Volume 3. Number 11. June 5, 1826, pp. 242-249.

• A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things.--No. XIII.: The Bishop's Office.--No. II. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 242-243.
• To the Editor of the Christian Baptist by W. C., pp. 243-244.
• [Introductory Note to "An Account of a Remarkable Occurrence in a Late Journey.--An Apostolic Church"] by Alexander Campbell, p. 244.
• An Account of a Remarkable Occurrence in a Late Journey.--An Apostolic Church (From Christian Magazine), pp. 244-245.
• Christian Morality.--No. II. by Alexander Campbell, p. 246.
• Theoretic, Scholastic, Metaphysical, Speculative Theology by Alexander Campbell, pp. 246-248.
• Church Government (Reply to Brown on Discipline), by Alexander Carson, p. 248.
• Two Anecdotes (from Lectures on Ecclesiastical History) by George Campbell, pp. 248-249.
• Implicit Faith (from Lectures on Ecclesiastical History) by George Campbell, p. 249.

      SOME of the populars sneer at the term bishop, as if the Spirit of God had not chosen it to designate the only legitimate "officer" in a christian congregation, who is, from office, to teach and rule. They love Rabbi, Rabbi, or Reverend and Right Reverend, too well to lay them aside, or to exchange these haughty titles for the apostolic and humble name of overseer or bishop. And I see that some of the Baptists too, who love the present order of things, and who contend for the traditions of the fathers in the mass, in their editorial labors either capitalize, or italicize, or by some outlandish mark, erect a monument of admiration at every inscribing of the name Bishop. Yet their dear "Confession of Faith" says, p. 43.

      "8. A particular church gathered and completely organized according to the mind of Christ, consists of officers and members; and the officers appointed by Christ to be chosen and set apart by the church, so called and gathered, for the peculiar administration of ordinances, and execution of power, or duty, which he intrusts them with, or calls them to, to be continued to the end of the world, are bishops, or elders, and deacons."

      Some again, because of the impieties of England and Rome in appropriating this term to a man who wore a wig, and a gown, and trappings, have considered it very profane indeed, to call any man a bishop who does not wear a wig and kiss the pope's toe. But to those who have got an apostolic taste, the title or name of office which Paul and Peter adopted and designated is incomparably preferable to the prescriptions of Geneva or Westminster. I have lately heard that some Baptist teachers who at first recognized the "divine right," at least of the name, and were desirous of coming up to the ancient model in all things, are now startled, if not considerably shocked, when saluted "Bishop;" but the term reverend can be heard without any nervous spasm. Perhaps this may be accounted for on good principles; and indeed, if so, it is the best argument we can find for giving an exclusive preference to the terms adopted and fixed by the Spirit of Revelation. The reason why they are startled at the title on this hypothesis, they see some incongruity in its application to them. There is no incongruity arising from their want of an academical education, from their being merely acquainted with their mother tongue, from their not having a doctorate or an honorary degree. It is not on this account they are startled or affrighted at being called Bishop. But they never read in the New Testament of a bishop of two, three or four congregations; of a bishop having the "pastoral care" of a church in Rome, and Corinth, and Ephesus--in Philadelphia, Pergamos, and Thyatira, at the same time. They might have read of a plurality of bishops in one congregation, but never of a plurality of congregations under one bishop. This they may have read in the history of diocesan episcopacy, but not in the history of primitive episcopacy. But some of them are startled perhaps, on another consideration. They were not made bishops according to law. Their declaration of a special call to some work entirely distinct from the bishop's work, was the ladder which reached from the floor to the pulpit. And they do not read that any were made bishops in the hale and undegenerate days of the christian kingdom, [242] because of their having declared that they were inwardly moved by the Holy Spirit to take upon them the office of a bishop. In fine, there is no occasion for being particular or minute in finding out incongruities, which may appear to some a good and lawful reason why they should not be so designated. But they can discover no incongruity in being called minister, preacher or divine; for everyone that makes public speeches or harangues on religion, is so called by their cotemporaries. The term reverend, too, is become such common property, that the preacher of the dreams of Swedenborg, or the leader of the dance of a Shaker meeting is fully entitled to all its honors and emoluments--equally heirs to its privileges in this world and that which is to come. That some half dozen of Baptist preachers have become shy of the name bishop, for the reasons above specified, is, indeed, a good symptom in their case. It proves that their acquaintance with the ancient order of things is increasing, that they see a discrepancy between the ancient order and the present--between themselves and the bishops instituted and appointed by the apostles.

