yours in the gospel.
    Elder David Philips.

    Note -- From these documents, it appears clearly that the court house fraternity are no Baptists -- but Sandamenians! What is Mr. Campbell, who wants "myriads of such disciples?" What, I say, is he?

    Then, sir -- though the whole of my former letters to you were lies, it would not shade the falsehood of the foregoing assertions of yours; though you appear to have calculated upon something of that sort. I think what we have just noticed, in connexion with your veracity and fair dealing with Mrs. Judson, and other missionaries, will make a never fading wreath of cypress for your honored brow. Sir, the God that separated me from my mother's womb, and gave my soul the second birth, has, in his mysterious providence, led me to give evidences of sincerity and honesty, as a professed Baptist, which you have never dreamed of; and therefore all your flings at my character as such, will be but beating the air.

    Your allusion to the present Baptist church of Pittsburgh, is altogether irrelevant, excepting as it affords an expression of the malevolence of your heart. If poison was clandestinely communicated to you through the medium of your food, and under the agonies and convulsions thereof, the perpetrator of the foul


    act was to reproach and deride you, would it not fairly entitle him to rank first in the name of miscreants? it would. And however much, in the earthliness of our imaginations and judgment, we may be disposed to make distinctions between what refers to the soul and body, and to attach most of importance to the latter, the day is at hand, when we shall find that it is registered in heaven, a deeper and more damning crime, to pollute the waters of divine truth, than the maroon current of life; to poison the soul of the saint with false doctrine, than to torture and kill the body with baneful drugs. If that church lies mangled and bleeding in her reputation, as she really does, I would have you examine the ends of your own fingers, the skirts of your own garments, and see if some drops of her blood does not rest upon you, in judgment, as her murderer. Should nothing of the sort be visible to you at present, perhaps I may, before I terminate my present remarks, turn up a fold of your mantle on which will be disclosed a clot of her blood.

    The next particular of complaint that you have, is about my conjectures as would be found pregnant with salutary intimation to a wise man. Of the intelligence, consistency, and appropriateness of those conjectures, I leave the reflecting part of the community to judge; satisfied, I am, that is you were not a mere swallow in the knowledge of human life, you never could survey the prominent features of your own public character, and then pronounce those conjectures, unwarranted. You will perceive, from the extract I have inserted in a former part of this address, that your character is thought to have been [bit] off pretty well in those conjectures; and e'er we make our exit for a second time, I persuade myself that we shall give luminous evidence that the conjectures were, at least, first rate guesses, and too true for you, to treat with levity.

    You now go on to give us a brief history of yourself, after having wished that I, who had undertaken to become your biographer, "had taken a little more time, and a little more of the advice of his friends in waiting to get acquainted with my history and myself." Now, sir, I had no friends to advise me at all about the writing of my letters to you, no mortal but one, and he you never saw, or heard of, (until my letters were published) knew any thing of my writing until the letters were ready for the press, or nearly so; and this fact and important fact, I told you in my first letter; and I told it to you for the express purpose of shewing you, and the public, that I was unswayed and unoperated upon in writing to you by any prejudice, party, or passion, (examine again that sentence of the first of my former letters beginning thus, "In the performance of that task, I have no other dictation than my own judgment, &c.)["] so that your insinuations, or rather plain declaration, of my having went counter to the advice of my friends is an erroneous assertion. But as there is the semblance of reason, and some apparent force in this objection to me, as the delineator of your character, and as it has been bandyed about among your friends to the same effect that you make use of it in your review, it will be proper that we pay some little attention to it. The argument is -- that I am comparatively a stranger to you and your history, and therefore ignorant of, and incompetent to describe your character. Now, if a detail of the locomotion of your life is your history, then the argument is good, and I was ignorant; but if the theological complexion of your writings, and the moral effect thereof, together with those of your public ministrations, was legitimately your history, then I was not ignorant; though I confess, that I did not pretend to have, nor do I yet pretend to have, a tenth part of that information about you which those two sources present. But, as in nature, so in morals, essential principles constitute genus; and though, there may be some variety of distinction in the subordinate parts; yet the man who has learned the constituents of a fungus on the eastern side of the mountains, knows very well when he meets with a fungus on this side of the mountains. I had met with your theological character long before I knew that there was such a man as you; I had been, with thousands of others, disturbed


    and tormented, perplexed, and beclouded with it, and compelled to investigate it until I was fairly satisfied that it was a sounding brass and tinkling cymbal. Hence, I was prepared to understand your character, sir, as a theologian, at a bird's-eye glance: and I trust, hope, and believe now, that God in his providence has heretofore brought me into contact with such speculators upon religion as yourself, and at present cast my lot in this part of the country, to the end, that I may in some little degree check the sluices of soul destroying sentiments which you are opening upon his church. O! sir, if he permit me to do this, your bitterest invective against me, will be sweeter music to my ears than song of loftiest seraph. No, sir, my friends have never advised me upon the subject, as I said before; there are those, perhaps, who give themselves the name of my friends, who are prodigiously sensitive about their own reputations, for they have as many wounds therein as Caesar fell before the capitol with; and they think, that it is so with me; but all my sores, blessed be God, are confined to his eye; they run under the sympathy of his heart, they are soothed with the tear drop of his commiseration. Others, and real friends, feel some solicitude about me, knowing, that your "Christian Baptist" is the shambles where almost all ministerial, and christian character, is cut up and quartered, and where that numerous part of the community who feed, with the appetite of vultures, upon the infirmities of God's people, resort to batten themselves. I say, there are some of my friends who feel pained at the idea of my being added to the list of your victims, and sent round the country in your "Christian Baptist" as food for vultures. But, as Whitefield said, in reference to his reputation, so say I in respect to mine, if I lose it, "thank God it is gone, for it has been a troublesome article." If you bury it sir, it will rest in hopes of a joyful resurrection. But I ought, by this time, to have said all that I have to say about your history, as given us in your review. In that history there are but few things that are necessary for me to notice. The first is, your "pronouncing 106 orations on 61 primary topics of the christian religion in the western parts of Pennsylvania, Virginia, and the neighbouring part of Ohio" -- this particular I notice here, to refresh our memories mutually for a better use of it hereafter.

    The next thing we notice of your history, that invites to remark, is, your connexion with the Redstone Baptist association, in union with the Brush run church, without any reference, on your part, to forms of faith. This may be so -- if so, it was certainly an erroneous proceeding on the part of the association: "To err," however, "is human, to persevere in error diabolical." The association has retrieved her character, and corrected her error, by turning out the Brush run church from her connexion: it would have been an immense blessing to her had she done it five years ago. Your discourse on the Law, which you mention in this part of your review, will be noticed hereafter. Your affectation of shame, for having milked the sheep and the goats of a thousand dollars to build a meeting house, is something like the blush upon the cheek of one of the frail sisterhood: for whatever was the sin, you are still virtually doing it, as we shall notice when we come to make a second estimate of your pecuniary receipts from your publications.

    I am authorised to say, that within any time for fourteen or fifteen years past, the Academy at Pittsburgh has not been offered to you, and therefore the presumption is, seeing you to have been but fifteen years in the country, that it was never offered you, or if offered, that the offer merely amounted to some talk about the thing between you and some unofficial character. Believe me, sir, it has become absolutely necessary, when you make assertions of having had such offers of ecclesiastical preferment from the Paido-baptist churches, that you should prove it by the exhibition of proper documents. And that, not only for the sake of your own veracity, but for the detection of those Paido-baptist churches who have been so defective in their judgments, or so unevangelical on their sentiments, as to select you for their minister. You will do society a piece of real service by giving us a knowledge of those churches -- Mene Tekel will be


    their merited sentence. I say again, then, give us the documents, that prove you have been so passionately wooed by Paido-baptist churches to a connexion with them, and to condescend to fill eminent places in popular sects and public (I suppose you mean literary institutions) places in Philadelphia and New York. I do not say, that it is not the fact, but I do say, that I don't believe you, and there are hundreds more that don't believe it. If it is so, however, the popular sects that wooed you, and the official characters that offered you public places of such eminence, must have been, in their respective spheres, miserably wanting in their intelligence, to judge suitably of the relation between person and place, or the fitness of things! For the present, however, we believe, it is a little item of your disposition to swell.

    It may not be amiss to notice, in a word or two, the obeisance that you pay to Dr. Ralston in your review of my letters. This is the same man whom you charge in other parts of your writings, with "base calumny, bold invectives, gross misrepresentations," &c. and whose Doctorship you have treated with your characteristic ribaldry. You have had, no doubt, some sinister object in speaking so complacently of the Doctor's hospitalities; equivalent, I presume, to the motive of a certain Englishman for pulling off his hat and bowing to an image of one of the heathen Deities, i. e. "He did not know how soon his God-ship might come into authority again, and it would be well enough to have a claim to his favour." So, peradventure, this passing congee of yours, to Doctor Ralston, is made upon the same politic principle as the Englishman's; you begin to have, perhaps, some forebodings that you will have to return to the bosom of the denomination from whence you came, and that Dr. R.'s influence may be of service to you in that event. But I presume the old gentleman's nerves have become too much ossified, from age and experience, to be tickled with your straws; or may be, he, like some others, would rather have your invective than your commendation -- As the poet says, "To be dispraised by some, is no small praise."

    We now come to the notice of my falsehoods, as you have represented them; and though it may appear, from what you have stated, a work of labour to dispose of them to any advantage to myself, I will, I think, soon shew you to the contrary. First, then, when you state, that I charge you with particular animosity to the sect of Seceders, you are mistaken; for by "denomination" I meant the Presbyterian church in all its distinction of Covenanters, Independents, and Seceders, and these I call a "denomination." And you will not deny that against this denomination you are and have been particularly hostile. There, then, is one of my falsehoods well disposed of. I may have been very ignorant to be sure in considering the different churches mentioned as fairly ranging under the name of the Presbyterian "denomination," at least you may think me ignorant. But please to remember, that you make exterior and incidental affairs of church order, fundamentals, and matters of distinction; and I make doctrines or faith, the basis of difference.

    The next falsehood you tack to my letters is, that I have asserted you to be vain: the assertion you say, "is capable of being proved a falsehood;" and then, by way of proving it to be false, you refer to your having "refused connexion with popular sects, and places of public, and conspicuous eminence in the cities of Philadelphia, New York, &c. -- Who could take his Bible and the plough, and sit down among the hills of western Virginia, and from the age of 21 to 31, move in the quiet vale of retirement &c. affords, we conceive, but few evidences that his ruling passion is the love of fame." And in the beginning of the paragraph from which the above extract is taken, you say, that your biographer ought to have explained how these incidents of your life harmonized with the charge of your being a vain man. I have already commented somewhat upon this particular, and I again say, give us proper testimony, aye, testimony, "FOR THE RELIEF OF THIS ONE FACT," that you have had these overtures from popular sects, and offers of places of public and conspicuous eminence, &c. and when you do it, though not a miracle, it will be a wonder of first rate magnitude.


    Until you do confirm this to be a fact, it is rather immodest for you to ask for explanation from me. Touching the second incident which you mention as hostile to my conjecture, that you are a lover of and a seeker after fame, alias, a vain man, I will give you some explanation how it may be fairly considered as an evidence of your ambitious projects. I shall premise my remarks by contradicting your assertion, "that youth is the period in which ambition or the love of fame is most predominant in the human breast." No, it is the master passion of an other period of life; and can only be of size and strength proportioned to the chance of gratification that observation and intelligence of human affairs has presented to the mind. The passion of human vanity, or love of fame, may be frisky and undisguised in youth, but its meridian height is to be looked for when the glass of life is about where Mr. Campbell's is! Though experience may have taught the subject of the passion, by the time he is 33 or 34 years old, to cloak it. But, to proceed, you say, that you were ten years in retirement in the valley (not the valley of humility) of Virginia; and this is your argument for proving that you are an humble man! Did you ever read of Junius Brutus, of Cromwell, of Mahomet? surely you did" well, all these were humble men too, for they chose obscurity and retirement for a period of their lives! The author of the Alcoran and you appear to have had exactly the same period of time in seclusion, i. e. ten years; and verily I, for one, conceive, that the fruits of your retirement so far have not been one jot better than his. But you had the Bible with you! so it is presumable, yea certain, Mahomet had, and yet he came out from his seclusion with the designs of a demon, and to overturn all essential religion. You, however, suppose that if you carry a Bible about with you, that it is ample security that you are not selfish in your designs, that you are not ambitious. I'll tell you a little anecdote -- You recollect the History of France speaks of a person of distinction by the name of the Constable de Montmorenci; well, this constable was a Bible reading man, and a Pater-noster saying man. "Every morning," says the Historian, "whether he was at home or in the army, on a march or in the camp, he never neglected to recite or hear his pater-nosters: but it was a saying among the soldiers, 'Take care of the pater-nosters of Monsieur the constable;' it was but the prelude to hanging, piking, shooting, or cutting in pieces some that had offended him." You know, sir, how to make the application -- let us beware of Mr. Campbell's humiliations, and retirement, and Bible studyings, it is but a prelude to his hanging, shooting, piking, or cutting in pieces every body's reputation but his adherents. But, sir, seriously, after the references which I have given you, wherein retirement was but the prelude to ambitious efforts, and the many other instances that exist on the page of history, and are present to the well informed mind, after this I say, what are we to suppose of the character of those popular sects and eminent places who could select you to preside over them in the absence of so much intelligence as leads you to confound the most familiar evidence of a principle, for evidence against!! Now, having made manifest that the incidents to which you refer, as evidence of your not being a vain man, are altogether nugatory and directly against you, I shall hereafter furnish you with a brief chapter of evidence to prove that you are vain; and thus remove the second falsehood from my conjectures.

    Your third charge of falsehood, is founded upon my estimate of your publication of Debates on Baptism. Now let me say here, that I have more pleasure in correcting two errors in my former estimate, than I had in writing them: and the ear of Jehovah heard me tell you, "that if there was any error I would with pleasure correct it through the medium of your "Christian Baptist," and that I did not design you the least injustice." You refused to let me correct the error unless I would say, that I did not believe you a vain and avaricious man! This I could not, would not do. But, sir, after correcting all the error connected with the estimate of your publications, you will have nothing to boast of 00 alas! it had been better for you not to have said a word about it; but


    you have dragged my attention to it a second time, and I will not spare you, (I did before, as you will see directly.) After presenting my exhibit of your publications on the face of your review, you go on to remark, "Now let us coolly examine this forgery!" Indeed, sir, it was a serious subject to approach, and as well calculated to keep you cool as if you had been sitting beneath the droppings of an iceberg. But, indeed sir, you did not keep cool; you appeared to know your own febrile temperament, and very properly to give the admonition "keep cool," to yourself: but bodies of your dimensions when they become red hot are not cooled in a minute; and had you really been cool you never would have had the temerity to pronounce the exhibit I gave a "forgery." But sir, in justice to you, and in the most perfect harmony with what I before offered to do, I now say, that I was misinformed as to the exact number of the Debates which you have published; that is, 1000 copies in the first Debate, and 500 copies in the last. At the store of Messrs. Eichbaum & Johnson, of Pittsburgh, I got my information in reference to the number of copies of the first edition. Not that they told me positively the exact number was 2000 copies, but to the best of their recollection, (and they had been in frequent intercourse with you and bought the copy-right of the first Debate, and thus might be considered a reasonable source of information upon the subject) that was the number published, and that they thought they were correct. And mark! this information was given when they knew nothing of the object for which I wanted it; indeed I may say I was an entire stranger to them. This will remove from all minds any suspicion of intentional falsehood on their part, and shew also that there was no falsehood on my part, but an ordinary mistake, and for which, as I said before, I now cheerfully atone by making a correction thereof.

