Sunbury American and Shamokin journal. [volume] (Sunbury, Northumberland Co., Pa.) 1840-1848, 1843-07-22
FOR THE AMERICAN.
A Reply TO Rev. W. R. Smiths Review.

have read with some care "Review of
my structures upon communication from L.
d. l.. on the subject of baptism, published IN
the American" The reviewer calls himself
"a scriptural Baptist" sad msnomer. The
truth is, he is an anti-scriptural sprinkler.
nm free TO confess, that am not very much
pleased with either the spirit or language of
the reviewer. The spirit is far from that kind,
noble, generous and candid spirit that should
ever characterize a religious reviewer, and es.
pecially the minister Of the meek and lowly
Jesus. 81 am distressed for thee, my brother
Jonathan" The style is too much like the
mere defamation of wild, fippant beigerant
| cannot discover redeeming principle about
either the style, the spirit, the arguments or
the attempted criticisms. The author of the
Review is the Rev. Mr.. Smith, of Sunbury,
Pastor of the Presbyterian church in that place.
He has certainly committed not few indiscre-
tions in his labors of determination against the
Baptists-indscrcton of such nature and cx-
tent, that Whatever praise he may deserve for
mere "index learning" will debar him from the
first rank among good critics, sound ,heologi-
ans and candid men.
Homer was content to give to Achilles the
credit OF daring and resistlcss might in the
battlefield and to Nestor preeminence in
counsel. Mr. Smith would like to DC invested
with both but we cannot quite accede TO this,
especially since he made decent back ou,
from public discussion of christian baptism
lie may however have thought of the words of
well known satirst, that,
ale who turns and runs away
May live to fight another day."
That there is in Mr.. Smiths Review" a pain
ful misuse of words, a wrong application of
terms, an unnatural coloring of facts, and the
greatest, and fear the most wilful misrepre-
sentations of the Baptists, the most careless
reader must acknowledge. | shall not pause
to account for this-whether it may be traced
to ignorance, prejudice, party feelings, an i'm
perfect nomenclature, or any other cause,
leave for others to Judge.
will, however, express my deep regret
that the gentleman has pursued the course ne
has, it will eventually return upon himself and
Iwoud assure him, that this very injudcious
attack upon the Baptists, will end ultimately in
his defeat and in the advancement of christian
baptism. Ifthe things of which am about tC
complain had emenated from avowed enmity
or had been vociferated only by the tongue o
SANDER, they had never excited any othc'
emotions in my mind than pity and silent con
tempt; but when they are ushered upon the
public, through deservedy popular paper, a.
undeniable facts, and sanctioned, too, by all tn,
gravity and sarcasm Of Rev. Mr.. Smith, they
assume very serious aspect, and imperiously
call us to selfdefence. 1t is well known tha
did not commence this controversy. A pedo
baptist threw down the glove, and have take,
it up in defence Of what believe to be truth
For US to have remained silent would but hav
afforded our opponents theme of exultatol
among themselves, and given them an op
portunity, uncontradcted, to assert a victor,
over the Baptsts they never obtained. Tina
the weakness of Mr. Smiths performance una,
be seen, and truth established, propose to no
tlce in subsequent numbers, the following order
First-Some things which Mr.. Smith pro
missed to do, but which he has utterly failed t
accomplish
Second shall present to the reader som
ofthe many misrepresentation and false charg
es brought against the Baptis,s.
Third will give little advice to Nj
Smith, which, ifhe will receive and reduce t
practice, will do him good. w. S. ii.
Berwick, July 10, lS43.
n. b. As Mr.. Smith prefers discussing tn
aciiOn of Christian Baptism in newspaper,
hereby inform him that am ready, let hi,
now go on and substantiate his position as give
in his challenge w. S. HALL.