      As to our Presbyterian brethren, they make little or no pretensions to the name. They are wise enough to know that it is unsuitable to their character; but they would have some to think, that their minister and Paul's bishop are one and the same character.

      Our methodist friends have not quite forgotten the glory and majesty of the Lord Archbishop of York:--for even until this hour archepiscopacy has some charms in their eyes. In other words, a few of this brotherhood still like the remains of diocesan episcopacy. They seem to admire it, even in its ruins. I believe, however, such is the progress of light amongst this zealous people, that few, if any of their leaders, consider there is a divine right for either their bishops or form of church government, other than "vox populi, vox Dei." Yet still their "church government" has too many heads, even when the horns are broken off.

      The good old high church bishops are not within the sphere of comparison. There is no point of contact; no one side of the system that can be measured by any side of primitive episcopacy.

      Our baptist brethren began in the spirit, but ended in the flesh, on their adopting a species of presbyterial independency--licensing of preachers, and then converting these preachers into elders, with the exclusive right of administering "sealing ordinances," and creating or finishing an order of its own kind.

      But the fact is, very generally, that few of the leaders of religious assemblies seem to know, or are able to decide, whether they should be called evangelists, preachers, elders, bishops, or ambassadors; but the term minister or divine seems to embrace them all.

      To many it seems but of little consequence to be tenacious of the name. Why not then call the leaders priests? Why not then call them astrologers, soothsayers, or oneirocritics, if the name be indifferent? Because, says one, those names are used to denote quite different characters. For the same reason, therefore, let the names which the apostles adopted be used in their own acceptation, and let those things, persons and offices which the apostles said nothing about, be named or styled as the inventors please, but call not bitter sweet, nor sweet bitter. Let as not call the messenger of a congregation, an elder. Let us not call a preacher, a bishop. Let us not call a bishop, a divine; nor a deacon, a ruling elder. In a word, let us give to divine institutions divine names, and to human institutions human names.

      Were christian societies to constitute christian bishops, and to designate them by their proper title or name of office, many important results would exhibit themselves, amongst which, none of the least would be the levelling the haughty and supercilious pretensions of those who claim another office under this name, and designate themselves as the only persons to be so viewed and denominated.

      Another happy circumstance resulting from this course, would be the discountenancing and suppressing the pretensions and enthusiastic conceits of those who are imposing themselves upon society, under the pretence that they are specially called and sent by the Holy Spirit of God to preach. If they are sent to preach, let them go to preach--but they can plead no right to officiate as bishops under the call to preach. If they are called to go and preach the gospel to every creature, they dare not, of course, refuse to go; nor dare they assume a work in relation to which they are not called, and to which no man was ever otherwise called, than as the brethren, under the direction of the Holy Spirit, called him. For amongst all the qualifications by which Paul would have a bishop chosen--the modern special call is not to be found--I again repeat, that the adoption of the course divinely recommended, would, in due time, suppress the impositions practised upon the unsuspicious, by a class of raving, ranting mountebanks, who are playing themselves off as a kind of little half inspired ones, who just give to the people who they pretend they have got from heaven; and say that so clear is their divine mission and call, that eternal woe awaits them if they preach not the gospel.

      The bishops of apostolic creation are sometimes called elders--because they were generally aged persons, and always amongst the oldest converts in the community in which they officiated. But the office is no where called the elder's office. There is nothing in the term elder, which can designate the nature of any office. But the term bishop implies a good and arduous work. While on the term elder, it may be remarked, that there is no greater incongruity than to see a stripling or a young man from twenty to thirty, styled elder; and if the name does not suit his years, it is a very strong reason in favor of the conclusion that the office of a bishop does not.

      Here I had intended to have called the reader's attention to the call and appointment of a bishop--but circumstances beyond my control, forbid an effort of this kind for the present.

EDITOR.      

B-------- Co. (Md.) April 1, 1826.      