    In reference to the falsehood, as you call it, in the statement of the second Debate, I have simply to observe, that my information about that was derived from a person whom you had engaged to bind the whole edition, and who in speaking of the engagement he had made to do the binding for you, said, that "the job amounted to 6500 copies;" of course I concluded that it was 6500 copies of the Debate. But since then he has informed me that the odd hundreds were the "Christian Baptist." Here then I hope it will be manifest that I designed to write no falsehood or misrepresentation in either case. In both instances, however, I have made a mistake and willingly correct it. The mistake, however, does not prove the estimate a "forgery," as we shall now proceed to show. There is then to be deducted from the former exhibit, 1000 copies of the first Debate, and 500 hundred of the last. This being done, I shall have some addition to make that will repair the breach made in the former estimate by the deductions, to wit: --



    The "Christian Baptist," you will recollect, sir, I did not notice at all in my former estimate: and to anticipate carping at the statement given of it above, I shall inform you here, that I have been told ny a friend of mine, that a young man recently from your service stated, that your present number of subscribers for the "Christian Baptist" is 1500; if so, it is but a reasonable calculation to suppose the average number of subscribers, from the beginning, to be 1000 per annum. This, for two and a half years, (corresponding with the summer,) will give the above results. Here then, you perceive, I have lost nothing by your review of my estimate, and the deduction I have necessarily made. The calculation I have made in reference to your "Christian Baptist," is positively liberal in your favour. As to the transfer of 3000 of the volumes to other hands, and the division of the other 3000 copies with Mr. Sala, I have nothing to do with that, my object being to show, that you are still milking the goats and sheep, and that your publications are a source of large revenue to you, or to yourself and others. Not to leave any part of this subject unnoticed, I will repeat, in answer to your declaration, "that the paper and printing of the first Debate cost you more than 37 1/2 per copy," that I can get, and could then have got, the same published entire for 33 cents per volume. But you say, "the greatness of my speculation will appear when it is understood that I am legally bound, and my property alone responsible for all the expenses incurred in printing and binding 6000 copies, and that I am legally entitled to the profits resulting from the sale of 1500 copies, for the whole risk; having no security but the integrity of the young men for whom I finished 3000 copies, and all the materials for the 1500 copies of Mr. Sala were obtained on my responsibility. Besides all this, Mr. Sala and myself, out of our joint 3000 copies, have, instead of 12 1/2 cents per volume," (that is the 12 1/2 cents which I allow in my estimate per volume for distributing expenses) "given 40 cents to Mr. Heyworth for the sale of 500 copies that were not subscribed for." Now, sir, I mean to dissect this paragraph, briefly, and thereby give another feature of the moral complexion of your mind. I shall begin with the last member of it. You say, that you and Mr. Sala, out of your joint 3000 copies, allowed Mr. Heyworth 40 cents per copy for the sale of 500 copies that was not subscribed for, consequently we are to understand that the other 2500 copies were subscribed for. Here then we ask, in the first place, if you chose to allow Mr. Heyworth, or any other person, the extravagant commission of 40 per cent; or if you choose to make any man a partaker in the profits, upon what principles of common honesty could you venture to attempt to do it! But again, as it is now evident (thanks to you for it) that 2500 copies of yours and Mr. Sala's quota were subscribed for, I may promptly assert, that 6 1/4 cents of the 12 1/2 which I allowed in my estimate per copy, for expenses of distributing, may be taken from each of the 2500 copies. In this case, it will be found, that my original estimate for 5000 copies was twenty dollars less to your gain than the latter allowance, giving Mr. Heyworth his 40 cents per copy! and is this the sort of incident that you bring forward to invalidate my veracity? O shame, where is thy blush!

    The next member of the paragraph is, what you say of Mr. Sala's obligation to you for your securityship on his behalf. What liberality! what delicacy of feeling there is in the publication of such an incident! To confer a favour on a friend, and them publish it! Poor Mr. Sala, I am afraid when he was setting the type for that sentence he doled out, "necessitas non habet legum" -- necessity has no law.

    The other member of the paragraph is, the profession of your generosity and disinterestedness toward two young men. It is well, sir, that you publish these things, or I question whether they ever would be known. And it is possible that you write, and preach, and debate, and ride, and publish so largely, and all for nothing, and go security for so many persons besides!! Why you will


    fling Howard and Wilberforce into the shade, in point of benevolence, if you go on. (There will be no calling in question, I suppose, your intelligence!) May we not expect that you will, among other instances of your disinterested responsibilities, soon come to Pittsburgh and stand sponsor for that edition of your first Debate which Messrs. Eichbaum and Johnston published, at your recommendation, some four years ago, and after paying you 300 dollars for the copy-right! Now, sir, how will you make that probrosum artificium, or sordid artifice, which you practised upon them, harmonize with the statement you have given us of your liberalities to Mr. Sala and others! * You will recollect, sir, that you succeeded in disposing of the copy-right of your Debate to these gentlemen upon staking your veracity as a man, and an acquaintance, and minister! that you assured them, that the religious public on the sea-board were eager to obtain the work, and that an edition of 3000 copies would sell readily and to advantage there. And what has the event been? why, that they have given you 300 dollars for the copy-right and incurred an expense of about 1000 dollars in publishing your Debate, to have them to look at, having found in four years, sale for but 300 or 400, and that by exchanging them for other books. To borrow words from you, I say, "I shall make no comment on this transaction," only, that it is to be hoped in your new found liberalities you remember Messrs. Eichbaum and Johnston, refund them the 300 dollars, and take the responsibility of their edition off their shoulders. It will not be a miracle to be sure, but it will be a wonder of the first magnitude; and will harmonize with, and authorize THE BELIEF OF THOSE THREE FACTS (upon the best evidence in the world) of your liberality.

    There, sir, I told you that you would gain nothing by making me canvass again the "estimate" I made of your publications. Did circumstances admit, I would say much more upon this part of your review, every line of which exhibits something weak or cunning; indeed, your appearance therein is affectingly similar to that of the Ostrich's running her head into the bushes and imagining, that because that part of her body is hid, there is no danger of the rest.

    You go on to say you have been as yet "only nibbling" at a few of my "falsehoods." Nibbling, nibbling! what! has it so suddenly come to this, that Mr. Campbell nibbles at falsehoods? what a change! how different to his former capacity! and what is this nibbling to be ascribed to, loss of appetence, or the want of food? the former, I presume, may be considered as the cause, as the mind, like the body, sometimes gets surfeited. It cannot be the latter case; the internal resources are too great to admit of this idea: on the contrary, it is fairly presumable that it is your peculiar privilege in this respect to say, "soul, soul, take thine ease, thou hast much goods laid up for many years!" But, sir, how comes it that you have the peculiar faculty of discerning falsehood first among a thousand objects? does it never strike you, that some of your readers, not to say many of them, marvel at the promptness with which your mind fastens upon what has even the appearance of falsehood? and that they are ready to inquire, is it instinct, is it hereditary, or is it to be ascribed to habit? There is a saying from the lips of him, who well knew what was in man, that may, if quoted, throw some light upon the subject, i. e. "Where the carcass is, there will the eagles be gathered together," which in its moral I conceive to say, that the subject nearest to the heart of man will always be that on which his thoughts (eagles) will gather. The human mind must have its resting places, and we may judge of its character by the places to which it most familiarly resorts! If these places be evidently a quagmire and a mine we may safely conclude, that it is both filthy and covetous.

    I hope, sir, that the falsehoods you have been "nibbling" at, are fairly and fully proved to have been no falsehoods on my part. Now we come to notice your remaining charges of falsehood against me. You say, "concerning

    * In noticing this circumstance, I wish it to be understood, that it is no request, or perhaps not the wish of Messrs. Eichbaum & Johnston that it should be noticed.


    the baptism of Mr. Church, in one half page, Mr. Church himself," (was he unassisted by you and Mr. Scott?) "did, in my presence, and in the presence of Mr. Walter Scott, convict him of no less than the round number of one dozen." What faith you must have had in the credulity of your readers, to suppose that they would believe in this assertion, without your ever specifying one of the round dozen of falsehoods! and what a noble comment on your fair dealings, and mental integrity, to charge me, publicly, with telling twelve lies, without naming one of them. I suppose you thought this round assertion would prove rather Fulmina, non verba, (thunder-bolts, than words.) And is this, and things like this, part of your opus ordinable for heaven? O! what a heaven must that be, where such works are esteemed preparation for it! But, having waited for the coming forth of Mr. Scott's memorable "Reply," upon turning to that, I find some clue to what you mean, in your charge of falsehood, about Mr. Church's baptism, and shall proceed to notice them, in order, as they are enumerated. The first is, my statement, that Mr. Church "comes to your society, and says, that he will join your fraternity," &c. -- But you and Mr. Scott say, that he did not join your society. Well, be it so -- who then told the lie? me, or you and Mr. Scott, and his fraternity? ot was you and them, unquestionably. For you and they led him out by the hand to public baptism, and under your auspices he was baptized. And agreeable to all usages, agreeable to all order of the Baptist church, and agreeable to all impressions and expectations, made by this act of yours, upon the public mind, he (Church) became one of your body!! yes, and one and all of the spectators and hearers of Mr. Church's baptism, I venture to assert, (a part from yourself and Mr. Scott's party) unitedly said, or thought, that Mr. Church had joined your fraternity in Pittsburgh, or if you please, Mr. Scott's church. Who, then, was to be prepared for your eccentric, your inconsistent, your anti-gospel proceedings? and just as well might you have published the whole of the spectators at the baptism alluded to, as guilty of falsehood, as to publish me. The whole case is presented in this idea, to wit: -- If a Baptist church baptize an individual, and any person, seeing them do it, go away and report, that that individual has joined that church; then, because that church has chose to silently set aside her own order of proceeding, the person saying or reporting, that the said individual baptized, has joined that church which baptized him, is a liar; and that church may and does publish him as a liar! What a forcible comment this would be upon the piety and morals of the church that did it! Well, sir, you and the court-house fraternity of Pittsburgh, have done this. Yes, the "Holy and beloved brethren" have done it. That is the way, it appears, that you and they "entertain strangers." So ends one of my falsehoods respecting Mr. Church.

    The next of the twelve falsehoods is, what I state in relation to Mr. Church's belonging to various sects of professing christians. This is a fact -- you, sir, in your "Christian Baptist," confirm it, to wit: -- you say of him, "Mr. Church had been a member of different religious communities, and once a ruling elder of a congregation of Covenanters:" this is the fact that I asserted in my letters. The names and the number of the communities were suppositious! my language is, "say, or suppose, (as the names and number of the communities) Catholic, Episcopalian," &c. -- the supposition extended to the number of seven; and neither you, nor Mr. Scott, nor Mr. Church, say the number was less; and I now know, as a fact, and not as a supposition, that he, Church, has joined five or six different communities, and how many more I know not. So ends the second falsehood about Mr. Church.

    The next thing charged to me as falsehood about Mr. Church is, that I said he "bargained" with the court-house fraternity to discourse about baptism. I no where said he bargained: my language is, "he, (Church) says, that he will join your fraternity, and at his induction deliver an address upon baptism." Well, hundreds of persons, I may venture to assert, knew, for many days before


    Church was baptized, that he was going to be baptized, and to harangue at the water: this, as the saying is, was the "town talk;" and this proves, that there was an agreement between you and him, and the court-house fraternity, before the event took place; that he offered himself for baptism, that he agreed to harangue! no, say you, by the pen of your sapient help-mate, Mr. Scott, (and in your charge of twelve lies against me about Church) no, the assertion is false, Mr. Church did not agree with us, we agreed with him. He did not offer him self to us, we offered ourselves to him! Well, there may be something of truth in that, to be sure. It being morally certain, that Mr. Church must have offered himself to you and the court-house people, or, that you and they offered yourselves to him! there is some probability that the latter was the case. I will shew you an item of the evidence upon which I found that idea, by giving an extract from that lullaby pamphlet of Mr. Scott's; who says, in addressing what he calls saints of Pittsburgh, "But you have no tradition to confess in order to obtain our fellowship, so that the gulph, which bad men have thrown between us, is still passable from your side; you may escape it if you choose -- we are standing with the Bible and with open arms to receive you." This is making considerable advances to the multitude, and openly; from which we may infer, that in the individual case of Mr. Church, and in secret, greater condescensions may have been manifested. I remember a similar instance of fowardness, as related by the wise man; you will find it in Prov. ix. 13 to 18. * But after all the implied quibble, that Mr. Church did not agree with you, but you with him; it is equally certain, that if you did agree with him, he must also have agreed with you, to join you and harangue; unless you used coercion with him. Thus ends the third falsehood, and you and Mr. Scott reducto ad absurdum, to say the best of you.

    The next falsehood is founded upon my statement of the time Mr. Church spoke at the water. I say five hours -- you, sir, say it was three hours and a quarter, and another says it was four hours; another four hours and a half, and another five hours. The general statement, immediately subsequent to the occurrence, was five hours; since then, however, I find there is some difference of opinion as to the exact time your disciple did speak. But all nearly agree in saying, that the time occupied by him was from half past nine to about half past two o'clock, in the afternoon: and though he, (Church) at intervals suspended his remarks, to give time for his lungs to cool, and thereby reduced the time of his actual speaking from three to four hours, yet he kept the people at the water for about five hours; and as there was nothing else attended to or done, there was not, nor is not, any departure from truth in saying that he harangued for five hours. I will rest my claim to veracity, upon that. It is certainly to be regretted, that these little incidents of indifferent character should have met your eye, while under one of your occasional contradictions of the moral thorax, in which a gnat strains and threatens to choke you; or, when your vision was darkened with the jaundice of malevolence, by which all that I said appeared to you coloured with the gall of enmity. Because I said Mr. Church harangued five hours, it is not only set down as a falsehood, but as an expression, with other things, of ill will to Mr. Church. Now, let us scrutinize this subject a little, and ascertain if there is the shadow of ground for such an idea. Mr. Church delivers an harangue of from three to five hours -- the exact time is questionable. The least, or shortest time mentioned, is three hours, and the longest five hours. Now it cannot be a matter of doubt, but what Mr. Church considered both the conception and delivery of this Oration, as meritorious! consequently, the more there was of it, the greater the wreath of merit for the brow of Mr. Church! I gave him the largest time that was mentioned, and consequently a claim to the full measure of praise that the case could afford! and this is called enmity to Mr. Church! and why is it called so? because, since Mr. Church delivered his harangue, he has seen that it was regarded with contempt, by almost every body,

    * It may be worth the reader's time to turn to this reference.


    and has himself become ashamed of it, as well as you and Mr. Scott; hence your charge of enmity on my part to Church.

    The next falsehood appears to be, that I said, Mr. Church recited what you had written on Baptism. And I say so still. My words in my former letters, are, "He (Church) gives a recitation of what you have compiled, and published upon that ordinance, from the writings of other men." Now, you and Mr. Scott, and Mr. Church, suppose I mean, that Mr. Church sat down and got by wrote, all your Debates on Baptism, and thus recited them! Indeed, if I had thought so, I should have approached Mr. Church with something like the same reverential awe that Lord Erskine felt in the presence of the illustrious Washington; Mr. Church would have been a model of patience, to which all the world might have done homage with propriety. No sir, I mean no such thing, and you know it! you know that I meant that Mr. C. ranged o'er the same field of ecclesiastical history, &c. that you did in your Debates! and so say all the hearers of that harangue, that have ever saw your Debates. There terminates, then, another of my falsehoods against Church, and amounts, in a word, to this -- because I say you wrote, or copied in writing, the speech of Tertullus against Paul, and Mr. Church recited the same speech, viva voce, therefore, I say, that Mr. Church learned it of you, alias, I lie!

