self to public sentiment, so far as to withhold some truths, and modify the statement of others, according as the ignorance, the prejudices, or the feelings of the community, make it expedient. The teacher who has not settled this question in his own mind, must frequently be in perplexity as to what course to follow, and will be liable to every sort of inconsistency; he will defend a proposition boldly on one day, which on the next, he will labor to explain away, and qualify, so as virtually to deny his own faith in it; he will frequently assert in private, what he is afraid to defend in public; and the character of his instructions will depend upon the state of mind which he happens to be in at the moment.

If considered in the abstract, this question is easy enough to answer. It seems obvious, that if we profess to speak the truth, we should speak the whole truth, and nothing else; and the only way of speaking truth, is to speak it exactly as we ourselves see and feel it. But as a question of every day practice, it is more difficult to be put at rest. The public teacher, in whatever way his instructions are given, feels that his object is not so much to state truth in a bare, undressed form, as to convey the truth to the minds of his hearers or readers; in other words, it is not his object to speak the truth, so much, as to make the impression of truth on the minds of others; and if he thinks that their, minds will be ultimately brought to the truth, if it is very cautiously and partially stated to them at first, better, than if it is brought out fully and boldly, his love of truth may induce him to throw a temporary veil over it. Besides this, the community which is addressed, is often in such a state of mind, that the statement of a truth to them, may leave the impression of error, instead of truth upon them; existing opinions and feelings may be such, that they will modify or. misinterpret the statement, so as essentially to change its meaning. For instance, we have known persons, who, when taught the truth, that man is born innocent, and is by nature pleasing to God, have immediately, involuntarily inferred, as though it were a part of the same proposition, that men need to undergo no change of heart, and that the common morality which results from natural feeling, is all which God requires from them. Now, although there is no real connexion between these two propositions, is it wise to state the first strongly, to men who will immediately infer the second? Or would it not be more judicious. nay. would it not be practically speaking, a more near adhesion to the truth itself, to state the former proposition with qualifications, which do not properly belong it, or in a form which,

although not perfectly correct, is most likely to leave a correct impression? In short, to leave particular examples, should not the teacher, when about to declare any truth, ask himself, how shall I make the true impression? By speaking plainly the simple truth, by concealing a part of it, or by accommodating it in some degree to the prejudices of those who are to receive it? And should not his statement of the truth be materially modified by such considerations? As a question of duty, is a man right in teaching even the truth, without a careful regard to the effect which will be actually produced on the minds of those to whom it is addressed? These questions certainly create a difficulty in the mind of a thoughtful man, as to the manner of declaring truth.

There are other difficulties of the same sort. There are some truths for which a community may be wholly unprepared, and which may threaten to produce unmixed evil on the minds of the majority. What is the teacher to do in such a case as this? Shall he at all ventures, utter his convictions, even if he sees plainly that the good will work evil? or does prudence command him to keep silent till a more favorable season? However easy it may be to set aside these difficulties by one sweeping assertion, that the truth must always be spoken, and that plainly, the conscientious teacher, who desires to do good, cannot help regarding them, and sometimes being puzzled by them.

But, notwithstanding these things, and many others of the same sort which might be urged, our own conviction is very full, and very decided, that the truth ought always to be spoken, and written fearlessly, without reserve, and in its true form. We have alluded to the difficulties in the case, to show that we are not ignorant of them; the fact is, we have often felt them very painfully, and have not yet learned to forget. them; but if they were all increased two-fold, we should still say with earnestness, let every teacher utter boldly all that he believes; let him present the truth in its own colors, as he sees and feels it. We are persuaded that this is the only course by which the interests of truth can be subserved; it is the only way in which the teacher can secure his greatest happiness and usefulness. We have no right to speak timidly what we feel strongly; we have no right to express our firm convictions with trembling, hesitating lips, as though they were but half-formed speculations. It is a favorite idea with us, that every man who possesses important truth has a mission to execute, in making it known to all around him; and he is false to his trust if he withholds anything, or covers up

any part; it is his duty to declare all that he knows, and to leave the result with God who sent him. All reasoning which prevents him from doing this, is sophistry; the probability is that it is nothing but a plausible excuse for the want of moral courage to speak plainly. In fact, the teacher has no right to deliberate at all in this matter; if he speaks at all, as we have already said, he should speak the whole truth and nothing else.

