CHARACTER is always important: it is important to all classes of persons; but especially to the young, to whom this paper is more immediately addressed.

Character is the development of principle, the manifestation of those peculiar qualities by which one individual is distinguished from another; but good character must have religion for its basis, and is inseparable from a name for wisdom and goodness, with all such as are wise and good.

A character, or name sustained by Christian conduct, is "better than precious ointment," and "is rather to be chosen than great riches;" it will afford more substantial satisfaction to the mind; it will make its possessor a more useful member of society; and it will prepare him to realize all the gains of godliness in the eternal world.

The honourable testimony borne to the character of Mary by our Lord, was infinitely more valuable than the precious ointment, with which she anointed him; and he who daily recommends religion to others, by the meekness of his spirit, and the holiness of his conduct, is a greater benefactor to society, than he who relieves the temporal wants of the needy, or mitigates the sufferings of the body, or saves a sinking mariner from a watery grave.

Character, formed on Christian principles, supposes inflexible integrity in all the intercourse and transactions of life; a keen sense of moral honour ; great tenderness of spirit; and the exercise of that prudential carefulness, which is as anxious to avoid injuring others as not to be injured by others.

A good name, or Christian character, supposes also the exercise of moral courage in defending the cause of truth and holiness; the discovery of sincerity in all our motives; the development of benevolent feeling and effort; and the well-founded hope of the honour and happiness, which are

prepared and preserved for all such as live and die under the hallowing influence of the fear of God.

Character is important in the estimation of all classes of persons: even the vicious value it, when its influence is discovered; and without it, it is next to impossible for any individual to rise to distinction, or to occupy any responsible position in society.

In the choice of a legal or medical adviser, of an instructor of youth or of a man of business, of a servant or a guide, there is generally much emphasis laid on character.

How important, then, it is, that the young should pay great attention to the first steps which they take on entrance into life; and how diligent, and anxious, and prayerful should they be that they may preserve their conduct without reproach.

An established character is not acquired at once: years must elapse, and many difficulties and temptations must be endured and resisted, before a good moral reputation can be obtained, before public interest and confidence can be elicited; and what it has required years to obtain, may, in one moment, or by one rash or imprudent act, be completely lost, and lost never more to be regained.

Good character is important, because it is beneficial in its influence.

It will guard the young from many suspicions; it will protect them against the slanderous insinuations of wicked and designing adversaries; it will promote self-respect; it will assist in the pursuits of this world; and it will prevent that deep and distressing remorse, which a tender and delicate mind must experience, as the consequence of a blighted character.

My young friends, good character may be regarded as capital; it is a treasure worth possessing and protecting; it makes friends where they did not exist before, and it produces a

disposition to show friendship; it makes duty comparatively easy, and lessens the power of temptation; in fine, he who has a good character, feels that he has something to take care of; something that is worthy of his most vigilant effort that it may not be injured; something that renders it needful that he should daily plead for upholding grace, for guiding and preserving mercy.

The formation of character is not the result of force, but of deliberate choice; there may be many classes of means in constant, and some in invisible operation, yet still every one feels that he has power to refuse or assent, to act or not to act, as his judgment may dictate.

An individual may be constrained to act, but he cannot be compelled to think, contrary to his prevailing inclination; he may be coerced or bribed to defend a cause which he does not approve, but he cannot be brought voluntarily to identify himself with a cause which his judgment condemns.

General character may be modified by circumstances, as in the case of Herod, who, for a season, was deterred from killing John, because "he feared

the people;" but Christian character is perfectly voluntary, it is cultivated by the individual himself as the result of Divine teaching; that teaching which, through the instrumentality of Divine truth, transforms the soul, enlightens the judgment, and sanctifies all the affections of the mind.

In order to the maintenance of good character, there must be much prayer to God; there must be great carefulness in the choice of companions, and in the selection of books; and there must be diligent attention to the means of grace, and a conscientious avoid. ance of all improper recreations.

Think, my young friends; think seriously of the immense importance of these things; for, as character is formed in this life so it will be found in eternity.

The character with which you live and die, will rise up with you in eternity, and will be eternal; then you will reach the perfection of eternal felicity, or endure the unutterable torments of eternal despair. "Thus saith the Lord of hosts, Consider your ways." R. N.

To the Editor of the

MY DEAR SIR,-It has become very common of late for persons who are attached to systematic theology to find fault with the rising ministry; and to charge them with "legalizing the gospel," "modernizing the religion of Jesus Christ;" "preaching semi- Arminianism," &c. "An Aged Minister" has uttered his lamentations on this subject in your magazine for this month.

I confess myself to be a young minister, and have no doubt that if my aged brother were to hear me preach, he would rank me among the class whose style of preaching he so much deplores. I wish to show him all that deference and respect which are due

to his age and to his office; but that need not prevent me from offering a few remarks on what I think unfair and objectionable parts of his letter.

In the first place, it is not fair to charge, even by implication, the whole body of young ministers with the unguarded expressions of a few individuals.

Then it is too bad for him to say that young ministers "must needs introduce their knowledge of moral science and mental philosophy into their sermons," as though they had no higher aim in doing so than mere display. Whatever may be the practices and motives of some, to include the

whole class of young ministers in this sweeping charge is unkind and unjust. If" An Aged Minister" has an extensive acquaintance with the rising ministry, he must know it to be so; if he has not, he ought not to have made the assertion.

