barous and ignorant middle ages. In this difficulty, Erasmus translated the five verses into Greek, from the ancient Latin Vulgate, which was abundantly enough known to the learned, and had been often printed before that time. Afterwards, when the Alcala edition became accessible, and more complete manuscripts of the Revelation were brought to light, it was found that, though Erasmus had not hit the very words of the original throughout, (it would have been a miracle if he had done so,) he had faithfully expressed the sense and meaning of every sentence and every word."

We need say nothing more to expose the character of this Apostle of Infidelity, or to vindicate the ministers of religion in this town for not entering into a personal controversy with a man so destitute of integrity of principle.

TO THE EDITORS OF THE "LEEDS MERCURY."

GENTLEMEN-Your insertion and remarks on the letter of "E.T.” in your paper of the 11th instant, inquiring why the ministers of religion in Leeds have not come forward publicly to reply to sentiments promulgated by two itinerant Apostles of Infidelity, Mr. Carlile, the bookseller, and the person calling himself the Rev. Mr. Taylor, authorise me on the ground of that justice and fair dealing which man under all circumstances has a right to claim from man, to request and expect your insertion of my respectfully intended remonstrance against an injustice into which your zeal for what you hold to be the best of causes, has betrayed you. Justice is due to every man. The better a cause is held to be, the less occasion and the less excuse for any attempt to defend it by unjust, ungenerous, or unworthy means.

The letter of your correspondent, "E. T." though far enough off from any tone of conciliation or good feeling towards the assailants of his faith, presents a character of honesty and sincerity which deserves admiration.

There surely is no medium between the alternative which he has defined. There can be no possible relief from one or other of the horns of the dilemma, that the refusal of the clergy to accept the challenge that has been given them, "must arise either from the defencelessness of the Christian cause, or the negligence of its guardians."

Your attempt to evade the alternative, by either a real or affected contempt for the persons or characters of the challengers, and having recourse to the unworthiness of gathering up, and throwing again the expended arrows which another's war had supplied to your hostility, without suffering yourselves to know

what defence had been or might be set up, is at least a mode of dealing, which few men would think fair if practised on themselves. Would it seem in any other case, just or reasonable, to sing Te Deums over one detected error, how gross or palpable soever, an admitted and acknowledged, a rescinded and corrected error, pointed out and exposed by a learned and excellent controvertist in the arguments of his opponent, and to jump at the conclusion, that no similar liability to error could exist on the other side? or to assume that he who had once made a mistake could never rectify it, nor ought to be held worthy of respect and attention as to the accuracy of any statements or reasonings he might subsequently offer?

Such a measure of censure would be as fatal to the credit of "the learned and excellent Dr. Pye Smith," as to his opponent. Had you read Dr. Smith's Rejoinder to Mr. Taylor's SYNTAGMA, or Defence of the Manifesto, you would find "the learned and excellent Doctor" himself driven as hardly, and constrained to acknowledge a mis-statement and error as gross as that he triumphs over. Not to say how ill it looks for any cause when its advocates are seen making so much of so paltry an advantage, and insisting on their easy victory over one unguarded position, as an excuse for the cowardice that dare not encounter, nor look on the mighty apparatus of yet unconquered, yet unanswered arguments, whose validity remains impregnable, and remaining so, are no less formidable, nor would be so, for the surrender of a thousand or ten thousand such immaterial or inconsequential positions.

What is the utmost extent of Dr. Smith's advantage gained over Mr. Taylor? Take it at the most.

Mr. Taylor has been betrayed by the exceeding strength of Bishop Marsh's exposures and rebukes of the liberties taken by Erasmus with his Greek text of the New Testament, to point out an instance, in which, upon a more exact trutination of the circumstances of the case, Erasmus will be found less to blame, than Mr. Taylor represented, and Bishop Marsh himself treated him as being.

The fraudulent and mendacious character of Erasmus, and the unjustifiable liberties which he took with the Greek text, are admitted and censured most severely by the sincerest and ablest defenders of the integrity of that text. Stronger instances of his presumptuous temerity, might probably have been selected, but the liberty taken with the very passage of the Revelation, which denounces "the plagues that are written in this book, against any man who should add unto these things," (22 Rev. 18.) seemed in its own nature, most frightful and startling, and to indicate a recklessness of wilful misrepresentation, that would be restrained by no religious nor even moral restraints.

The extent however of the imposture practised by Erasmus in

this instance, went no further than that finding his Greek manuscript, the Codex Reuchlini, deficient in this place, he supplied it by a rendering of his own from the text of the Latin Vulgate, representing the whole, as derived from the same authority, and representing that authority as worthy to be considered of the apostolic age, in the teeth of its own internal evidence, that it was the hand-writing of Andrew, of Cæsarea, in the ninth century, and of his own knowledge, that it was derived only from the infinitely suspicious custody of the monks of the monastery of Basil.

Any conscientious Christian critic would feel the indignation expressed by Bishop Marsh, on such evidence of misrepresentation and interpolation. Our indignation is apt to betray our reason into the very fault we are censuring in others; and Mr. Taylor, in this instance, in the earlier editions of the Manifesto, which alone Dr. Smith has condescended to notice, put forth an exaggerated statement of the fraud practised by Erasmus, which he modified in a subsequent edition, and explained in his SYN

TAGMA.

