Rhode Island American, Statesman And Providence Gazette

"Prompter" is received. We will inform him in explicit terms, that his communication is inadmissible. He must recollect that he has been indulged once, upon a subject which did not legitimately belong to the columns of this paper. His first communication was admitted merely for his own personal gratification.

If the evangelical paper, which is to be printed in this town, cannot by its own independent merits, acquire distinction, it will not be our fault. "Prompter," could have reflected but little, when he penned his communication. If he thinks that the Advertiser is open to the religious disputes which now occupy the attention of the community; he is mistaken.

Besides, "Prompter" should recollect that others have the right to freedom of opinion. He or his peculiar sect are not infallible. They are subject to the same errors and infirmities, and perhaps greater ones than the class which he so boastingly condemns.

But what is the substance of all his remarks? Why, that the class of Christians to which he belongs, are the only true, and virtuous, and pious class—that they alone deserve the countenance of intelligent minds, and ought to enjoy general dominion. Yes, he goes further: that those who embrace a different system, do not embrace the doctrines of revelation; and practice its pure and simple precepts. He displays a spirit which does no honor to the Christian religion.

Charity, liberal and enlarged charity, should be the standard, around which every community should gather. Persecution on account of religious opinions, or indeed of any other, do not belong to this age or country.

We have no idea of encouraging religious controversy. Neither will we take any steps to chain down the freedom of the human mind. Reason and conscience are not to be stifled by external force or arbitrary dictation. In proportion as the human mind is kept free from the violence and dominion of self-constituted judges, so much the more free is a community.

But, does "Prompter" see how far his doctrines carry him? What right has he to denounce a large portion of the christian community? Is he to be the judge of men's opinions whether they are right or wrong? Is he to support a paper the columns of which are to be open to calumny and detraction? Is he to decide what are the true doctrines of revelation and what not? Is he to arraign the motives and characters of some of the best and greatest of dead and living men? Does he think that he is any more capable of discerning truth from error than was Newton, Locke, and Priestly?

He has allowed (to use the mildest term) his zeal, to get the better of his judgment. Before we leave the subject, it may not be inappropriate to advise "Prompter" to cultivate a liberal and enlarged charity, a spirit of active and stirring benevolence, which prompts us to embrace all as children of the same common Father, and subjects of the same glorious immortality.