    The next, and the last falsehood of the "round dozen," that I can see in your review, or the "Reply" of your bell-wether, Mr. Scott, is that, of my saying Church had "professed, and reprofessed" -- this is modestly called by Scott, a mistake; but by you adverted to as a falsehood. But I will shew that it is neither the one nor the other. You say, and I say, that Mr. C. has made "different professions" in religion. Well, when he first professed, it was, I conclude, as he thought, "the one faith," this was the substance of his profession! when he professed again, and again, did he not profess the same thing, and thus in all these instances, reprofess? I say, he did reprofess the "one faith," for there is but one. If you, sir, or your worthy associates, chose to give a different meaning to the words, than what they legitimately convey, myself nor no other person, is bound to be responsible for what we may write.

    I have now done with all the falsehoods which Mr. Scott registers against me, in reference to Mr. Church, and they are the whole I can find. The twelve, the "round dozen" then, have somehow or other, became reduced to five in number. How is it, that there does not more of them appear? may it be ascribed to your forbearance or Mr. Scott's? No, this will never be believed, after the exhibit I have given of the foundation and complexion of the five already noticed.

    I shall return again to your review. You accuse me of intimating that Mr. Church held "a delusion that would only be dissipated in hell." The grounds upon which this idea was predicted, will be fairly seen, when I come to notice a few of your own sentiments upon that subject -- I mean the subject of baptism. It will be no wonder, then, that I should conclude thus of Mr. Church, as well as every person who permits you to baptize them. Then follows a charge of another falsehood, about the time occupied by you in debating upon baptism. Here, I readily concede, there is a palpable error; but an error that never could have injured you in the least degree. Allow me to explain the ground of that mistake. It was thus -- having both of your Debates before me, I referred to one of them for the time taken up in the Debate, and found it from the 15th to the 21st of the month; something intervened at the moment, to draw off my attention, and when I took it up, as I thought, the other Debate, I got hold of the one I had previously looked into; the mistake was more easily made, as, in both instances, I had no object but to look for the time the argument lasted. You justly observe, that it was "unguarded," as it really was, considering the individual to whom it referred, and with whom I had to deal: one, who is ever eager to catch an adversary accidentally at fault, or glean an equivocal expression from an opponent; you are a very tyger at denial, assertion, and


    haughty invective in such a case. But more of this hereafter. You go on to observe, that in your first Debate with Walker, you "was written to three times," before you accepted of the challenge. Who wrote to you? not Mr. Walker? no, it was a Baptist minister, Mr. Birch: and who knows, but it was a preconcerted thing between you and Mr. Birch? This is a conjecture, to be sure, but one, in a measure, authorised by a knowledge of your "ruling passion." It is certain, you left the essential interests of those who were more immediately under your care, as a teacher, to go elsewhere, to contend for subordinate principles. And it is certain, and positive, and true, that you never did receive a challenge from a Paido-baptist, to debate. This I should not notice so emphatically, had you not laid yourself out to impress the public mind to the reverse, and to give the shade of falsehood to my remarks thereon.

    Your reference to my remarks about your influence in the Baptist church, leads me here to notice, that it is with extreme satisfaction that I find, that influence is much more limited than I thought it was, when I wrote my former letters; and though still "undue and deleterious," I hope, e'er long, to see it more contracted, and in the end, totally "destroyed." The disproportionate noise and clamour of your adherents, is calculated to deceive one materially, as to their number! and I find it is no rule to judge of their numbers by, no more than the thousand time broken voice of the speakers in St. Paul's, is a criterion for those, at its dome, to determine the number that speak. It is really diverting to bear with what gravity some of your admirers (though perhaps not altogether to the credit of their intelligence) occasionally inquire, what they say about Mr. Campbell "over the mountains? if they do not think him a great man," &c. This brings to my recollection, a circumstance connected with the travels of one of the English explorers of Africa, who, having penetrated farther into the country than any of his predecessors, found a new tribe of Afric's sable sons; the Prince of whom, in an audience granted to the Englishman, among other things, asked the latter, "what they thought of himself and his kingdom in Europe, and if his Britannic majesty did not often speak of him, and desire to see him," &c. Nature, you perceive, has not been sparing in the gift of vanity, to any of her children; and it might cool the ardour of some of your admirers, if they were told, that you are known about as well over the mountains, and spoken of about as much as the African Prince alluded to, was in England.

    You very properly took notice of what I said, by way of commendation, of your fraternity, in their attentive perusal of the scriptures. This I did do, and it afforded me pleasure to say that much favourably of them. But you will recollect, that in that case, I judged of the whole by the society meeting in the court-house here! Subsequently, I have had cause to believe that the court-house society by no means represent many others of your friends; on the contrary, there are many of them as remiss as the assumed criterion appears diligent in that respect. In the notice, however, that I took of the bible-reading of your Pittsburgh brethren, I did them nothing but justice, and should be glad to say a thousand things more favourably of them. But as the case stands at present, I cannot help associating with that exercise of theirs, the anecdote of monsieur the Constable's bible readings, and pater-nosters, as well as Mr. Campbell's valley studies.

    In the concluding paragraph of the first part of your review, you profess yourself to "have been obliged to make this defence of your character, from regard to the truths which you advocate." Well, if you have defended, I have re-assailed, and if the breaches have not been enlarged and multiplied ten to one, I am under some optical delusion. Touching the truths you advocate, they may be in existence and perceptible to you, (mark! I mean in intelligible connexion) but to very few, if to any other person. Your readers, when they open your Christian Baptist, are in circumstances somewhat similar to those of Samson at the mill of Gaza, or at the amphitheatre, where he lost his life; in the former, he required some other hand to lead him to his task, and in the latter,


    to direct him to the pillars: so your readers grope, and will grope, until you can add, to your other distinguished attainments, locomotion equal to the Genii of ancient lore, and be present to direct and lead their minds, individually, into your meaning. It was well observed to me a few days since in the country, by a sensible, reading, and I hope a pious woman, (one too that in former times was strongly disposed to esteem you) "that, as a writer, you were like a man with a muffled dagger, approaching his fellow mortal to transfix a death wound upon his body, when he was expecting the embrace of friendship -- that such was the covert character of your writings; and while gilded with fair words, they were foul and deadly poison." Another individual, and a man of sober sense and well poised mind, during the same excursion, observed, with some emotion too, for he had been, perhaps, a sufferer in the case, "that your writings, i. e. your "Christian Baptist," ought to be burned as fast as it was published, if there was no other cause than the clamour, feud, and confusion it produced in families where it was received, as to what were its truths, and what you really did mean:" or, if you really knew what you meant yourself, I added. Now, a more pertinent, solid remark, about the intrinsic merit and desert of your writings, I have not heard, than that which this man made, for it was founded "ON THE BELIEF OF ONE FACT,["] and that fact possessing the best evidence in the world: the fact was, the general contention among people, as to what you mean, and the evidence, the eyes and ears, of the human body. These are but two, out of a numerous list of cases of a similar sort, that I might refer to, was it not for the expense of printing. From what has been said, you will perceive, that your lucubrations have something ROYAL about them; that is, they are like Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar's dreams: they want a Daniel to interpret them, if they are at all susceptible of interpretation. I shall have occasion to say a few more words to this point, anon. and shall proceed with your review after adding, that it appears scarcely more worth your while to defend these "truths," if such be their character, than it was for the Greeks to defend the pass of Thermoplyae; you will, like them, loose [sic] your life in the effort, and die inglorious too.

    Now then, for the interview to which you allude, when you say, "I asked him to make a recantation of the whole pamphlet, and I should publish his recantation." This interview has been noticed by you and Mr. Scott, in a very disjointed, and I think, unfair manner: as there is a judge of quick and dead, I will make a true statement thereof. -- On a Friday afternoon, immediately subsequent to the publication of my letters, you came into Pittsburgh, and called upon Messrs. Eichbaum and Johnson, the printers, for my name. They at once shewed you the written condition which I have exhibited in a former part of this address, and told you, that if you wanted my name upon a principle of justice to yourself, and would prove so, by agreeing to that condition, that my name should be given to you. To this condition, you then said, you would not agree, and left the store of Messrs. E. & J. and in about an hour after, came down to my house in company with Mr. Rigdon, to see me, as the suspected author of the letters. Having introduced yourself, in a short time after you introduced your business, and gave me virtually to understand that you had seen the printers and complied with my condition! this I can prove. But it so occurred, that during the interval between your leaving the bookstore of Messrs. Eichbaum & Johnston and your calling upon me, that I met with a young gentleman who is in the service of Messrs. E. & J. and who was present when you called upon the latter; from whom I got information of [your] interview with Messrs. E. & J. and the results. Hence I was prepared to foil you in your characteristic manoeuvreing, and did foil you: though I must confess, I was astonished at the mental prostitution you exhibited in the case, i. e. making your mind bow to the utterance of certain ambiguous, double-meaning remarks, about your calling on the printers, which remarks, though they were designed and calculated to impress my mind with the idea that you had complied with the conditions and obtained


    my name, left it in your power to say, that you did not tell me, you had got my name, in direct terms, and therefore you uttered no falsehood. Such was the feature of deception in which you first presented yourself to me; while in your associate, Mr. Rigdon, there was exhibited a similar one. Of the latter, however, you were ignorant, and are still so. I will sketch the feature to you briefly in Mr. Rigdon, to the end, that yourself and others may see how truly you were yoke-fellows. You remember, no doubt, (I can prove it, if you do not) that in the course of the interview alluded to, Mr. Rigdon observed, upon my saying that I would not have you speak to me as the author of the letters, he observed I say, that he "thought that I was not the author, that I was too much of a gentleman and christian to write them." Now mark! first, I can prove that he, Mr. Rigdon, did say, at the store of Eichbaum & Johnson, that he "thought and felt satisfied that I was the author;" and this he said before you and him came to see me! Again, Mr. R. pronounced me to be a gentleman and a christian, in the above interview; and a few weeks before, and after his hearing me preach warmly against Sandeminian sentiments, (though I did not know at the time he was one of the congregation) he gave me the dignified appellation of a Jack-ass. Now, how can these things be made to agree? O am sure, that in the first instance, there is an absolute impossibility; Mr. R. then, must be guilty of tergiversation -- deception. The latter case is equally inexplicable to me, though it may not be so to every one. Mr. R's intelligence in this instance, as perhaps in many others, extends far beyond mine. He may have been familiar with the case, and the process too, whereby a Jack-ass, in a few short weeks, became transformed into a gentleman! for my part, I profess entire ignorance of the subject -- I am no Pythagorean. But, as I said, I really thought at the time, that these two incidents about Mr. R. gave him a fair claim to be considered as a yoke-fellow to you -- in deception.

    In the morning of the Saturday following, you called upon me in company with Mr. Church and Mr. Scott, (in this instance I had no one with me) and you informed me, that you had now agreed to the condition and positively got my name. I then observed, that the course for you to pursue was plain, and that I expected you to take legal measures to prove that there was calumny against you, in my letters -- Your reply was, I wish to settle the affair in a different way; we are both christians, and I want to treat the thing on gospel ground; alias (in a word) and to use your own expressions, you wanted me to recant all I had said about your gain, your hostility to the Paido-baptists, and your vanity. I told you, that I did not believe you to be a christian, and therefore should not think of settling the case in any other way than according to the letter of the condition. That if I had made any mistake about the number of copies which you published of your Debates, as there was a possibility of my having done it, I would, with pleasure, upon finding out the mistake, offer you a written correction thereof, to be inserted in your "Christian Baptist;" observing, at the same time, in effect, that though I held many of your sentiments in perfect abhorrence, it was far from my wish to be thought of as your enemy, or capable of doing the least injustice to you. This, is what you call a partial recantation. Give it what name you please, and I glory in having manifested, from my heart, such a disposition, and thus given evidence that I was capable of correcting my own errors, or of atoning for my faults. Though here there was no fault; it was a mistake of others.

    The "full recantation" you speak of my having offered to make, in reference to Mr. Church, is much of the same complexion with the other. Mr. Church complained about the people's believing, that my supposed names of the "different communities," which you say he belonged to, were real, and that I designed them to be considered real! this, I told him, was not so, and far from my intention for it to be thought so; that it was easy to correct the false impression, and that I should feel a pleasure in doing it. Mr. Church then told me, that he did not speak five hours; he had not learned from Mr. Campbell's Debates,


    what he said at the water; he had not joined the court-house society; to all of which, I briefly replied, that wherever there was an error of that sort, and I was satisfied that it was an error, I would with pleasure correct them; and as these things are adverted to by you, in the "round dozen" of falsehoods you charge me with, they have already been explained and corrected; and just the same explanation and correction I should have given them, had I made that insertion in the "Recorder," to which Mr. Church alludes in his letter in Mr. Scott's "Reply." And. here I notice, once for all, that the correction of the mistakes, as to Mr. Church's time of speaking at the water, that correction, I say, was promised upon the condition that it would prove satisfactory to Mr. Church; and he said, "it would be entirely so;" and then, mark! he went out and gave me the name of "a regular liar," with other names of the same sort -- "venerable saint!" From this it appears, that when Mr. Church told me that the correction proposed, would be "entirely satisfactory," he uttered a falsehood, for he was not satisfied! but went through the town giving me those illiberal names adverted to; and again, he violated the condition upon which I promised the correction, i. e. "if that would be satisfactory," and of course, cancelled all obligations for my taking any notice of the case -- he having taken the thing into his own hands! I will rest my claim to honour, veracity, and justice, upon the propriety of my proceeding altogether, in this case. Well, sir, the interviews between us, of which so much has been said by yourself and party, ended in your going away without any recantation, as you call it, more than what I have here noticed. And this recantation, or correction of certain indifferent mistakes about the time of your debating, and Mr. Church's haranguing, if they had been given sooner, it would have only the sooner shewed your mutual capability in making mountains out of mole-hills. Your comparing yourself, in this part of your "review," as well as throughout your writings, to John the Baptist, the Son of man, and the Apostles, while it is designed to enlist the sympathies of your adherents, and your readers, in your behalf; to the eye of intelligence, presents itself as an evidence of your ill disguised and consummate vanity. When the complexion of your mind, the character of your disposition, the levity of your spirit, the ribaldry of your writings, the theatrical airs of your orations, and the grand effect of the whole upon others, are exhibited as a counterpart to the character and ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles, I think we may say, that human insolence is consummated. You notice, that I have said, "the devil is your master;" he is the master of us all, by nature -- "the string man armed, holding his goods in peace." There my meaning was, that you are an unregenerated man, and to say the best of you, in your public character and relationship, I should use the language of St. Austin, to a certain young man of some parts: -- Cupit abs te ornari diabolus -- the devil desires to be adorned by thee. As we noticed before, your cry, and the cry of your friends, is persecution, persecution, persecution; but the thing will become too inconsistent to the mind of all, e'er long, to have any effect. Let me here remark another unmeasurably broad feature of your vanity; that is in this -- you think you can write year in and year out, about the character of others, and do a thousand other things faultless; you think you can give the tens of thousands of the wisest of men in religious society instruction; you think you are a standard for the morals, the piety of the thousands of most holy and upright of the community. With such a measure of vanity, it is no wonder if a little adoration from your admirers, has produced in your mind an effervescence, like the union of acid and alkali; under which, you now even anticipate the celebrated motto, veni, vidi vinci -- You already publish your intended orations for months before they take place. Has this a parallel? Now, sir, if you think yourself capable of exercising correct judgment about the multitudes that you write of, and competent to be the reformer of so many, is it not reasonable to suppose that there may be an individual, now and then, as capable of understanding your character, and reforming you, as you are to reform the multitude? and here let me tell you,


    in the spirit of true philosophy, i. e. in knowledge based upon experience, that you do and say a great deal too much, to do it well, unless you were an inspired man -- where there is so much in a bottle, it must be for the greater part truth!

