*On that “Conference of Religion” that was held in New York City, and that was reported in these columns several weeks ago, the Christian Advocate says:—* What could be expected of a convention consisting of Jews, Christians, agnostics, or of a body that would produce “a manual of common worship consisting of selections from the Jewish, Christian, and ethnic scriptures, prayers selected from Jewish offices and Christian liturgies, ancient and modern, as well as from private sources, together with hymns and a wide range of authorship?” . . . Priests, parsons, ministers, rabbis, may meet merely as citizens, and discuss other things than the fundamentals of their respective faiths; but a Christian can not approach God in any other name than that of Christ, while a Jew can not pray in that name, nor a modern Unitarian, except in a sense unknown to those of the evangelical faith. All such conferences are nets which catch the unwary, and make the impression on many that, as the distinctions between the conferees are immaterial, the subject on which they confer is immaterial or intangible. Such a Conference of Religion as this, as an association conceived and constructed chiefly to make an impression on the public that the differences between the evangelical Christian churches and the Unitarians, the Jews, and others, are not fundamental (and as a partnership in which the latter classes have everything to gain and nothing to lose), would deserve the credit of being wonderfully well adapted to promote the object designed. That is all true. Yet, true as it is, the Christian Advocate is the only paper in all the land, that we have seen, that has expressed any such views.