When he says, "if they be truly pious and devoted to their work, they will come right in time," he means that they will abandon what he calls their semi-Arminian views and style of preaching. Now, if there be any ground for this assertion, or any propriety in it, it follows as a matter of course, that all our ministerial brethren among the Wesleyan and other methodists, who do not "come right in time," but who close their ministry holding the same views as they commenced it with, were not "truly pious and devoted to their work." Does "An Aged Minister" mean to assert this? If he does not, there is no point or propriety in the sentence. If he does, then I think the spirit which his system has engendered is not likely to recommend it.

"An

I very much question the wisdom and prudence of bringing these complaints before the public, even supposing them to be well founded. Aged Minister" asserts that "there are thousands of pious persons who cannot go with the times," &c., by which he means that they do not like the preaching of the rising ministry, and that "there is oftentimes great difficulty in a young man's being settled over an intelligent people." I am not disposed to admit all that is meant by these two assertions; as I think it were not a very difficult task to show that the dislike of these thousands, if it does exist, is the result of groundless prejudices which have been produced by partial views of polemical divinity, and that the difficulty which any young man feels in getting settled over an intelligent people might be accounted for on other grounds than his doctrinal opinions. But I am willing to let that pass, and admit that what is stated is strictly true; then I ask, Sir, ought not " An Aged Minister" to be one of the

last to perpetuate that dislike on the part of the people, and to increase that difficulty on the part of his young brother? The private Christians who read your magazine are ten fold more numerous than the ministers who read it, and perhaps a hundred fold more numerous than those to whom the letter applies; and if the thousands referred to by your correspondent should happen to be among them, their distaste for the preaching of the rising ministry will not be likely to be diminished by any thing contained in his letter. There is a foolish prejudice existing against young ministers in many minds, on no other ground than because they are young. Now our aged brethren who "feel a peculiar interest in young ministers," ought to try and remove that prejudice as far as they can. But they are far more likely to increase it than diminish it by publishing to the churches that they do not preach the truth as it is in Jesus.

When I began, I meant to make a few remarks on the general question respecting what is called the modern style of preaching; but I am afraid of troubling you with too long a letter, and will therefore leave them till next month, when, if no one takes up the subject, and you see fit to publish this, I will endeavour to forward them. In the mean time let me just say, that we deny the following things, which are either stated or implied by an aged minister. 1. That we need a modern New Testament,' in order to justify our mode of preaching. 2. That because our preaching may in some respects differ from the style of the excellent, yet fallible men named, therefore it must differ from the Bible. 3. That there is any greater contradiction' in our mode of stating the truth than in that adopted by the inspired writers. 4. That our divinity' is more 'modern' than that of Christ, the prophets and apostles. 5. That we preach 'another gospel' or 'legalize' the true 6. That we neglect to preach or keep in the back ground the utter depravity of man ;' his redemption by

one.

Christ,' and 'justification by faith,' and by that alone as the only means of the sinner's reconciliation to God. We may be wrong; and if so, I for one shall be glad to be put right. But we think that our mode of preaching more fully declares the whole counsel of God than the old one; for while we are as anxious as any of our older brethren to give all the glory of the sinner's salvation to God, we wish, on the other hand, to attribute all the guilt of his impenitence and unbelief, and all the blame of his final condemnation, to himself. Yours sincerely,

EDITOR'S REMARKS.

We have received no fewer than five critiques upon the paper of "An Aged Minister," which appeared in the November number of the "Evangelical Magazine;" some of them written, as we think, in a tone of severity by no means justified by any thing which fell from the pen of our venerable correspondent, who is neither a hyper-Cal vinist, nor an unfriendly observer of the rising ministry. Had he been either, we should not have admitted his strictures into our pages. At the same time, we are jealous of the reputation of our younger brethren, and should be grieved beyond what we can express, if the well-meant observations of our correspondent should create unreasonable prejudice, or lead querulous persons to think less respectfully and kindly of young ministers, who are the hope of the churches, than they deserve. Though we have painful suspicions that some modern preachers,

both among Baptists and Independents, are justly chargeable with "modernizing" the appeals of the gospel, we would fain hope that the majority of our beloved young brethren are sound in the faith. We well know how strong the tendency is, in certain quarters, to find fault with inexperienced preachers, and to make them offenders without a cause with such an unjustifiable and ungrateful state of feeling we can have no sympathy. On the contrary, we would express it as our conviction, that the rising ministry ought to be encouraged, that too much ought not to be expected from them, and that all wise and good men ought to hail and comfort them in entering upon the duties of their responsible calling. We love them too much, and feel too deep an interest in their future success, ever to become parties to any petty warfare against them, which might either discourage them, or tempt them to set light by the opinions of those who may be qualified to minister good advice to them.

Having thus expressed our Own strongly cherished sentiments, in reference to young ministers, we hope not to be mistaken, when we say, that they should strenuously guard against the adoption of such views of truth, or such modes of inculcating them, as might tend to breed suspicion of heterodoxy in the minds of serious persons. Is there not some danger, in the present day, of an attempt to refine too much upon the plain doctrinal statements of Scripture? to reconcile difficulties which must continue to press upon us? to cultivate an over-technical mode of enunciating the truths of the gospel? We are not disposed to be fastidious; but we think we perceive tendencies like these in some modern preachers. We are not free from apprehension, moreover, that some doctrines of Christianity are in danger of being concealed or mutilated in certain quarters. Is not man's responsibility insisted upon, in such a manner, by some teachers, as to veil both the absolute corruption of human nature, and the necessity of Divine influence? Is