    You intimate, that I am advocating the Westminster catechism, in my former letters! what barefaced injustice -- what a pitiful subterfuge; but then it chimes with all other parts of your writings; and revives to my recollection an observation of an intelligent Baptist minister, made yesterday, when asked what he thought of your "Christian Baptist;" he answered, to the persons, (your adherents too) that if they wanted to become possessed with the spirit of levity, of low cunning, or the spirit of the world, generally, connected with something like half-wit; then they might read your writings to advantage! Sir, I never alluded to the Westminster creed at all -- and you know that I did not! what object then had you in view in intimating that I did so? It was to confound my unqualified expression of estimation in the Baptist "Confession of Faith" as an epitome of Bible truths, and church order, with the lordly, pompous establishment of a national church, or ecclesiastical hierarchy! another instance of that artifice, by which you distort person and things, and move to laughter, your giddy admirers.

    I have now went over that part of your review which particularly refers to my veracity. I have been somewhat lengthy in my remarks thereon; and I hope not without some advantage, as you shall see directly. I am necessarily limited in my writing, or I would extend my strictures to the second part of your review of my letters, and in so doing, shew that it possesses the same marks of bold assertion, palpable contradiction, disingenuous perversion, and direct falsehood, as the first part exhibits. For the present, I have only an opportunity to notice a few of the more prominent items of the conclusion of your review; among which, is your charge of grammatical and biblical ignorance on my part. To this I have nothing to say, further than that I have, as yet, laid no claim to being one of the deliciae literatae. If there was a score of grammatical errors in my former letters, still I have the satisfaction of knowing, that I was understood in what I wrote -- this is what you cannot boast of, for even in your own writings you are frequently saying, "that we did not mean so and so." Perhaps it is the grammatical splendour of your sentences, that so entirely obscures your meaning! But why did you not point out the grammatical errors? this would have been kind and friendly in you, and made manifest your own knowledge of language; as it is, it looks too much like the "round dozen" of falsehoods you charged me with about Mr. Church, without naming one of them. Sir, I believe, that as many errors of grammar as existed in my former letters, you have an eye to detect, and an ability to correct: why did you not do it, and thus give for once an item of value to your writings. You are a man of words -- I profess to be more familiar with person and things; you are (we will suppose) well conversant in all the inflections belonging to a verb or noun -- I profess to be skilled in the inflections of character -- that has been my study -- "every one hath his gift!" I will venture to promise you, that the errors of grammar which you point out in my letters, I will exhibit as many in your own writings; and yet here there is no question about your superiority.

    The ignorance you charge me with "of the scriptures," is but too true! I feel that I know nothing of them as I ought to know. But, sir, the instances you cite of my ignorance, are no evidence at all of it; they are evidence of your own ignorance, or something worse. You ought to have known that the name apostle was apploed to Epaphroditus -- also to the brethren who accompanied Titus -- also Andronicus and Junia (Rom. xvi. 7) -- and to Barnabas as well as Paul (Acts xiv. 14) -- and that the seventy disciples are called apostles by Tertullian (what an ignorant man Tertullian was, compared with Mr. C.) and why then not call Philip an apostle? because, Mr. C. wants to prove that I am a very ignorant man! admirable purpose! You may say with David, but from widely different reasons, "O how I love thy law." The other two instances you give of my


    ignorance, are of no more force than the first. I say again, "That Barnabas washed away by the dissimulation of false teachers," as stated in Gal. ii. 12, 13. In the last instance you give of my biblical ignorance, you only betray your own miserable delusion, in supposing that baptism is the "washing of regeneration." This feature of your awful ignorance of the spirit of the gospel, we shall have occasion to mention again. The man that can talk or write about baptism being the same thing as the "washing of regeneration," is blind indeed.

    In the latter part of your review, you charge me with calumnies and slander of the court-house church of Pittsburgh. If they, and if you are, as you have stated, caluminated, and slandered, why did you not prosecute me? Why did you not fulfil your promise? the condition, upon which you got my name from the printers. What an easy thing it is for you, and them, to publish me as a calumniator, &c. but it is a different affair to prove it! I am a stranger, isolated and alone, comparatively, and yet I do not fear to meet you and them too, to answer for all I have written about you. And had I not more important things to fill up my paper with, I would here give you the name of the church I alluded to, and a history of them, that should make good all that I charged them with: this, however, they have in a measure rendered unnecessary, having published themselves as no "Regular Baptist" Church -- this is so much to their credit -- "go thou and do likewise;" publish yourself as no regular Baptist, or I shall do it for you. I shall notice an instance of mutual flattery between you and the court-house church, confirmatory of my assertion, "that you and your fraternity are flatterers of each other." You say, in your review of my letters, ["]that this pamphleteer has honoured me too much, in representing them as my disciples." In return for this fine compliment, Mr. Scott says, (refering to me) "I think, however, that you may yet be immortal. I think Mr. Campbell may yet touch you with his pen, and then you will live." Now, you think it too much of an honour to have them called your disciples; you wish that you had myriads of such disciples, and yet, they have published themselves as being no regular Baptists, and the preceding documents, i. e. the letter of elder Wheeler, and the certificate of the council of ministers show, that they are no Baptists, but Sandeminians!! What must you be, then, who have such delight in them? such estimation of them! No Baptist church regards this court-house fraternity as a church! upon what principle of consistency then, do you, who call the regular Baptists your "brethren," call them so too? You repeat your charge against me of preaching for hire, and vehemently declaim against my conjectures and ifs; all of which, together with the rest of this part of your review, I must necessarily deny myself the satisfaction of analyzing, for I cannot, like you, print when and as much as I please. I shall proceed to recapitulate, briefly, what I have exhibited in the foregoing pages, in reference to myself and you; leaving your declamations about my conjectures and ifs, to meet their answer from the extracts which I shall make hereafter from your own writings.

    In the recapitulation proposed, I have, I think, fairly and fully shown, that all the falsehood that you charged me with, amounts to two, or, at most, three mistakes! to wit: -- a mistake in the number of copies published of your Debates -- 2d, a mistake in the time occupied by you in debating -- 3d, a mistake as to the exact time Mr. Church was haranguing at the water. To every one that reads the foregoing pages with attention, I persuade myself it will appear manifest, that these three mistakes are the sum total of my falsehoods against you. On the other hand, and in reference to you, I have shown, 1st, That you violated your solemn pledge to Messrs. Eichbaum & Johnston, or rather to me through them, to prosecute me if my name was given to you: that name was given to you solely upon condition, that you would prosecute, and you have not done it.

    2d, I have clearly proved you guilty of slander and falsehood against me, in having published me as a hired minister.

    3d, I have clearly proved you guilty of slander and falsehood against the regular


    Baptist church of Pittsburgh, in saying, in your "Christian Baptist," that they were an "excluded party from a regular Baptist church."

    4th, I have put the negative upon your assertion, that the Academy at Pittsburgh was offered to you. And I have warned you, that it is not believed, that you ever had those great offers from popular sects, and of eminent places, which you boast of having received.

    5th, I have exhibited the very circumstances that you advert to, as evidence of your not being ambitious -- as evidence to the reverse.

    6th, I have shown, that you were guilty of unqualified falsehood, when you called my estimate of the profits from your publications, a "forgery." That instead of being a "forgery," my estimate fell short, one thousand dollars of the gain, from your publications.

    7th, I have shown, the strongest circumstantial evidence, that you are a compound of meanness, selfishness, and vanity, from the indelicate and cruel publication of the names of the persons that you have, professedly, obliged by becoming responsible for them -- even to your own partner in business. The man that could do this, never did perform a liberal action, and ought not to have the means of offering a favour!

    8th, I have shown evidence, in your sordid artifice, practised upon Messrs. Eichbaum & Johnston, that your claim to fair dealing, much more to disinterested liberalities, is cancelled. And that you are bound to refund them the 300 dollars given you for your copy-right of your Debate, and take the edition off their hands, e'er you may boast of your liberalities.

    9th, I have shown, that your resort to the mere verbal, or indifferent, mistakes of those who oppose you, as falsehoods, shows that your own mind has much dalliance with the subject -- that it is deeply imbued therewith.

    10th, I have shown, the barefaced injustice that you are capable of doing a man, from your having arraigned me at the tribunal of the public mind, as guilty of having told one "round dozen of falsehoods," without ever naming one of them!! O what a pledge to the public that you are dealing "truly and kindly" with them in your ministerial functions! But, perhaps, your plea is that of a certain New Englander, who, in support of his character as a professor, said, "that nobody could deny, but what he was, God-ward, nation clever; though man-ward he was, to be sure, sometimes, rather twistical." Sir, you cannot point out, in the whole annals of monkish persecution and inquistorial barbarity, an instance of more flagrant injustice, than the above charge against me exhibits.

    11th, I have shown you guilty of direct falsehood, in your stating, that I told a dozen of falsehoods about Mr. Church, when he, (Church) and you, and Scott, have only been able to state five of the twelve you charge me with.

    12th, I have shown you guilty of a DIRECT falsehood, in stating, that you had to threaten the printers of my letters with a civil suit, before you could get my real name! Whereas, they told you, they would not give up my name unless you would prosecute me.

    13th, I have exhibited you telling an indirect falsehood, by insinuating, that I wanted my name known, as a gratification to my vanity; whereas, the fact is, I did every thing to prevent its being made public that, in justice to you, I could do.

    14th, I have shown you guilty of another indirect falsehood, in your calling upon me and attempting, by equivocal expressions, to impress my mind with the idea, that you had complied with my condition to the printers, and had got my name, when you had not done either one or the other.

    15th, I have proved you guilty of falsehood, in your saying, that I made an offer to recant part of what I had written about you, and all that I had written about Church; and your falsehood here, is evident from these circumstances -- 1st, you came twice to see me, and spent three hours and a half, or more, in the


    two visits, in trying to get me to recant; but you got no recantation, or you would have exhibited it. You got a frank and voluntary declaration from me, that if there was any of the little errors you and Church talked of, that I would myself correct them; and this declaration you have tried to exhibit as a recantation! again, and conclusively, that I made no recantation, is evident from my having put you under your pledge, to prosecute me before you said any thing about a recantation. You had pledged yourself to prosecute me; and then, according to your story, you came to me, when you was pledged to prosecute, and I recanted! alias, I became witness against myself, and furnished you with the means of triumphing in the prosecution you were pledged to enter against me!! Well, I suppose you write for some who will believe this assertion of yours, and surely, they may boast of as much credulity as the devotees of the "Holy maid of Kent."

    In a word, and not to foreclose other things by continuing my recapitulation, I have given the character, I have exhibited the moral complexion of eight small pages of your writings, as a SAMPLE for the public to judge of the rest by. And had I time, or rather could I afford to do it, I would publish strictures upon the whole of your writings, (C. B.) that would present them, in the whole lump, as agreeing with the sample. By hypocrisy, prevarication, direct falsehood, railing, sophistication and ribaldry, you are indebted for your momentary triumphs over an antagonist. You persuade yourself, that you are a mighty Reformer, a demi-culverin of controversy: but when closely examined, you turn out to be a mere Tom Thumb, swaggering your way to distinction by means, which, when properly known, will sink you to the lowest contempt. In your wordy debates about baptism, you have came off triumphant, with the arguments of other men as your weapons; from which triumphs, in debating on baptism, you have become full of the idea, that you will prove a tyger among all your assailants. But take care you do not find yourself, e'er long, in the folds of the Anaconda, and while writhing in agony, be literally crushed in its folds.

    I shall now proceed to make some extracts from your writings, after saying a word in reference to that echo of your review, from the pen of Mr. Scott. That pamphlet of Mr. Scott, was written by way (among other reasons) of drawing off my attention from you, into a controversy with the court-house fraternity, there is no doubt. But Mr. C. insignificant as I am, I cannot descend to the dessection of flies; or as your verse says, "To shoot at crows, is powder thrown away." Of the pamphlet as a whole, I am, perhaps, not competent to judge correctly; I can only say, that when I had read it through, the lines of the poet came fresh to my mind, where he asks,
    "What image of their fury can we form?
    Dulness and rage, a puddle in a storm!"

    Mr. Scott, the writer of that pamphlet, I am informed, is called, one of the best teachers in Pittsburgh; it is well he did not put that in his book, or the intellectual character of Pittsburgh would have received a most cruel injury. To judge of his attic story from the pamphlet he has written, and one would say, that it is like a poet's wardrobe -- every thing after its kind -- piteously threadbare! If that pamphlet has not occasioned him the loss of many of his scholars, I shall marvel at ot -- further demands, then, Mr. C. upon your liberalities! In this pamphlet, Mr. Scott professes, not to "interfere in what concerns you and me," and yet his book he calls expressly "a Reply" to my letters to you; and four-fifths of the book is taken up for you -- your name is conned over about one hundred times!! and yet, he don't, he says, "interfere!" How charmingly this chimes with your consistency! Mr. Scott offers to let me "rake his character fore and aft, for five cents" -- he throws himself heroically between you and danger. What self-devotion -- St. Pierre of Calais does not equal it -- no longer shall the friendship of Jonathan and David, or Damen and Pythias, be referred to as examplary, but that of Mr. Scott and Mr. Campbell. In this pamphlet, Mr. S. pretty plainly intimates that he is an amiable and an honest man. It


    may be so; but really, any one giving into the favourite science of Lavater, would find the assertion a "sticking point" for his faith. I would advise Mr. S. to make himself familiar with the physiognomy of a very prominent figure in West's celebrated picture of the "breaking of bread," to the end, that he may learn to be cautious in laying claim to any thing of the sincere or amiable. In this book, why did they not, in connexion with you, sir, prosecute me, according to my condition. Now, sirs, don't publish me as a falsifier -- but prove me so -- prosecute me according to agreement and pledge, and I will make good, all I have said about Mr. C. or the court-house fraternity. Mr. Scott, in his book, sets Mr. Church to write to me upon polemics -- a fly in amber! a beetle surveying the pass of Thermopylae! Poor man, may God give his precious soul the power of godliness, he has had the form long enough. Mr. Scott, in his book, calls himself and brethren "Holy brethren," and pretends to write for them in the gentleness of an angel -- and the spirit of the Saviour toward his enemies, when he cried, "Father forgive them." Now, tell Mr. Scott, that I will prove, if he thinks necessary, that he and they were "bitter against me as serpents," when they wrote under the affectation of meekness.

