ON RELIGIOUS CONTROVERSY. BY THE REV. JOHN BROWN. THE influence of religious controversy on the great interests of Christian truth and holiness, is a subject which deserves a more at tentive consideration than, so far as I know, it has ever received. A thorough discussion of the question, whether, or in what degree it has been favourable or unfavourable to these interests, would involve in it a good deal of important statement and speculation, and might not improbably elicit some highly useful practical conclusions. There can be no doubt that those persons are mistaken, who consider religious contro.. versy as an unmixed evil, and reprobate it in every form and on every subject. It is readily admitted that the necessity of religious controversy is an evil, and that were things in the state in which they should be, there would be no room for it. Were truth universally received when proposed, and were it retained unadulterated when received, to engage in controversial combat with an imaginary enemy-to conjure up doubts for the purpose of laying them-to excogitate heresies for the purpose of refuting them, would be something worse than a waste of time and labour. But since truth has uniformly been resisted by men of corrupt minds, who have rejected it when offered to their belief, it became necessary to defend it against their objections, and as it has uniformly been modified and mutilated by many of a similar character who have professed to receive it, till it has changed its nature, and been converted into dangerous error, it has been found equally requisite, not merely to exhibit the truth in its native undebased purity, but to expose the ignorant or ill-intentioned attempts to deprecate it, and to guard against their dangerous consequences. Thus the propagators of truth, however peacefully disposed, are under the necessity of taking up defensive arms, if they would not betray her sacred cause into the hands of perfidious allies or open enemies. : It Hence we find, that religious controversy is nearly coeval with the publication of truth and a very considerable portion of the recorded discourses of Jesus Christ and his apostles, are of a controversial nature. were surely to act unworthily to the most argumentable (to use one of Dr Chalmers' out of the way but expressive words) of all religious systems, for its friends to leave the objections of its enemies unanswered, as if they were unanswerable; or to suffer what in its genuine form is a sovereign remedy for all the diseases of our moral nature, to be, by the folly or wickedness of men, reduced to an inert mass, or converted into a deadly poison. Religious controversy, then, as through the corruption of human nature it is abso.. lutely necessary, so when properly conduct. ed it can do no harm, but is calculated to do much good, by putting to silence and to shame the ignorance of foolish men, and confirming the Christian in the faith, and profession, and practice of the truth. In such a world as this, it is requisite that religious truth should be defended; and when its champions are properly acquainted with its principles, and embued with its spirit, the result of the encounter will always be advantageous. But, unhappily, religious controversy has often, even on the part of the defenders of the truth, been conducted in a temper directly the reverse of that manifested by its Author, and natively produced by its faith; and the consequence has been, paradoxical as the assertion may seem, that the defence of truth has frequently diffused a most malignant in fluence over the interests of truth, and over the interests too of that holiness, to the pro→ duction of which, truth itself is intended to be subservient. In many cases, in consequence of the se cular establishment of what is called orthodox Christianity, the maintenance of its divine origin, and some of its fundamental articles, is in a very considerable degree identified with the temporal interests, the wealth, the respectability, the influence of a particular class of men, many of whom, while strangers to the faith of the gospel, are induced to become its champions, on principles nearly akin to those on which Demetrius of Ephesus opposed the innovating doctrines of the Christian apostle, and defended the dogmas and rites of the Pagan establishment. In such a case, what is to be expected but the defence of Christianity on worldly principles, and in a worldly temper? The same sordid principles, and the same unhallowed passions, in such a case, are set at work as in any other worldly contention; and the adversaries of truth, setting down to |