Letters or prejudice [by M. Kenney].

If the objections to which I have adverted, were always founded upon direct examination and comparison of these writers, with those of what is called a more evangelical character, and upon a fair collation of both with the standard of Scripture and of the Church, it were unquestionably right to exclude them from the course of Christian study, unless for the purpose of marking the aberrations to which the presumption of the human understanding is liable. But if it appear that such objections (their justice, now, is not the question,) are sometimes taken upon trust, and that much of the clamour against this class of theologians, is heard amongst persons who do not even profess to have consulted their works, and adopted, implicitly, upon the testimony of others, surely, it is fair to urge an investigation of the ground of such testimony, or a suspension of judgment upon the merits of the case: surely, it is fair to urge, that writers to whom the cause of general Christianity is, confessedly, so highly indebted, should not, now, be condemned unheard, or charged with perverting or abandoning

the fundamental articles of their faith, because they may have been led, by the exigencies of their day, to enlarge upon circumstantials, or by the character of their audience, to adopt certain modes and topics of illustration. The question, indeed, whether they do preach" Christ crucified," is indispensable to ascertain their merit as Christian teachers, and their title to the confidence of the Christian reader. But this question is to be decided by the inquiry, not whether they teach this fundamental truth, in the language of this or that class of religionists; not whether they build on it, or connect with it, other doctrines of which it may be independent; but whether they lay it, or adopt it, as the foundation of their whole scheme of instruction, as the principle of every duty which they urge, as the source of every hope which they suggest, as the grand and vital point to which all others are but instrumental and collateral? whether they build upon this truth as upon an admitted basis; and whether their not, at all times, expressly stating and enforcing it, does not appear to have

proceeded from a conviction, that it was already fixed in the apprehension of their hearers ?

So far, my dear friend, had I already proceeded in the anticipation of some of your objections, and in reference to those which I have heard from others. It would lead to a discussion beyond our present purpose, to enter very minutely into the examination of this question, though its importance fairly entitles it to our attention. It may, however, furnish you with an excitement to pursue the subject, and a proof of the necessity of the distinctions which I have suggested, if I devote a few of our future hours to the consideration of some of the works which have been made obnoxious to this species of criticism, and endeavour to trace the origin of what I have here ventured to denominate a prejudice. I do it with a full conviction of the difficulty and delicacy of the task, and a wish that it had fallen into abler hands; but still, under an impression, that if the cause of true religion can be served, and the duties of can

dour and charity enforced, even by the weakest and most obscure individual, the hewers of wood and drawers of water are as much bound to contribute their services, as those who are "filled with wisdom of heart for the cunning work of the temple."