    Mr. Scott, in his book, has said, that the court-house fraternity is no Regular Baptist Church; this is what I wanted, and this is so much to their credit. Had they not done it, I should have done it for them. You may, Mr. C. take one lesson of them at least -- a lesson of common candour -- of consistency. Mr. Scott, in his book, has inserted a certificate of Elder David Philips, for the purpose of making me appear a liar; that certificate will be well disposed of at the end of this pamphlet. Mr. Thomas Campbell, Messrs. Scott and Co. may be thankful that I do not enter into an analysis of their joint effort to destroy my credibility. Yes, I say, they have reason to be thankful that I have neither time nor space for it. It has been as tedious to go over the first part of your review, (the second part has something like mind about it) Mr. C. as to follow an ox cart through a Virginia sand flat. My patience is not equal to untwisting Mr. Scott's "Reply!" Besides, when I had done it, it would only be to repeat of Mr. S. what I have exhibited of your character, from your review. But I would caution Mr. S. and his fragile band, to beware how they lend themselves to you as a cat's-paw, lest they provoke to an exposure of themselves, that they perhaps do not dream of -- The little character they retain, is held by a precarious title -- they are barely tenants at sufferance. As they have honestly declared themselves no Baptists, they have my best wishes that they may be a benefit to the community where they are. So much, sir, for the "Reply." I now leave you to the keen vibrations of the preceding truth, and shall conclude my present address, with an appropriate extract from Junius, in a few words of wholesome advice to Sir William Draper: -- "From the lessons you have received, you may collect a profitable instruction for your future life. They will either teach you so to regulate your conduct, as to be able to set the most malicious inquiries at defiance, or if that be a lost hope, they will teach you prudence enough not to attract public attention to a character which will only pass without censure, when it passes without observation."


    A Correct, though miniature Portrait, of Alexander Campbell's
    Theology, in Extracts from his own writings,
    to wit: --

    EXTRACT 1st. -- (this extract is in reference to, and presents Mr. Campbell's ideas of the kingdom of Christ) i. e. "John not only preached its near approach, but he baptized into the faith of him that was to come. Jesus not only proclaimed that it was nigh, but taught his disciples to pray. Thy Reign (or kingdom) Come. Many through ignorance or unbelief, still pray "thy kingdom


    come," not knowing that this petition is out of season. It was for a limited time, as was the preaching and baptism of John." -- Debate 2d, page 98.

    Note, -- What ideas the man may have had of the kingdom of Christ, who can write such a paragraph as the foregoing, as his sentiments, it may be difficult to say: one thing, however, is conclusive, that is, that he must be entirely ignorant of the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ, (the kingdom of grace) in his own heart! As the apostle says, "the whole creation, (spiritual, new creation in Christ,) groaneth and travaileth in prayer together, until now; and not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the spirit, even we ourselves, groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body," -- Rom. viii. 22, 23. In which characteristic exercises of prayer, every heaven born soul throughout the earth, are now united, and incessantly beseeching their God, that his "reign, (or kingdom of joy, and peace, and righteousness) may come" more and more into their own souls, individually and collectively, and that the same kingdom of grace may extend, or come, to the souls of those around them, who at best, (and like Mr. Campbell) know nothing of it, excepting its mere letter, and outward ordinances. Speak, ye myriads of heaven-born souls, and confirm what I say! for as Christ Jesus liveth to make intercession, you know and feel, that what I have said is true. You agonize for the kingdom of Christ to come, as we have represented: you subject heaven to an holy violence therefor. You know also, that Mr. Campbell's sentiments, as above stated, is a mark, an awful evidence, that he knows nothing as he ought to know of religion, not even the first principles of the gospel.
    EXTRACT 2d. -- "How does this (Mr. C. is alluding to the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost at the day Pentecost) illustrate Messiah's discourse with Nicodemus, 'Except a man br born again, he cannot see or understand the reign of God; and except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' The day of Pentecost is therefore called the regeneration." -- Debate 2d, page 100.

    Note, -- Now mark! Mr. C. says, that the day of Penticost is called the regeneration; that is, the gift of miracles; and that this illustrates, or gives the meaning of our Lord's words to Nicodemus, when he told him, that a man must be born again, or he could not enter the kingdom of heaven!! Well may we adopt the language of Christ and say, "Lord of heaven and earth, how hast thou hid the mysteries of godliness from the wise and prudent, and revealed them unto babes." O ye who have the "spirit of life on Christ Jesus, and have been thereby quickened in righteousness" of heart, can you want greater evidence of Mr. C's heterodoxy, of his unregeneracy, than the foregoing extract from his own writings affords? Does it not confirm all that I have asserted of his denying the spirit's special and direct influence upon the human soul, since the days of the apostles? Does it not demonstrate that he himself has not the spirit of Christ, and is therefore none of his? Connect the foregoing extract with his empty strictures upon experimental religion, in his "Christian Baptist," No. 8, and see additional confirmation of the man's radical ignorance of a saving change of heart. Joseph Priestly nor Thomas Paine, never gave stronger proof of their being "natural" men, than he does. I will quote a passage from the 6th [sic - 8th?] number of his "Christian Baptist" upon the subject, to wit: -- "The charges now before us is, that we deny 'experimental religion.' Before we plead guilty or not guilty of this impeachment, we should endeavour to understand the subject matter of it. Not having been in the use * of the phrase 'experimental religion,' I would neither affirm nor deny any thing about it. The question then is, what is the thing? The name we have not in our vocabulary, and therefore could not deny the thing constructively. We will first ask, what does the

    * Mt C. here acknowledges that he has not been in use of the phrase; and yet creeping through the Baptist churches, as a Baptist and a Bishop of a Baptist church; when the very basis upon which every individual is received into the Baptist church is "experimental religion." O where will the chapter of inconsistency end?


    Bible say about it? Upon examination, I found it says not one word about 'experimental religion.' The bible is as silent upon this topic as upon the 'Romish mass.'" In this extract, we perceive Mr. C. says, that as the phrase "experimental religion" was not in use with him, he would neither affirm nor deny any thing about it. (It would have been well if Mr. C. had never affirmed or denied any thing about what he was ignorant of! He never, in that case, would have said any thing about the gospel of Christ!) Mr. C. then puts the question, what is the thing? A Baptist minister asking what experimental religion is!! what a comment upon his intelligence of divine things! what a mournful reflection upon their consistency, to suffer such a man to call himself a Baptist preacher! Again, Mr. C. remarks, "the Bible says not one word about it; it is as silent upon this topic as upon the 'Romish mass." A Baptist minister allowed to publish such an assertion!! what may we look for next? or rather, what may we not look for of bold and impudent assertion, and bare faced error, in the name of the Baptists? When the apostle says, "That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled of the word of life:" and when another says, "If so be that you have tasted that God is gracious." In these passages and similar ones without number, we see nothing like experimental religion! Mr. C. may not, but every real believer in Christ does; for they have spiritual senses, to which the foregoing passages of scripture, as well as many more like them, apply; which spiritual senses Mr. C. is as destitute of as a 'brute-beast.' But I must not allow myself to remark upon the extracts from Mr. C's writings, only in a very brief way. Let the two last extracts show how entirely Mr. C. is ignorant of the work of regeneration, and how palpably he denies the Spirit's influence in the essential sense that all pious men on earth hold it.
    EXTRACT 3d. -- (This extract refers to Baptism.) "It's great significance may be seen from the following testimonials. The Lord saith, 'he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.' He does not say, he that believeth and keeps my commands shall be saved; but he saith, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. He placeth baptism on the right hand of faith. Again, he tells Nicodemus, that 'except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.' Peter, on the day of Pentecost, places Baptism in the same exalted place -- 'Repent' says he, 'and be baptized every one of you, for the remission of sins.' Annanias saith to Paul, 'Arise and be baptized, and WASH AWAY your sins, calling upon the name of the Lord.' Paul says of the Corinthians, 'ye were once fornicators, idolators, adulterers, effeminate, thieves, covetous, drunkards, rioters, extortioners, but ye were WASHED in the name of the Lord Jesus;' doubtless refering to their baptism. He tells Titus, 'God our Saviour saved us by the washing of regeneration, (he means baptism) and renewing of the Holy Spirit.' See again its dignified importance! Peter finishes the grand climax in praise of baptism -- 'baptism doth also now save us by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.' I have thus, in the naked import of these testimonies, shown that it is of vast import, of glorious design. We shall leave these testimonies for the present, to speak to your understanding, my friends," &c. -- Debate 2d. page 117.
    I shall make an extract or two more, from Mr. Campbell's writings, in immediate connexion with the above, and by so doing present to view the essential features of his theology.

    EXTRACT 4th. -- (This extract refers to faith.) "The grandeur, sublimity, and beauty of the foundation of hope, and of ecclesiastical or social union, established by the author and founder of christianity, consisted in this, that THE BELIEF OF ONE FACT, and that upon the best evidence in the world, is all that is requisite, as far as faith goes, to salvation. The belief of this one fact, and subjection to one institution expressive of it, is all that is required of heaven, to admission into the church. A christian as defined, not by Dr. Johnson, nor by any creed-maker, but by one taught of heaven, and in heaven, is one


    that believes this one fact, and has submitted to one institution, and whose deportment accords with the morality and virtue taught by the great prophet. The one fact is, that Jesus the Nazarene is the Messiah. The evidence upon which it is to be believed, is the testimony of twelve men, confirmed by prophecy, miracles, and spiritual gifts. The one institution is baptism, into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Every such person is a christian, in the fullest sense of the word, the moment he has believed this one fact, upon the above evidence, and has submitted to the above mentioned institution." -- Christian Baptist No. 9, page 221.
    EXTRACT 5th. -- (This extract exhibits Mr. C's idea as to how faith is attained.) "That faith is necessary to salvation, is a proposition, the truth of which, we need not now attempt to prove, as all professors of christianity admit it; and that testimony is necessary to faith, is a proposition equally true, evident, and universally admitted. He that believes, believes something, and that which he believes is testified to him by others. A man, every body who thinks, knows cannot see without light, hear without sound, nor believe without testimony. Some people, we know, say they believe what they see; but this is an abuse of language. -- I know what I see, and I believe what I hear -- upon the evidence adduced in the first case to my eye, and in the second to my ear. It is as natural for a child to believe as it is to hear, when its capacity expands: and were it not for lying and deceit, it would continue to believe every thing testified to its understanding. -- C. B. Vol. 2, No. 1, pages 13, 14.
    Note, -- In the three last extracts, we have presented what may be considered a fair view of Mr. C's religious sentiments, and his ideas of what constitutes a christian. There can be no mistake upon this point -- his own language, in the second of the three paragraphs, declares it. Let us offer a few remarks on the whole of the three extracts. They begin in falsehood and end in faith of Devils. In the beginning of the first extract, of the three we are referring to, Mr. C. says, "He (the Lord Jesus) does not say, he that believes and keeps my commands shall be saved; but he saith, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Now, to this we remark -- 1st, what is being baptized, but keeping Christ's commands? Christ himself said in reference to baptism, "thus it becomes us to fulfil all righteousness." And what is the righteousness Christ adverts to, but the keeping of his commands? What paltry quibbling! what unintelligible jargon! 2nd, Christ does say, "He that hath my commands, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me; and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him." Here then, Christ says, he that loves him keeps his commandments; and shall be loved of the Father. What is it to love Christ, but to have faith, or, believe in him? (faith works by love.) And when God loves, and manifests his love to the soul, is it not one and the same thing as salvation? Here then, it is evident, Christ has said, that he that loves (or believes) and keeps my commands, shall be loved (or saved) of God. Again, Christ has said, he that believeth (without any reference to baptism, mark!) shall be saved; and he has said it himself no less than twelve times, in the Gospel of John. (See John iii. 36 and xi. 25.) Here then, Mr. C. in the foregoing assertion, positively falsifies the Lord Jesus Christ, unless he can prove that what Christ says, in one of the evangelists, is not of equal authority with what he has done by another. And was it ignorance of the scriptures that led Mr. C. to make such an assertion? No, it was not. The assertion, or the sentiment, we are combatting, was advanced as an entering

    * Upon this principle, it appears quite evident, that the Devils want nothing but baptising to be bone fide christians! They said, "we know thee, who thou art, thou Holy One of God" They said, "Paul we know, and Christ we know." They believed this one fact. They now believe this one fact. If Mr. Campbell can only get some water to them, or get them to some water, he may have disciples plenty. Query -- Were not the devils that entered into the herd of swine, believers of this one fact! they owned Christ to be the "Son of God!" were they not "dipped," (and in the body too) they ran down into the sea -- ergo, they were christians!! Yes, Mr. C. they were just such believers, and christians, as your system makes yourself and your disciples.


    wedge for his broaching the doctrine of baptism being a saving ordinance, as the sequel of our note will show. The extract goes on to say, that baptism is what Christ meant, (at least one half of what he meant) when he said to Nicodemus, a man must be born again, &c. -- and that Peter taught, it was "For the remission of sin" -- and Annanias taught, that it "washed away sin" &c. -- and that Paul taught, that it "washed away fornication, idolatry, adultery," &c. -- and that he told Titus, that God our Saviour, saved him "by the washing of baptism," (at least one half of the salvation was by the washing of baptism.) And that Peter, in another place declared, without any qualification, "That baptism save us." Now, connect the foregoing ideas of Mr. C. upon baptism, with what his adherents, or disciples have said, and then let any one judge, if I was not justified in concluding that Mr. Church was under the delusion I supposed him to be, i. e. "that baptism is salvation;" that is, his adherents have said, (Mr. R. of Pittsburgh, for one) "that a man being baptized, came up out of the water, holy as an angel!" It will not be in my power, neither is it a part of my design, at this time to give an evangelical interpretation of the passages of scripture quoted by Mr. C. in the foregoing extracts; neither, if I were to do it, would he be the wiser; and those who know their gospel import, have no need of comment upon them. The object in view is, to show Mr. C's views of the Gospel, and then leave all the spiritual Baptists to judge if I have not said true, when I asserted, in effect, that Mr. C's faith is wide from theirs, as "hell from heaven is wide." From what has been said and exhibited from the first extract of the three, we learn, clearly, that Mr. C. means (if he means any thing) to say, 1st. That Jesus Christ has said, unless a man is baptized, he shall not be saved! by positive and clear inference then, he has said baptism is salvation.

    2nd, He has asserted a falsehood of Christ, in saying that he does not say, he that believes (simply) shall be saved; for Christ has said it again and again!

    3rd, He has shown, that he considers baptism as either the whole, or part of the "being born again," which Christ speaks of. * He has made Peter say, that it is salvation. He has said, that ot washes away adultery, theft, &c. -- and is for the remission of sins; and Mr. Rigdon has said, it makes a man holy as an angel!

    In view of this exhibit of the subject, by Mr. C. himself, and who will doubt but what I had reason to charge him, and his fraternity, with the strong delusion of believing, that baptism is a saving ordinance. And what shall be thought of their bitter invective against me, for intimating that they held these sentiments. Now, the fallacy of the foregoing sentiments is known to every christian, spiritual Baptist; because, he feels that dipping had nothing to do in saving him from the guilt of sin -- it was the blood of Christ. He knows, that dipping had nothing to do with saving him from the domination of sin -- it was and is, the Holy Ghost! Every Paido-baptist, of a truly spiritual character, feels the same Holy Ghost -- sees the same Invisible Saviour, in all his transcendent fullness of grace and truth; and is as mighty on his emotions of panting desire after the God of his salvation, as is any Baptist; and herein, Baptist, and Paido-baptist, have evidence, that God is no respecter of the persons of those whom he has really quickened in righteousness; and, consequently, that all ideas of baptism being essential in the economy of salvation, is in direct opposition to sober facts, and every day experience, with both Baptist and Paido-baptist believers. Every observing man of the world knows, and feels satisfied, that there is nothing effectual, or of saving influence, in baptism; inasmuch, as in too many instances, he sees those who have been sprinkled with a little water, living in sin! and those who have had water poured upon them in baptism, (as it is called) living in more sin than he that was sprinkled! and he also sees, those

    * How tallys this interpretation of the new birth, with what he has said elsewhere, of regeneration being a Pentecostal out pouring of the spirit!! but note! Mr. Campbell's contradictions are too numerous for me to think of noticing here!!


    that have been dipped in four foot water, committing more sin, than either of the other professors! * Such is the fact in many instances; and those, perhaps who have been baptized in all the modes practised, (that is, those who have been sprinkled, poured upon, and dipped backwards and dipped forwards) are among those who are the least holy as professors -- a striking instance to the point might be referred to in Pittsburgh.