The bitter railings of Dr. Pye Smith over this indefensible and perhaps inexcusable error of Mr. Taylor, and the disingenuous obtrusion of it upon public observance, after it has been fully acknowledged and corrected, as an excuse for declining to take up the defence of Christianity against an adversary, who, this defect or twenty other and greater ones notwithstanding, remains strong and impregnable, in arguments which neither Dr. Smith, nor any other Christian advocate has yet felt competent or willing to conflict with, betrays a reality of the state of things, which it will soon be as vain to deny, as it is to attempt to conceal.

The charge of flagrant and unparalleled dishonesty which Dr. Smith brings against Mr. Taylor for his pretended quotation from Bishop Marsh, and which you, Gentlemen, quote from Dr. Smith's Answer to the Manifesto-Dr. Smith himself in his Rejoinder, recalls, rescinds, and begs pardon for. What sort of honesty is it, to insist on an accusation which the accuser himself has withdrawn? What sort of justice would it be, should Mr. Taylor himself, alledge this admitted error of his opponent, as a sufficient reason for treating every thing else which he might offer, as unworthy of a better estimation?

If contempt and scorn of those who differ from us were a sufficient vindication of the system we choose to maintain, there is no religion that ever was upon earth that might not be defended as well as Christianity.

If clergymen are not to be required to accept the challenges of those whom they may please to call "unprincipled and impudent assailants of Christianity," just be so good as to tell us, Gentlemen, what sort of assailants of Christianity ever could, or would challenge them, whom they would not call "unprincipled and impudent."

Or if at a time when it is known that Infidelity is spreading in all directions, and that there is not a well-educated family in England but what numbers among its members an avowed or a suspected Deist-scorn and contempt, reviling and detraction, are a sufficient notice of Infidel arguments; when will it be that Our Christian clergy shall have any summons to action, when shall they have any thing to do but to pocket the revenues of their office, preach to those who are willing to be preached to, and rail at those who call on them to give a reason of the hope that is in them?

Stockport, July 14, 1829.

ROBERT TAYLOR,
Infidel Missionary.

PREACHING; BUT NO DISCUSSION.

For the Rev. Robert Taylor, A. B., and Mr. Richard Carlile.

MR. PARKER acknowledges the receipt of a Circular from the Rev. Robert Taylor, A. B., and Mr. Richard Carlile, inviting a discussion on the merits of the Christian religion. If he does not accept the challenge, it is not from any conviction that the cause of Christianity will not bear the closest scrutiny, but from a persuasion, that if Messrs. Taylor and Carlile cannot be convinced of the existence of Jesus Christ, and of the divine origin of the religion which bears his name, from what has been written by Lardner, Paley, Priestley, Wakefield, Belsham, Maltby, and other eminent men, it would be in vain for him to attempt to convince them.

That Jesus Christ existed, Mr. P. believes to be supported by very strong evidence. He is satisfied with what Mr. Beard has advanced on this subject in reply to Mr. Taylor.

The person who denies the existence of Jesus Christ, is surely, pursuing a path which will lead him into the regions of desolation and darkness. To be consistent, he must place no faith in historical testimony, in support of any thing which occurred in past ages.

With respect to the benefits of the Christian religion, Mr. P. certainly differs from the gentlemen, who style themselves. "Infidel Missionaries.” He acknowledges that the Christian religion has been greatly corrupted, and that it has not been always recommended by the temper and conduct of the persons who have professed to believe its divine authority, yet he is persuaded in his own mind, that in other instances, in which it has been properly received, it has produced very important effects. No 4.-Vol. 4.

I

Notwithstanding all the discouraging circumstances which have attended this religion, and which still attend it, Mr. P. believes, that the gates of Hades will never prevail against the true Church of Christ; and, that the period will come, when the religion of Jesus shall triumph over all opposition.

Mr. Parker sincerely wishes that Mr. Taylor, and Mr. Carlile, may live to embrace "the truth as it is in Jesus;" and earnestly invites them to study the sacred scriptures, with a humble, serious spirit, endeavouring to divest themselves of improper prejudices, and availing themselves of the aids of Biblical criticism.

He con

Mr. P. conceives, that the principles of Infidelity cannot make him any recompense for the loss of pure Christianity. siders unbelief as the grave of truly refined and noble sentiments, while a firm faith in the simplicity of the gospel, is the source of every thing grand and elevating, every thing which is virtuous and praiseworthy.

Mr. Parker cannot see the propriety of Messrs. Taylor and Carlile's "impugning the honesty of a continued preaching, because they challenge a discussion on the whole of the merits of the Christian religion."

Whatever may be the ideas of Messrs. Taylor and Carlile, with respect to Mr. P., or others of his brethren in the Ministry,

they may say to persons who impugn their honesty, "With us it is a very small thing, that we should be judged of you, or of man's judgment.-He that judgeth us is the Lord," Heaton Cottage, near Stockport,

July 14, 1829.

PROGRESS of infideLITY.
(From the New York Correspondent.)

Extract of a Letter, dated Wilmington, United States of North America, De. February 7th, 1829.

LIBERAL principles are gaining ground in this place. Twelve months ago, it was not publicly known that there was one Deist here. Within the past year a society has been got up for the purpose of investigating the truth or falsehood of the Bible. Twelve or fourteen professed Deists have come out publicly, and before very large audiences, against the Bible and Christianity; amongst whom are men who stand the highest for intelligence and respectability. Our discussions have excited great interest; and Infidelity, as it is usually called, is divested of that horrid garb in which it used to be presented by the hireling priesthood to their deluded hearers; and with many (who used to be alarmed at a doubt of the truth of Christianity) "revealed religion" appears to be the legitimate wearer of the frightful garments.