Such a rule as this presupposes, we are aware, that those who pretend to teach, should give diligent and anxious thought in the formation of their opinions. We have no idea of countenancing what is so often done, the proclaiming notions of an hour, with the authority which properly belongs only to long studied and carefully examined opinions. The lightness with which the responsible office of teacher of the public mind is sometimes assumed, and the carelessness with which it is filled, cannot be too strongly reprehended.If deliberate caution is needed any where, it is needed in the formation of opinions which are to be brought to act on the community; and no one has a right to perplex others, and put their faith and virtue to peril, by uttering as truth, doctrines which, even in his own mind, are only ingenious speculations. In scientific pursuits, every conjecture may be brought forward; and hypothesis may be defended merely for the sake of exciting thought, and encouraging experiment. But in religion and morals, to which we have particular reference, far greater prudence is essential. Conjectures and speculations should be kept back until they have been studied, and re-studied, before they are offered to the minds of others. We are

not sure, indeed, that mere speculations have any place in moral and religious instruction; the faith and holiness of men are too precious, and too easily injured to allow experiments to be tried with them; and the teacher who feels his responsibili ty as he should, will never be forward to say a word, however ingenious, by which they will be needlessly tried. It is shocking to see with what levity many preachers and writers attack old doctrines in religion, and bring out their own crude, undigested ideas, or rather fancies, before the public eye. They strike at the foundation of men's creeds, as though no great interest were involved; as if it were no evil to have one's religious faith unsettled, and as if an error introduced into one's moral feelings, were of no more importance than a mistake in regard to the classification of a plant. We have sometimes wondered, when we have heard preachers defend boldly, new doctrines, which they were ready to con

fess, in their confidential intercourse, were quite unsettled in their own minds. Such men are far more to be condemned, than those who hold back their honest convictions, in consequence of an overstrained sensibility as to the effect they may produce. They are promoters of disorder and infidelity, to a degree which they themselves would shudder to behold; they mar the beauty of many a religious mind, and give excuse to many a sceptical heart; they are continually working greater ruin than the hand of man can retrieve. In our country, and especially on this side of the on this side of the mountains, this is a class of persons much to be dreaded. Men are fearfully ready to assume every kind of responsibility, and terribly thoughtless in regard to the consequences of what they do. The demand for laborers is so great, that many stand up and are heard as teachers, who are prepared for the office neither by learning or wisdom, and it is not wonderful, that the pulpit and the press are often made engines of more evil than good, by the licentious freedom of those who occupy them. We hope that the time will come when every one who writes or speaks to the public, will feel that to promulgate an error in religion or morals, voluntarily, is a crime little short of murder, and that to do so carelessly, is a sin to be repented of in sackcloth and ashes. For we cannot have too much caution, if it is united with manliness, and unmixed with personal fear, in the promulgation of new opinions upon these momentous subjects.

But all this does not affect the speaking the truth boldly, when long and careful examination has convinced us that we have found it. Perhaps we may say, that it is impossible to be too cautious in forming opinions, or too fearless in speaking them out when they have been deliberately adopted. And it is to this last that we would now refer a little more particularly. We recently heard a man of considerable eminence as a preacher of the Gospel, say, in relation to a book about to be published in Boston, on the Old Testament, "I am sorry that it is to be published, for although I agree with the author in most of his views, I fear that they will do harm, and that the public is not prepared for them." Another person, in speaking of some peculiar views of his own, which he valued very much, said, that "he did not venture to preach them, because he feared they would not be acceptable to his people. There are several errors involved in these two expressions of fear, which proceeded from the same feeling, and we will occupy one or two pages in pointing them out. "The public are not prepared-my people

are not ready to receive these truths." What presumption is here! We would answer to those who use such words, how do you know that you are so far before your age and nation, that it is not safe for you to speak to them boldly? For this conceited fancy, is the true ground of the fear expressed.— He who does not dare to speak his convictions of truth, because he thinks people are unprepared for them, and are unable to understand them, virtually says, "I must deal with these men who are about me, as with babes, feeding them with milk, for they are not yet able, as I am, to bear stronger food. I stand upon an eminence above them, and must look down, or I cannot see them. It will not answer for me to treat them as equals, for my understanding is more enlightened, and my mind is more spiritual than theirs." This is all a mistake. Since the times of the apostles, men have not stood at so great distances apart, as such fancies would indicate.We hear some men spoken of as having advanced fifty years before their cotemporaries, but we do not believe that such cases are often to be found. It is true, that occasionally some one spirit soars above its age and becomes a "Prophet" of future times, speaking of things that are not understood until many years have gone by; these are the very great men who, while they live, are in the world, not of it. If any one imagines that he is one of this little band of prophets, we do not presume to address him in our feeble words. Only this we will say: that those whose minds have reached farthest forward into future time, who have risen highest into the spiritual regions of thought, and have had least in common with the struggling world about them, have ever been the boldest and plainest in the utterance of truth. Such men feel that they are entrusted with a message which they must deliver; the fulness of their souls must be poured out; their tongues must speak all which their hearts feel, and their minds think, whether it is understood or misunderstood; whether it is destined to bring forth fruit at once, or to lie dead in a barren soil for ages. What have they to do with effect, with results? They speak boldly, and leave the rest to God. They know that if, from fear or weak misgiving, they hold back their message, they must render an account to the God of truth for the buried talent; and they love the truth too much, and trust too implicitly in its divine power, to wish to throw a veil over it, or to set it off in the meritricious colors of worldly wisdom. Jesus Christ was the great apostle of truth, and his example should be followed by every teacher. He indeed stood above and before his time; he was alone in the world, without