    The second of the three extracts refers to faith: that faith which is called "the faith of God's elect." Mr. C. says, in plain terms, that faith is "the belief of one fact, upon the best evidence in the world;" which evidence, he says, is, "the testimony of twelve men, confirmed by prophecy, miracles and spiritual gifts." And in the third extract, he gives us to understand, that this faith, (this saving faith) is attained to, in reading the scriptures, just upon the same principle as a child would learn to believe that there was such a person as Alexander Campbell, by seeing and reading his Christian Baptist. In further proof of which, in other parts of his writings, he says, in ammount, that the faculty of believing (that is, exercising saving faith) is one given us in common with other mental endowments. In one word, he says, and means to say, (allowing me to select the means of illustration) that, as the national archives of these U. States, have sundry documents of the sayings, doings and actions of the Father of our republic, which themselves prove that he existed; that he was pre-eminent in council, and successful in war: therefore, from these documents, in said archives of the U. States, we seeing them, do most fully and assuredly believe, that a Washington has lived: which faith, in the existence and character of Washington, upon the testimony adverted to, is exactly parallel with, and essentially the same, in its nature, with saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, that faith, in Christ, being produced by the actions, sayings, &c. of his twelve apostles; and that by perusing, or studying, the actions of the "twelve men," we shall, and will, as necessarily come to a saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, as by going to the U. States archives and seeing the public letters, orders, &c. of Washington, we should fully believe in his having existed! If such is not the substance of Mr. Campbell's ideas upon faith, from the extracts we are noticing, then there is not a sentence in all he ever wrote that is intelligible to common sense. This then, is the Alpha and Omega of Mr. Campbell's faith! and I will take upon me to assert, that neither Methodist, Presbyterian, Episcopalian, or Baptist, or any other denomination of christians who are of any general estimation in the world, could, with the shadow of consistency, or upon the fundamental principles of their personal religion, regard Mr. C. in any other light, than as one of the dry bones in Ezekiel's valley; or, in other words, as a poor deluded unbeliever. For my own part, I must confess, that it is one of the most inexplicable circumstances that I have ever met with, how he should be acknowledged as a believer, in any part of the christian church, after the public expression of the sentiments here quoted from his writings: but above all, how the Baptist denomination should tolerate him for an hour, as one of their ministers! The substance of his views is -- That man, by nature, has the faculty of faith -- that reading the scriptures, attentively, naturally produces faith from the testimony of prophecies and miracles -- that believing in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ, upon that testimony, is faith -- that faith is non-essential until connected with baptism -- that thus believing, and being baptized, and practicing the morality and virtue of the great prophet, makes a christian to all intents and purposes! Now, the reveries of Swedenbourg, or the rationale of Joseph Priestly, is not more distinct from saving faith, than these views of Mr. C. -- Speak, ye mourners in Zion! Ye, who are broken in heart, contrite in spirit, ye heavy ladened and labouring sinners: speak, and tell Mr. Campbell, that e'er saving faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is realized, you find, that repentance toward God is essentially necessary -- a subject that he speaks not of, writes

    * I am not to be understood as intimating, that the Baptist denomination are less pious than other sects; no, but the reverse is my candid opinion.


    not of, and knows nothing about. Tell him, that you have his faith, and have had it for years, but that in your souls condition it is of no more value thereto than the water in the moon is to your body. And tell him, that was he to feel his own depravity of nature, the plague of his own heart, the darkness of his own mind, the awful power of his own sins and spiritual enemies, he, too, would then own, that all his boasted faith, about which he has written so many great swelling words, and made so many rhetorical flourishes with his tongue and his pen; all that faith, we say, he would own, was no more like the faith of God's elect, than the groans of the damned are like the mellifluous songs of cherubic hosts! But, no, tell not Mr. Campbell any of these things -- "cast not your pearl before this swine," any more; you have already done it, and he has turned upon you and rended many of your precious souls; as you all will see, in taking notice of his remarks upon Christian experience, or experimental religion, as contained in his eighth No. of the C. Baptist, page 182. I have not space to transcribe it, or to make those comments on it I would wish; read it for yourselves, and see an awful confirmation of the man's entire unregeneracy. I will give you here a few ideas from it. He says, "that he has been charged with denying "experimental religion;" and then asks, "what the thing is?" is not his question evidence for the truth of the charge? And who then, can deem him worthy of their confidence as a teacher, when he is asking what experimental religion is! He then goes on to talk of Paul's experience, and represents it, as being "perils by land and sea, &c. weariness, painfulness, hunger, thirst, fastings, cold, nakedness, stripes and imprisonments:" this he calls Paul's christian experience! No notice about, no, nor no conception of, "his law in his members, warring against the law of his mind, and making him cry out, with indescribable emotion, "O! wretched man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" Mr. C. has no reference to the "groaning" of the apostle, as a part of his experience, and which he had, in common with all the "new, or spiritual, creation, which groaned and travailed in pain together," with the apostle! No, he, Mr. C. is a "dumb dog" in these things; he sees, he feels, he knows nothing of the subject. And I call heaven to witness, that, from all I have seen of his writings, I do not believe there is one solitary item of evidence that ever the man had any spiritual life; therefore, it is no marvel if he should have no sympathies, or fellow feelings with the apostle, except in what relates to the body! There it ends -- it is only after the flesh. And is it for such a man to be a leader in Israel? Dread God! what an expression of thine anger to thy church generally: and O, my Baptist brethren, what an unutterable wo to you!! Pray that God would take off his restraining grace from the man, that he may be known to you in his true character, as Hazael was to the Prophet Elisha, 2d Kings, viii. 13. Yes, pray to God for this, and that he would take out of the world every Baptist minister, * and overthrow every Baptist church, so called, who gives any countenance or support to the man: either event would be a great blessing to you; and a great blessing demands great supplication.

    In taking notice of a few more ideas of this man, in reference to "experience," we quote the following sentence of his. "I read in the New Testament, of many who were the subjects of energies and divers gifts of the Holy Sporit, but it was "after they had believed." Here, then, in this quotation, you perceive again, that the man does not believe that the Spirit's special, direct, influences, is necessary to saving faith in the soul of the sinner: on the contrary, he says, the New Testament tells of many who believed before they ever knew any thing of the spirit in their own souls. And further, you explicitly have him saying, that all influences of the Spirit, even at that time, were the gifts of miracles, tongues and prophecy! Now, mark the above extract, and my comments, and then read the declaration of A. Campbell in the conclusion of his review of my

    * It is time, that every man calling himself a minister in the Baptist church, either grey headed or in youth, should be taken away, who can fellowship Alexander Campbell. To say the best of them, they will, they can, be only dead weight to the society.


    letters, to wit: -- "It is just every way as true that Paul said, let me do evil that good may come, as that I have denied the Holy Spirit." I had, in my letters, charged him with denying the influence of the Spirit in the production of saving faith! The first of the two last quotations proves it! For he positively says, "that they believed before they received the spirit at all!" The last of the two quotations he makes apply to the gift of miracles, tongues and prophecy; as if, mark! I had ever said, that he denied the gifts of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost; which I never did pretend to say or write! and thus, by thus artful misapplication of the case in question, he would make it appear that I had falsified him; whereas, in fact, he has mentally lied, by applying, in his writings, what I refered to the production of saving faith, to the gift of miracles! or, in other words, when he knew that I said, "Mr. Campbell you deny the Spirit's influence in the production of saving faith in the soul of the sinner, at the present day, and only believe in its miraculous influences at the day of Pentecost, and therefore, I say, you are an unregenerated man, and no Baptist." He, Mr. Campbell, turns round and says, (virtually) "Hear, O earth, hear what a lie this vile man tells of me! Listen! well, what is it? why, he says, that I deny the Spirit's miraculous influences at the day of Pentecost!" No, Mr. C. the lie is yours! for he don't deny any such thing! on the contrary, he has said, and says, that you confine the influences of the spirit to that period. This is what he charges against you, and upon which he affirms you are an unregenerate man, and no Baptist! Besides, sir, you have not only told the lie, but you have attempted to practice a contemptible deception upon all your readers who have read the "Regular Baptist" * They all know, that he, the Regular Baptist, says, that you don't admit, that the spirit has any thing to do directly, in giving faith to the soul of man -- and you say, that they believed before they received the Spirit's influences at all, in the days, even, of the Apostles!! Mr. C. goes on, in his essay on "Christian experience," to say, that it is an "insipid" subject, (and yet a Baptist minister!) He goes on to ridicule "Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress," (and yet a Baptist minister!) and to tell us of a person who was for three years a "godly unbeliever;" this is, three years the person was in darkness and had no light, and yet a penitent sinner. This case Mr. C. does not understand!! † therefore, he makes sport of it. Upon the same principle exactly, and without any irreligion, every one may make sport of Mr. C's writings -- for they are, for the most part, incomprehensible to all! Query, Mr. C. whether this "godly unbeliever" is not at least a match, upon your own principle, for one of your believers of the one fact, but who has not been baptized? or for one of those of your baptized ones, who is made thereby, "holy as an angel," but, as yet, does not believe in your one fact! Truly such a character as yours, is like Mahomet's coffin, suspended in the air, belonging neither to earth nor heaven. Tell us, if you please, how you are going to dispose of your own abortions, before you offer to midwife for, what you may think to be, those of other peoples.

    But I must stop short, in my extracts, of what I intended. My intention was, to have shewed clearly from Mr. C's writings, that he denies the law as a rule of life -- in a word, to have proved from his own writings, all and more than I ever suggested against him. Yes, if ever a man's writings could be converted into a thing of scorpions to flog himself with, it is Mr. Campbell's. Let that which I have noticed, be duly reflected upon, and considered as a little sample of the whole. In writing what I have wrote, I lose my time -- have no gain -- I am subject to, and receive, all the vituperance Mr. C. can pour upon me. I must have something to animate me -- 'tis motive! Searcher of the heart, I refer that

    * If that part of Mr. C's writings which I have been reviewing, is a sample of the whole, then I conclude, that all my readers will be ready to say, that it is impossible for one to say what the extent of hypocrisy, prevarication, subtlety, inconsistency, contradictions and untruth, on the face of those writings. Had I means to do it, (print it) I would give at this time, at least a hundred pages in reviewing it.

    † This mocking of the most solemn and affecting incident in the life of the dear child of God, is not only a mark of Mr. C's destitution of personal piety, but an "offence against the little ones" of Christ, for which Mr. C. shall bleed in heart in time, or gnash his teeth in torment in the world to come.


    To the Religious Public.

    My Fellow Pilgrims on Earth.

    You have been made acquainted with such a name as I bear, and a certain character attached thereto, in the pages of Alexander Campbell's "Christian Baptist" -- I pray you for Christ's sake, and to the end, that you may judge correctly of me, and not suffer yourselves to give me any countenance, if I be the character A. C. states; I pray you, I say, to read the foregoing pages attentively; and if they do not fully remove all Campbell's imputations of falsehood, &c. against me, then consider me guilty so far as that is not done. The burthen of my design in my former letters was to say, that I believed A. Campbell to be a vain, avaricious, heterodox, unregenerate man; and to pronounce him, without any qualification, to be no Baptist, and that I would prove it, if he pleased to have it so! In this last address to Mr. C. I conceive you will not only be furnished with a confirmation of what I before stated of him, but that you will have enlarged views of the man's character, and the character of his writings. You will see with what unblushing effrontery he can call, and publish any minister an hireling, a falsifier, an ignoramus, or any thing else, who opposes him. You will naturally ask, if Mr. C. has been capable of such a tissue of misrepresentation, abuse, deception and falsehood, toward one of the Baptist society, what estimation of, or what confidence is to be placed in his representation of other, or Paido-baptist character. And further, you will say, if such are the features of Mr. Campbell's heterodoxy; and he absolutely ridicules those very things upon which every denomination, deserving of the name of christian, founds the existence of all personal religion; how shall we ever dare to give up our time and attention in following this man through his vain speculations upon divine things: speculations which are
    ----- "Like a madman's dreams,
    Varying all shapes and mixing all extremes."

    How shall we account for ourselves, as ministers, at the bar of God, for encouraging the circulation of this man's writings, to the production of dissentions in the church of Christ! or how account as heads, and members of families, for encouraging the reading of this man's writings, to the production of domestic feud; and incessant clamour about what he means in his writings, or what he is in his character! or how to account for reading his writings when they draw us off from closet devotions, family prayer, and holy meditation, and fill our souls with a disposition to rancorous argumentation, and our minds with disgusting levity! O ye inhabitants of the Rock! and ye habitations of the Holy Ghost! ponder well upon these interrogations, and carry them out a proper extent in your own minds. I pray you to believe, that it is not ill will to Mr. Campbell, that has led me to write against him or his publications, but good will to the precious souls of the dear saints; for whom I feel unutterable emotions of solicitude, and with whom I have suffered, and do suffer, and rejoice, in no common degree. And O! I will go down to the grave bearing any obloquy that Mr. Campbell may pour upon me, with contentment, if the spirit of our Jesus will but bless my efforts, to warn you from the mind-harassing and soul-destroying sentiments of Mr. C. Whatever I have written to Mr. C. in a spirit unworthy the gospel of Christ, I pray God, and you, to forgive. For, if I know aught of myself, I would rather die than reproach the holy name wherewith you are called, and grieve your precious souls by so doing. Nor would I excite one feeling of hatred in your breasts towards Mr. C. on the contrary, while you say of his theology, "get thee behind me Satan," let the poor man have an interest in your warmest prayers -- for indeed he needs it. I have one thing more to submit to your


    notice, and then I am done for the present: that is, an explanation of the case of alleged falsehood against me, in the pamphlet published by Mr. Scott. That pamphlet, is but a repetition of what Mr. Campbell says against me in his "Christian Baptist," excepting the article of falsehood about Thomas Campbell; and therefore there can be no object gained in noticing Mr. Scott's pamphlet further, excepting to show its mental insignificance, which I have no disposition to do. In that pamphlet you will have seen, that a certain certificate is got from elder David Philips by Thomas Campbell, to prove that I told a lie in saying, at the Redstone Association, "that Thomas Campbell refused to go to prayer and ask a blessing at meals, at elder Philips' house." Now, suffer me to inform you to what end I mentioned it at the association alluded to -- to wit: Thomas Campbell and his church too, were suspected by the association of being heterodox; their character was a topic of discussion in the association, when T. Campbell referred to elder Philips' estimation of himself, as evidence of his orthodoxy! and to prop up his character with the association! On the other hand, and in justice to the association, I referred to what elder Philips had said of T. Campbell's refusing to go to prayer, and ask a blessing, &c. as evidence against Thomas Campbell. That elder Philips did say thus of T. Campbell, is a fact, which he does not, has not, nor will not deny. Elder Philips certificate given to T. Campbell, and published by Mr. Scott, says, that he did refuse to go to prayer and to ask a blessing, (though the certificate having been worded by T. Campbell, is so artfully fabricated that it appears, upon a slight perusal, to deny the fact, as well as the motive about his refusal to pray, &c.) and this is what elder Philips designed it should say! Having a letter to the point now before me, from elder Philips, I shall make such extracts therefrom as refers to this case, after noticing this particular circumstance, viz: -- Thomas Campbell not only refused to go to prayer at father Philips', on the evening in which Mr. Ephraim Estep was present, (that was Sunday evening) but he repeated his refusal to go prayer on the Monday evening or Tuesday morning following, when Mr. Estep was not present!! Elder Philips' certificate refers to Sabbath evening! Mr. T. Campbell pleaded to elder Philips what he told Mr. Ephraim Estep, of his cold, &c. as a reason for elder Philips, to give him a certificate, exonerating him of refusing to go to prayer on the Sabbath evening, from opposition to that exercise. This elder Philips did do, from what Mr. Estep told the latter, Mr. Campbell, at the time, stated to be the ground of his objecting. But, mark! Elder Philips did not mean that this certificate should apply to the refusal to pray, &c. on Monday, for then he had heard from one of the members of this church, what Campbell had said about prayer at meeting, in elder Philips' meeting-house, on the Sabbath; (elder Philips was not at meeting) all of which will appear evident from the following document and extracts from elder Philips' letter to me, to wit: --
    Mr. Greatrake,

