was to present Christianity in a light which should enable the unbeliever to see its truth. He found me an unbeliever, and he could not therefore talk to me as if I was already a believer. There can be no doubt, that had he been conversing with individuals whose faith was fixed, he would have used much more Scriptural language, and been less careful to point out the rational element of religion. But he had to

adapt his language to my wants, to use a language I could understand, and which should enable me to see the coincidence between my own experience and that which I found recorded in the Bible. In this he did right, and so far as I was concerned he was signally successful; and must have been equally successful with any others who should have been in a like condition with myself.

In looking back upon the long struggle I have had, I must thank God for it. I have been reproached by my Christian brethren; they have tried to make me believe that I was very wicked in being an unbeliever; but I have never reproached myself for having been one, nor have I ever regretted it. I would consent to go through the whole again, rather than not have the spiritual experience I have thus acquired. I have sinned, but never in having doubted; I have much to answer for, but not for having been an unbeliever. I have no apologies to make to the Christian world. I have no forgiveness to ask of it. I have done it no disservice, and it will one day see that I have not been an unprofitable servant. It has never fairly owned me, but I care not for that. Even to this day it calls me an infidel, but that is nothing. It will one day be astonished at its own blindness; and when freed from the flesh, in that world where I shall not be disturbed by the darkness of this, I shall see it doing even more than justice to my memory. I have not lived in vain, nor in vain have I doubted, inquired, and finally been convinced. When the scales fell from my eyes and I beheld the true light I followed it; and I have done what was in my power to direct others to it. My task is now well nigh done, and I am ready to give in my last account. I say not this in a spirit of vain boasting, but in humble confidence. I say it to express my strong faith in God, and in his care for all who attempt to do his will.

I doubt not that many good Christians may be shocked at first sight at what I have here recorded. They will see no coincidence between the views here set forth and their cherished convictions; but I will assure them, that as they

Own

read on, and fairly comprehend them, they will find the coincidence all but perfect. The Christianity here set forth is the Christianity of the universal church, though presented perhaps in an uncommon light. I cannot persuade myself that a new Christianity is here presented, but the old Christianity which all the world has believed, under a new aspect, perhaps, and an aspect more peculiarly adapted to the wants of the present age. It cannot have escaped general observation, that religion, for some time, has failed to exert that influence over the mind and heart that it should. There is not much open scepticism, not much avowed infidelity,but there is a vast amount of concealed doubt, and untold difficulty. Few, very few among us but ask for more certain evidence of the Christian faith than they possess. Many, many are the confessions to this effect, which I have received from men and women whose religious character stands fair in the eyes of the church. I have been told by men of unquestionable piety, that the only means they have to maintain their belief even in God, is never to suffer themselves to inquire into the grounds of that belief. moment they ask for proofs, they say, they begin to doubt.

The

Our churches are but partially filled, and the majority of those who attend them complain that they are not fed. Our clergy are industrious, and in most cases do all that men can do, and yet not many mighty works do they, because of the people's unbelief. Everywhere we hear complaint. Even amongst the clergy themselves doubt finds its way. Learned professors proclaim publicly and emphatically, even while denouncing infidelity, that we can have no certainty, that our evidence of Christianity is at best but a high degree of probability. Surely, then, it is time to turn Christianity over and see if it have not a side which we have not hitherto observed. Perhaps when we come to see it on another side, in a new light, it will appear unto us more beautiful and have greater power to attract our love and reverence.

The views here presented have won the love and reverence of one man who was once as obstinate an unbeliever as can be found. I know not why they should not have the same effect on others.

More I would say, but I have lingered too long already. If any have been interested in the several personages I have introduced, as having been in some way or other connected with my spiritual conflicts, and who would wish to know their ultimate fate, I must reply by asking where, in the case

of any one of us, are those who started with us in life, and whose young hearts responded warmly to our own? Where are the friends and acquaintances we formed, and whose course for a while run parallel with our own? There were many of them, but where are they now? One by one they have dropped away, and we have plodded on, in our turn to drop aside, and be passed by the new throngs pressing onward to an unknown goal.

"And Elizabeth, will you tell us nothing of her?" Pardon me. I have planted wild flowers on her grave, and watered them with my tears.

CHARLES ELWOOD REVIEWED.*

[From the Boston Quarterly Review for April, 1842.]

THIS small volume, written for the most part in 1834, though not published till a couple of years since, was by no means designed to offer an elaborate defense of the Christian religion, far less a complete system of theological doctrines. Its purpose was to state with a little more than ordinary clearness and philosophic precision, the leading questions between believers and unbelievers; to show the unsatisfactory character of the answers usually given to those questions; and to indicate with some distinctness a better method of treating them. It is properly a discourse on the method of handling the matters in issue between believers and unbelievers, with only such applications of it as were necessary to make it intelligible, and to establish its justness and suffi ciency.