    Sir -- I fulfil your request, concerning the doctrine that was delivered by Thomas Campbell on a day that he preached at the meeting-house on Peter's creek, and when there was a few members assembled together. After he had lectured on the parables of the 13th chap. of Matthew, he called the attention of the congregation, and told them, "how they ought to attend to their duties as a church," (no great compliment this to elder Philips) "that they ought to assemble together on the first day of the week, and read some passages of scripture, and to attend to the breaking of bread and prayer," (or, in other words, they ought to conform themselves to his order, and not their own -- what modesty! or rather, what impudence!!) He said it was not necessary to pray for the forgiveness of sin; for you know, said he, that when any person is in pursuit of any object, when they have obtained that object that they were in pursuit of, they were satisfied. So, it is the case with a person when he had found


    favour with God, and had his sins forgiven. That it was not a duty enjoined on him to pray for the forgiveness of sin, but to be always found returning thanks to the Lord for what he had done for him, (i. e. for pardoning his sins.)

    Given under my hand this 8th day of November, 1824,
    JOHN HOLMES.    


    Extract from elder Philips' letter to me, dated 11th Nov. 1824. *

    "I will not transcribe the certificate; it is obvious from the face of the certificate, that I charge Mr. Thomas Campbell with refusing to pray in my family, and he also refused to ask a blessing before we ate the food: his answer, on each occasion, was, pray yourself -- ask a blessing yourself. The fact was, I asked Mr. Campbell to pray and bless, he refused to do both, or either." Again, and in conclusion of the letter, elder Philips says, "Mr. Campbell observed at the time," (the time Campbell was begging the certificate of elder Philips) "that I had not been at the meeting house, therefore, I could not prove † what I really believed in my heart implicitly, and that was, that he (T. Campbell) delivered at the meeting house;" (this was the discourse Mr. Holmes alludes to.) "It was, in my view, a burlesque on sermonizing, a truly theatrical romance, without profane vulgarity, upon divinity. I have had a rehearsal of this romance lately, from three enlightened persons. I told Mr. Campbell, at the time of giving him my name to the certificate, that I never would embrace his view of Divine things, nor never would adopt the mode and form of worship established by him and others in Pittsburgh."
    Here, then, I stand fully acquitted of the charge made against me, in Mr. Scott's pamphlet, of having falsified Mr. Thomas Campbell. Here the affair might rest, was there no one interested in the case but myself; but the public are as much concerned in having a knowledge of the elder Campbell, as the younger. A few comments on this certificate affair, will give a faint idea of Thomas Campbell's character -- (Before I begin my comment, let me observe, that I have made some words in Mr. Holmes' letter and elder Philips', emphatic -- the same I did in some two or three words of A. Campbell's.) The first thing to be noticed is, that Thomas Campbell preached one day last winter for elder Philips, the latter having asked him to officiate for him, not being able to go to the meeting house himself. But instead of officiating for elder Philips, he officiated for himself; that is, he tried to persuade the church to give up their order altogether, and to adopt his, or, as Mr. Holmes says, he undertook to instruct them "how they ought" to conduct their meetings. ‡ (Query -- if this instance of impudence was not among "the new things" to Mr. Estep, mentioned in his certificate? if so, I can tell Mr. Estep, that it is no new thing to others -- that this impudence is characteristick of the man) -- 2ndly, We learn from Mr. Holmes' letter, that T. Campbell declared, in the meeting house, that we had no occasion to pray, having once believed, "but to return thanks to the

    * I have not room to give the whole of the letter -- the parts I shall give, are to the case in hand. On the face of these extracts will appear some asperity, for the letter was written when Elder Philips thought I had published him in the "Recorder," as the falsifier -- this I did not do! nor never dreamt of doing! Such, however, are some of the consequences that result, when an Iago comes between friends in the closest ties.

    † Mr. Campbell's manoeuvring for the certificate appears evident here; and that he had to use all his subtlety of argument to get Elder Philips to agree that he ought to have a certificate from him.

    ‡ Had I been a deacon of the church, at this time, I would have considered it my duty to have handed Mr. Campbell out of the pulpit, and out of the house too, as an impertinent fellow. By forwardness and impudence of this sort, the father and son succeeded in getting their ends accomplished.


    Lord;" and this doctrine the old man has taught as publicly elsewhere, again and again. 3dly, We learn from the extracts from elder Philips' letter, that he, elder Philips, "lately" (since the certificate was given to T. Campbell, I presume) has had a conversation with three intelligent persons about T. Campbell's discourse at the meeting house, and that all the heterodox things said by T. Campbell, in that discourse, about prayer, being brought up to his mind again by these three intelligent persons, who heard T. Campbell's discourse, that now he, elder Philips, is satisfied, that from what T. Campbell preached on the Lord's day morning, about prayer, he, T. Campbell, must have refused to go to prayer in the evening of the same Lord's day, from a motive of opposition to it. And that now elder Philips feels assured, that T. Campbell is "inimical to, and has an inveterate hostility against, prayer!!" That T. Campbell's "sermonizing os a burlesque" upon preaching!! and so thinks every evangelical man. And that T. Campbell's sermons, and A. Campbell's writings, are as well matched as any two Jack-asse's ears. But to proceed in our comment -- T. Campbell says, virtually, in the meeting house at Peter's creek -- "In the name of God, brethren, I stand up to tell you, that there is no occasion for a man to pray for the pardon of his sin after he believes, or to pray at all; but to give thanks." At elder Philips', on the evening of the same day, father Philips says, Mr. C. I go to prayer in my family, habitually, to ask forgiveness of our sins, will you this evening go to prayer for me? Mr. C. says, (according to the certificate of elder Philips and Ephraim Estep) father Philips, I assure you, I would do so with pleasure, but have a bad cold, this is the reason that I do not pray in your place! Query -- whether Mr. Campbell lied in the meeting house, or at elder Philips' -- or at both? He said, at the meeting house, that there was no occasion for a believer to pray -- he says, at elder Philips', that the reason he don't pray, is, that he had a cold and cannot speak loud enough for elder Philips to hear.
    Again -- T. Campbell says, that he declined going to prayer on Sabbath evening, at elder Philips', because, he could not speak loud enough for elder Philips to hear! well, be it so: was there anything more as the cause? yes, he was fatigued on Sunday evening! Now, all this may possibly be true; but it is rather suspicious! For, he who would preach in the middle of the day, in a good voice, so as to be heard by all present; and he who had but walked half a mile, and spoke once in public through the day, could scarcely be supposed disqualified, in voice and strength, for an evening prayer!! But what of Monday! when he refused to ask a blessing at meals! and to go to prayer the second time? Why, the certificate says, that he had a cold and could not speak loud enough for elder Philips to hear him! and yet mark!! from Friday or Saturday before, until Tuesday, he was almost incessantly, and vehemently, talking to elder Philips, in propositions and reasonings with elder Philips, to have the latter relinquish preaching to his church, and to let the church at Peter's creek be put into his (T. Campbell's) order, &c.!! * He could speak loud enough in the latter case, for father Philips to hear him, and had strength of body to speak for many hours!! but in the former case, he had a cold, he was weak in body, &c. and could not speak loud enough for elder Philips to hear him!!
    There -- let no man, hereafter, be surprised, that Alexander Campbell is a man of such parts; when such is the character of his father. Let no man dare to say, that the father is not worthy of the son, and the son of the father; or, that my character, and the character of others, are not safely deposited, when in their joint keeping, and that of their adherents!

    * This I can prove at any time the Messrs. Campbell may think necessary. Should they call upon me to prove it, I shall have my opportunity of doing greater justice to the merits of the old man, and of telling other [equally] interesting anecdotes of him and his impudence, subtlety and falsehood.



    Lawrence Greatrake's 1824 Pamphlets

    Bio-data  |  Chronology  |  Ordination  |  Bibliography  |  Conclusions

    c. 1830 signature of the Reverend Lurenis (Lawrence) Greatrake

    Lawrence Greatrake: Bio-data

    The Laurence Greatrake, Sr. family came to Philadelphia from Herford, England, in about 1800 and lived on Brandywine Creek in the Christiana Hundred of Delaware. in the early 19th Century. Although Greatrake is an Anglo-Saxon surname from the English Midlands, it has Continental counterparts and it is possible that the Laurence Greatrake, Sr. family were of French ancestory, and perhaps descended from Huguenot refugees living in the United Kingdom. Lawrence Greatrake, Jr.'s curious misuse of the English tongue may be attributable to its being a second language for him.

    Laurence Greatrake, Sr. managed the Gilpin paper mill on Brandywine Creek. His wife was Eliza and their children were Eliza, George, Henry, Mary Ann, Lydia, Sarah and [Charles] Laurence, Jr. Laurence (or Lawrence) Jr. moved to Pittsburgh in about 1823 -- probably to find employment as a paper-maker. He was evidently already a licensed minister in Baltimore's Second Baptist Church: he was ordained a Regular Baptist preacher, in or near Pittsburgh, in the middle of 1824. Rev. Greatrake then took over leadership of the much diminished First Baptist Church in that city, replacing the Rev. John Winter in the office of presiding elder. Rev. Greatrake was briefly hired as the church's official pastor, but on an expenses reimbursement basis, rather than a salaried basis. He appears to have relinquished that office about the end of 1824, although he continued as chief elder for several months thereafter. He was listed in an 1826 Pittsburgh city directory as a minister residing in that city. Rev. Lawrence Greatrake remained in Pittsburgh at least until 1827, at which time he may have temporarily relocated to Fayette City, Pennsylvania.

    The 1820 Census of Baltimore County District 1 lists Lawrence "Greaterick" as the head of the Franklin Paper Mill, which was founded by Aaron Levering in 1807-08. There is no listing for Laurence, Sr. or his son Laurence in the 1830 District 1 Baltimore census. In 1830 the Franklin paper and woollen mills were sold to Lewin Wethered -- possibly an indication that Laurence, Sr. had died. His daughter Mary Ann married a Captain Roberts; daughter Eliza was briefly married to Franklin Peale. Laurence, Jr. married Maria Jaquett (either in 1824 or 1834 -- date uncertain).

    Parish records in England provide the following information:

    Laurence Greatrake / Greatrix / Greatrex / Greatorex -- wife: Eliza _____


    Chas. Laurence Greatrake
    b. 08 May 1793; Hemel Hempstead, Hertford, England

    George Greatrake
    b. 27 Oct 1794; Hemel Hempstead, Hertford, England

    Henry Joseph Greatrake
    b. 18 Feb 1798; Hemel Hempstead, Hertford, England

    Lawrence, Sr. & Jr. Greatrake found in:
    Passenger and Immigration Index, 1500s-1900s
    Passenger and Immigration Lists: Philadelphia, 1800-1850

    Laurence Greatrake:
    Marriage Index: 1740-1920
    Married: Jun 01, 1834 [sic - 1824?]
    County: New Castle, DE
    Spouse name: Maria Jaquett

    Genealogy of the Jaquett Family, Page 112-114
    VIII. 367. Peter Jaquett [1718-1772] md. Nancy -- son of Peter & Maria Jaquet
    Genealogy of the Jaquett Family,, Page 114
    438. Jesse, (c. 1774-99); m. Sarah Brumfield. 20 Dec 1791 in Cecil, MD; resided Baltimore, MD
    children of Jesse and Sarah:
    476. Maria, b. c. 1797 (Baltimore?) m. Lawrence Greatrake
    477. Sarah, b. c. 1798 (Baltimore?)

    Genealogy of the Jaquett Family,, pp. 129-130

    May 21, 1799. Peter Jaquett, of Long Hook, apptd. guardianof Maria and Sarah Jaquett, minor orphan children of Jesse Jaquett, dec'd.

    The will of Major Peter Jaquett was dated June 18, 1834... he bequeaths to his nephew Peter, son of his deceased brother Nicholas Jaquett, his Bible... he makes bequests to Maria Jaquett, wife of Lawrence Greatrake, and her sister Sarah Jaquett, adopted daughters of his late wife; -- Mary Ann Greatrake, wife of Captain Roberts, and her sister Maria Greatrake, wife of Mr. Southerland, and Sarah Greatrake and Lydia Greatrake, daughters of Eliza Greatrake;

    Maria [Jacquett] Greatrake found in:
    US - Census Index (1870)
    State: Pennsylvania
    County: Allegheny
    Town: Allegheny Ward 1
    Age: 77
    Birth Location: Delaware

    Tombstone inscription: Union Dale cemetery,
    Division One, Brighton Road, Pittsburgh PA 15212, Allegheny County:

    George W. Greatrake
    Second Son of Rev. Lawrence and Ann Maria [Maria Jaquett],
    _____ 6, 1824 - Feb 9, 1854
    lived in Alleghany city, PA 1849-50

    Louisa Greatrake
    Age: 20
    born c. 1830
    Birth place: PA
    Gender: Female
    Home in 1850 (lived with John F. COle family)
    Allegheny Ward 4, Allegheny, PA

    Samuel F. Cole -- b. Pittsburgh, JUne 9, 1845, son of John F. and Elizabeth M. (Greatrake) Cole. Elizabeth was the daughter of Joquett Greatrake, a Baptist minister of French extraction.

    Elizabeth Davis married Henry Fink in 1819 in New Castle Hundred. They moved to Ohio later. ... a connection to Laurence Greatrake who lived in New Castle Hundred 1800-1819.

    Historical Society of Pennsylvania:
    Pennsylvania Magazine of History & Biography Greatrake, Lawrence: (1956) 81:396-399, 404

    Henry Greatrake was either the son of Laurence Jr. or Senior. Laurence Jr. was a famous Baptist preacher and Laurence Sr. was a papermaker on the Brandywine. H.G.G. Brandywine Paper Mills

    Reminiscences of Wilmington: 38

    Rockdale: The Growth of an American Village in the Early Industrial Revolution
    by Anthony F C Wallace:

    Greatrake, Lawrence, pp. 217-18:
    " the 1820s, a steady stream of English and French mechanicians... came to America... in the Philadelphia area,among the best known were the... Greatrake family on the Brandywine.... Lawrence Greatrake [Sr.], technical manager for Thomas Gilipin" (in Delaware Co. near Philadephia)
    258: "Franklin Peale (son of Charles Wilson Peale) married the daughter of the Gilipins' mechanical expert, Thomas Greatrake. The Greatrakes were Quakers and the young woman [Eliza] was a "Quaker Preacher" of extreme religious zeal... the marriage was annulled..."

    the Greatrake family immigrated from Hemel Hempstead, UK to the state of Delaware, circa 1800. Lawrence Greatrake, was a well-known paper maker.

    From Chapter 3 of Robert Richardson's Memoirs of Alexander Campbell, Volume II. (1869)

    Another individual, who made himself quite notorious about this time, was Lawrence Greatrake, a regular Baptist preacher, of a restless spirit and strong passions, who occupied himself in itinerating through the country, wherever he could obtain a hearing, either in Baptist or Pædobaptist congregations, breathing forth misrepresentation and abuse of Mr. Campbell and his teachings. The bitter spirit, however, by which he was characterized, rendered his reckless assertions doubtful to thoughtful and impartial hearers, and served rather to further the Reformation by exciting their curiosity to read Mr. Campbell's writings or to hear him for themselves. As to Mr. Greatrake, he continued his itinerant labors for a considerable time, and published a scurrilous pamphlet against Mr. Campbell; but afterward, falling into disgrace, became an apostate, and finally, in passing through a piece of woods on his way to a place of shelter, was suddenly crushed to death by a falling tree.

    A Laurence Greatrake reportedly died in Paris, Tennessee c. 1830.

    Lawrence Greatrake: Chronology

    1793  (08 May): Lawrence (Charles Laurence) Greatrake was born in Hemel Hempstead, Hertford, England

    c. 1812-13 Greatrake experiences a spiritual renewal and soon joins the Baptists in Delware/Maryland

    1822 Greatrake is licensed as a preacher in Baltimore's Second Baptist Church

    1822 (31 Aug-02 Sep): The Redstone Baptist Association meets in Washington (between Pittsburgh and Brush Run). Sidney Rigdon represented the Pittsburgh congregation. Thomas and Alexander Campbell represented Brush Run and preached their "reform" doctrines. From this time forward Rigdon preached as the Campbells did. There was a strong opposition to Rigdon's actions, on the part of a minority of his Pittsburgh congregation.

    1822-23 (winter): Fifteen members of Rigdon's Pittsburgh congregation, (including the church clerk and a deacon), object to the doctrines Rigdon is preaching. They meet with Rev. John Winter for bi-monthly Sunday services. At some point (probably when Rev. Winter began his opposition preaching), these members are formally excluded by Rigdon.

    1823 (spring?): Hollard Sumner (?), among the Pittsburgh First Baptist Church dissenters, complains to Rev. Charles Wheeler, the pastor of a neighboring congregation, of "existing difficulties in the Pittsburgh church," as conducted by Elder Sidney Rigdon. Rev. Wheeler writes to Elder David Philips (Rigdon's early pastor at Peters Creek), requesting that Philips write or visit the Pittsburgh congregation "to afford the brethren council" in matters of doctrinal dispute.

    1823 (11 Jul): (According to Rev. Stanton) Under the direction of Rev. Winter, the fifteen excluded Pittsburgh First Baptist dissenters write a "carefully prepared paper," protesting against their exclusion and claiming to be the true First Baptist Church of Pittsburgh. They assert that Rigdon and the majority of the congregation had departed from the principles of Baptists, were no longer a Baptist church, and had neither moral nor legitimate right to the church property. They say to Rigdon: "you have, contrary to all scripture, religion, reason, justice, or humanity, and in direct opposition to the laws of love by which you profess to be actuated... separated us from you, and as you suppose, delivered us to Satan."

    1823  (05-07 Sep): The Redstone Baptist Association meets in Pittsburgh (at the First Baptist Church). Sidney Rigdon attempts to represent the Pittsburgh congregation, but problems arise from the claims made by the dissenters. Elder John Winter is seated at the meeting as a visitor (thus allowing a de facto presence for the Pittsburgh dissenters). The Redstone "Minutes" read as follows: "The committee appointed to receive information from the two parties of the church in Pittsburgh, claiming to be the church, reported as follows: That the representatives of the party who presented the first letter, after consultation among themselves, withdrew. Your committee, therefore, could obtain no information from them, touching the existing difficulties. And, though the representatives of the other party were wishing to go into an investigation of the subject; yet your committee were loath to lay before the association, a detailed statement of what they were wishing to alledge as their grievances, lest we should prejudice the minds of the members of this association, by an ex parte statement. Your committee, therefore submit the following resilution: That it be recommended to both parties to agree to apply to the five nearest churches, to send them such help as they can, to endeavour to compromise their difficulties; and that the further consideration of the subject be indefinitely postponed.' This resolution was adopted and agreed to by both parties."

    The result of this action by the Association, was that Sidney Rigdon was not recognized as the messenger from the Pittsburgh congregation, while the respresentatives of the Association were meeting in his own chapel! Rigdon was thus compelled to temporarily withdraw from the business meetings, and Pittsburgh went unrepresented at the 1823 gathering. But, what was even more important, Rigdon's prior exclusion of the dissenters (who had been joined by Elder Winter) was effectively nullified by the Association and their spiritual leader (Winter) was allowed to attend the meetings. Alexander Campbell, who had previously employed his influence to assist Rigdon, was in attendance, but not seated as a messenger (he having moved his church membership outside the Association's geographical bounds, in order to escape disfellowshipping). All of this leaves Sidney Rigdon in a much weakened position, so far as church politics and Campbellite "reforms" are concerned.

    1823 (11 Oct): Thirteen Redstone Baptist Association elders commence deliberations in Pittsburgh (in Rigdon's absence!) to decide the doctrinal/political dispute centered in that congregation. As Alexander Campbell would later point out, the convening of this body of elders was in direct violation of the Association's decision on the matter, agreed upon the month before.

    1823 (15 Nov): Sidney Rigdon's followers in Pittsburgh's First Baptist Church dispute, are themselves excluded from the congregation, by the decision of the 13 elders. This amounts to a virtual excommunication for Rigdon and any of his parishioners who continue to profess his heterodox doctrines. The elders took over a month to produce the certificate documenting their decision, which perhaps indicates that it took them many days of discussion before they all concurred in the written agreement. They may have also delayed certifying their decision, waiting to see if Sidney Rigdon would return to Pittsburgh to attend their deliberations -- he did not. By the time he did return (after Campbell's debate with M'Calla), the congregation had lost its chapel, due to Rigdon's non-payment of rent.

    1824 (01 Jun): Greatrake marries Maria Jaquett in New Castle Co., Delaware and the couple moves to Pittsburgh

    1824 (mid-Jun): Greatrake is ordained in Pittsburgh's First Baptist Church -- becomes their pastor

    1824 (11 Jul): Dr. William Church is baptized by Elder Walter Scott in Pittsburgh -- Greatrake disapproves and writes against Campbellism

    (under construction)

    Lawrence Greatrake's Ordination

    1. From: C. B. Hassell's 1886 History of the Church of God, p. 901: "The First Baltimore church was established in 1795 with eleven members, all of whom except Elder Lewis Richards were dismissed from Harford Church. The second church of Baltimore was constituted by Elder John Healy and a few English Baptists, and their meeting-house built in 1797. This church may be called, in the Baltimore Association, the mother of preachers... The first licensed in this church was Elder Daniel Dodge, after him was Lawrence Greatrake, William Brinkers, Joseph Trapnell, W. Curtis, William Reck, Joseph Cone, Bartholomew T. Welch and Joseph H. Jones."

    2. In giving the early history of Baltimore's Second Baptist Church, George F. Adams' 1885 History of Baptist Churches in Maryland provides the following information on page 61: "William Brinkett... was licensed in 1820. The highly esteemed Jos. H. Jones was ordained at a meeting of the old Baltimore Association in 1820, by request of this Church. Lawrence Greatrake was ordained in 1822. Bartholomew T. Welch was licensed in 1824, and Jos. Cone in 1826..." (Probably the author here misread the Second Baptist Church's record, for it seems that Lawrence Greatrake was only "licensed" as a preacher at that time, and not yet made an "ordained" minister).

    3. In his c. 1828 Dialogue First... pamphlet, Greatrake says that he had been a Baptist for "thirteen years," and reveals the following additional biographical information on pages 3-5 of that publication: "I was... a blind, blind, transgressor... until the twentieth year of my life, when it pleased God, the Holy Ghost, to bring me through the pangs and theoes of a new and spiritual birth, and to lead me, in connexion with the precious Gospel of Christ, into the Regular Baptist Church, as my mother in Israel. For ten years subsequent, I brojected largely of earthly enterprise... At the expiration of this time, the Lord brought me from a whirlpool of secular business into the ministry of his Gospel: I have since endeavoured to labour in word and doctrine as God in his providence has given opportunity, and the Holy Ghost hath endued with grace; so that having obtained help of God, I continue unto this day."

    Greatrake goes on to say that he has a been a Baptist minister "about five years" and that he came, originally, from a family of Episcopalians. Counting back "13 years" from 1828, it appears that Greatrake became a Baptist in Baltimore, in about 1815 -- that is, when he was about 22 years of age, and perhaps a year or two after his initial spiritual awakening. Counting back "about five years" from 1828, it would seem that his ordination was in 1823 or 1824. He then goes on to provide some details of his ministerial experience: "I have itinerated nearly all the time: during seven months however I had the charge of a people calling themselves a Baptist church, who were graciously pleased to allure me to their service at the expence of hundreds of dollars and which they promised to refund me, but which they cheated me out of, allowed their members openly to ridicule the doctrine of the Baptist confession of faith, magnanimously to slander me, charitably to tolerate caluminators, liars and drunkards among themselves, and to plead, in their extenuation, that they 'were too small and weak to put away any of their members.' During this period I got quote satisfied with the honour and emoluments connected with the pastoral charge of a mere Baptist church."

    From the these biographical scraps, it appears that Lawrence Greatrake was ordained a Baptist minister in about 1824, and that he served as a pastor (presumably beginning shortly after ordination) for seven months, and then continued on in the role of Baptist minister with no settled pastoral charge.

    4. In his early 1825 pamphlet, entitled Greatrake's Calumnies Repell'd, Alexander Campbell says this of Lawrence Greatrake's short pastorate with Pittsburgh's First Baptist Church, on pages 12-13: "My words... are, (C. B. vol. 2d, p. 39,) 'this gentleman is at present hired by a party'... that, at the time of writing the above in the first week of September last, Mr. G. was actually hired by a party... it is a fact that Mr. G. is not their pastor now." An attached note from "Z. Packard," dated "Pittsburgh, December 26th, 1824," confirms that Greatrake's "request or demand" for payment, " was not acceded to by the body."

    In other words, according to Campbell, Lawrence Greatrake was the "hired" pastor of the First Baptist Church of Pittsburgh at the beginning of September, 1824, but he was no longer functioning in that position at the time Campbell wrote his Greatrake's Calumnies Repell'd. Assuming that Campbell completed his writing of that pamphlet on or before Jan. 17, 1825 (see its page 57), this means that Lawrence Greatrake's "seven months" as pastor terminated no later than the second week of 1825 -- indicating an ordination in about mid-June of 1824.

    5. The date of Greatrake's ordination in Pittsburgh may be closely established from a comment Alexander Campbell made on page 48 of his Greatrake's Calumnies Repell'd. There the writer says: "Any person who wishes to know the sentiments of Thomas Campbell on prayer will find some instruction on this subject in all the essays over the signature of T. W. which have appeared in the 'Christian Baptist;' some of which were written before Mr. Greatrake 'received ordination'..."

    Thomas Campbell's first three letters to the Christian Baptist were published in the issues for September 1, 1823, June 7, 1824, and October 4, 1824. Since Alexander Campbell published that Greatrake was already,"at present hired" as the Pittsburgh pastor, the October Thomas Campbell letter is out of range for calculating Greatrake's ordination date. Had the elder Campbell only written a single 1823-24 letter to the editor, before Greatrake was ordained, Alexander would probably not published that "some" of his father's "essays" had been "written before Mr. Greatrake 'received ordination." It thus appears that Lawrence Greatrake was ordained as a Baptist minister in Pittsburgh, in June of 1824 and that he served in Pittsburgh pastorate for the last seven months of the year 1824. Even after his dismissal or resignation near the end of 1824, Greatrake remained in the Pittsburgh "Regular Baptist" congregation. The 1826 Pittsburgh city directory lists him as a minister living in that city. Greatrake attended the annual meetings of the Redstone Baptist Association, for 1824, 1825, and 1826, as the official representative of the Pittsburgh congregation. However, when the time came for the 1827 meeting (held at Uniontown, Aug. 31-Sept. 2), Greatrake attended as the representative of the Little Redstone congregation, (located in Cookstown (now Fayette City) Washington twp., Fayette Co., Pennslyvania). After that 1827 gathering, the name of Lawrence Greatrake disappears altogether from all subsequent Redstone Association records.

    Lawrence Greatrake: Bibliography

    [Letters] To Alexander Campbell, by A Regular Baptist,
    30 p.; 22 cm. (9 in.)
    Pittsburgh: Eichbaum & Johnston, [Aug.] 1824

    A Miniature Portrait of Alexander Campbell; being a supplement to The Letters of a Regular Baptist,
    36 p.; 22 cm. (9 in.)
    Pittsburgh: (Eichbaum & Johnston?), [Nov./Dec.] 1824
    CLP Main Oliver Room (Oakland) - Closed Stacks r 265 R17

    The Harp of Zion: to which is added, a brief retrospective and prospective view of the Baptist society / by a Regular Baptist
    Pittsburgh: Johnston and Stockton, Printers, 1827.
    Sewickley Pub Lib 286 REG 1827 HIS -- zaccp2 b22674304
    (See also: Classified Catalogue of the Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh
    Carnegie Library of Pittsburgh: 1903
    Page 179: Greatrake, Laurence: Harp of Zion, 1827

    The Parallel and Pioneer, or, a Pocket Mirror for Protestant Christendom, by Lawrence Greatrake
    100 p.; 23 cm. (9 in.)
    New Lisbon: Printed at the Office of the Palladium, 1830
    Indiana Historical Society, Indianapolis, IN

    Lights and Shades of the Waterite Reformer and One Fact Apostle, alias Alexander Campbell
    56 p.
    Pittsburgh: Printed for the Publisher, 1836

    An anti-missionary dissertation on the commission in Mark 16, 15...
    [nd 1838]

    Note: The 1824 pamphlet by Elder Walter Scott is:
    A reply, to a series of iniquitous "Letters to Alexander Campbell, by a regular Baptist," alias, the Rev. Mr. Greatrake. Together with an address, to the saints in Pittsburgh, and the third Epistle of Peter, or; A looking glass, to the present hired ministers.
    Pittsburgh: Printed for the publisher by John McFarland, 1824

    Lawrence Greatrake: Conclusions

    (under construction)

    Return to top of the page

    Sidney Rigdon "Home"   |   Rigdon's History   |   Mormon Classics  |  Bookshelf
    Newspapers  |  History Vault  |  New Spalding Library  |  Old Spalding Library

    last revised May 26, 2007