It is but justice to the author to say that he never for one moment considered that the book of itself would be sufficient to convert an unbeliever to the Christian faith; nor that viewed either as a simple argument, or as an exposition of a system of doctrines, it left nothing to be desired. His own painful experience had taught him that the unbeliever is never converted by mere argument, however forcible or conclusive. He is never reasoned into faith. His conver

* Charles Elwood: or the Infidel Converted. By O. A. Brownson, Boston: 1840.

sion, under the blessing of God, must be the result of the operations of his own mind. Far less can be done for him than is commonly supposed. The most we can do for him, is to present him the proper topics of consideration in a light, which aids him, from his position, to see them for what they really are. This is what, and nearly all that, is attempted by the author of Charles Elwood. For the

desired effect, he relies on the trains of thought which he believes will be naturally suggested to the unbeliever's mind, and the feelings that will be kindled up in his heart. These trains of thought and these feelings will convey the intelligent unbeliever further than the book itself goes, if he pursues them.

The book is written in the form of an autobiography, and this has led some to infer that the author is the hero of his story. This, except so far as the purely spiritual experience detailed is concerned, is not true. The author has merely transferred to Charles Elwood his own experience as an unbeliever, the struggles which actually passed in his own mind, the efforts he made to get the better of his doubts, his repeated failures, and ultimate success. Beyond this he has nothing in common with him. The characters introduced are fancy sketches, though perhaps not unlike some frequently met in actual life. We mention this, because there have not been wanting individuals to demand of us, whether in sketching the character of Mr. Smith, the fanatical preacher, we did or did not mean them?

As a literary production, the work has been objected to, that its story is meagre, and its plot without interest. The aim of the author was not to write a story that should possess an independent interest, nor to show his skill in weaving and unravelling an intricate plot. The narratives and incidents introduced are integral parts of the work, essential elements of its discussions, and necessary to its main argument, to which they are designedly subordinated, but to which they contribute, perhaps, more than our readers in general suspect. Abstract the personal interest taken in Charles himself, the æsthetic effect of his conversation with his betrothed, and of the moral beauty of Mr. Howard's life and generous friendship for him, and the life and force of the argument would be greatly impaired, and nearly all the efficacy of the work would be lost. The author relied more on the subtle influence these would exert on the heart of the unbeliever, than on his metaphysics. Knowing this, we

were not a little amused by the following passage from a friendly critic :

"But we do not think him [Mr. Brownson] qualified, nor do we think he has attempted, in the book before us, to present Christianity and its grounds so as to satisfy the wants and the tastes of all persons. We think that all must feelthe author and all-that the views to which his logic leads do not entirely satisfy. Logic has to do with the intellect and thought-the philosophic element in man. To this element Mr. Brownson has addressed himself satisfactorily. But the heart, and its affections and sentiments, the fancy and the love of the beautiful, have wants which logic cannot satisfy; they require what the logical understanding cannot prove to exist; nay, they often require a faith in what it pronounces to be impossible and absurd."-(Christian Examiner, May 1840, p. 198).

Doctors disagree. Without offering any comment on the metaphysics of this extract, we will say that it is precisely what this writer supposes the author did not attempt, that he has aimed to do; and it is precisely in the logical part of his work that he is least satisfactory. This critic took up a somewhat prevalent opinion, that the author of Charles Elwood is a sort of logic-grinder, without heart or soul, or at best with nothing but a gizzard; and therefore inferred that he could dream of attempting nothing but the construction of a mere logical argument. Yet from a tolerably intimate acquaintance with the author, of almost forty years standing, we must say that we have formed a somewhat different estimate of his character. We are far from regarding him as the pure, intellectual being, the mere dry logicmachine supposed. Nay,we doubt whether he has one-half the logical power ascribed to him. Abstract the deep, earnest feeling, the passion even, that he mingles up with his arguments, to an extent perhaps little suspected, and we apprehend his logic would be by no means remarkable. But be this as it may, we think the tone of the book indicates, and we know that its whole design was to show, the utter insufficiency of mere logic to satisfy the wants of the soul, or to effect any real change in one's faith. In his conversations with Mr. Smith and Mr. Wilson, where only logic is brought into play, Charles is represented as falling deeper and deeper into unbelief, and we apprehend the reader sympathizes with him; but the moment he comes into the presence of his betrothed, whom he loves, and whose gentle