      DEAR BROTHER,--ALTHOUGH a stranger to your correspondents Faithful, see page, 184 and J------ H------, see page 222, I feel an affection that proceeds for the truth's sake, that I cannot withhold from their view a statement of a church of Jesus Christ attending to the ordinances in their simplicity. Although I am in practice for years with the order described below, yet to copy this account is far better than I could do it otherwise--and your time being so much occupied with printing the New Testament, you have not been able to comply with what you say at the close of yours to Faithful, that is--"We intend [243] to give the history of the progress and proficiency of some congregations who have taken this course, and are now enjoying a participation of the fulness of the blessings of the gospel of Christ." You will please publish this account in the present volume, and my anxiety for the dear brethren, Faithful and J---- H----, will be relieved.

	Yours in love,
	W-------- C--------

      The following is copied from the first volume of The Christian Magazine, printed in Edinburgh, in 1819.

      HAVING occasion, some time ago, to travel in the county of --------, I arrived, on Saturday evening, in the town of --------. Being a stranger, I made inquiry of my host respecting the places of worship in the town. He told me there were two established churches, a Burgher and an antiBurgher meeting, an Episcopal chapel, and of late, said he, another meeting has been set up, whose mode of worship is different from all the others. I was curious to learn wherein it differed; but he could give me no distinct answer, only, he said, that many of the town's people did not approve of it, though, he had heard, some of the graver cast liked it very much. Next morning I inquired where I should find the new place of worship he had mentioned, and being directed, I repaired to it.--Two persons, whom I supposed to be the elders of the church, soon entered.--One of them, after a short prayer, imploring the divine presence, gave out a hymn, celebrating the resurrection of the Lord Jesus. He then read a portion of scripture from the Old Testament and another from the New. That from the New Testament was judiciously chosen, as illustrating some part of what had been read from the Old. Having mentioned several of the members by name, who were variously afflicted, he called on one of the brethren to pray. He was an aged disciple of grave appearance; his prayer seemed to be the effusion of a heart alive to God--plain, artless, and appropriate. I was particularly struck by the affectionate manner in which he prayed for these distressed brethren. It reminded me of the apostle's description of the body of Christ, "Whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it." After again uniting in praise, the other elder addressed the church, in terms which made such an impression on my mind, that, I believe, I repeat his words almost verbatim,--"I have now," said he, "brethren, to lay before you a matter peculiarly painful, it is the case of our brother --------. His crime is described in the fifth chapter of the Galatians, the 19th verse. The fall of our brother, I lament to say, is well known to the world, and has caused the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme. By the offence of this person (for he did not again name him) the church is called to deep humiliation before God. In this mournful case, we have a striking mingling of the fatal effects of unnecessarily mingling with the world. This was the first step of his defection, and it paved the way for all that has followed. When first spoken to on the subject he positively denied it; but has now, confessed it to me and two of the brethren." [Here these two brethren simply attested the truth of the statement.]--After a short pause he proceeded--"With the law of our Lord and Master in our hands, we can be at no loss as to our duty in this case. That law is explicitly stated in the fifth chapter of the 1st epistle to the Corinthians, from the fourth verse to the end, [which he read.] Here then, you perceive, brethren, there is no alternative; the Lord Jesus commands us, both for this person's good, and that of the body, to separate him from our fellowship." The church, (who I now perceived were sitting together in one place) having signified their conviction that this was their duty, the elder, with much solemnity said, "We then, as a church of Jesus Christ, and acting by his authority, do, in obedience to his commandment, separate ------ ------ from our fellowship." He then prayed, in a very appropriate and impressive manner, for the unhappy subject of discipline, that the ordinance of God which had now been attended to, might be blessed to his soul, in bringing him to repentance--and to the church, in leading them to watchfulness, self abasement, and continual dependance on the grace of Jesus. After prayer, the 101st psalm was sung, which formed an extremely suitable conclusion to the solemn service. I never witnessed a scene more deeply affecting. The countenance of every person present bespoke his feelings. How is it, said I to myself, that I have lived so long among christians, and have never, till now, seen this plain and positive law of Jesus carried into effect? How beneficial are the laws of his kingdom! how much are they calculated to promote the spiritual life of his people, and to awaken the thoughtless and inconsiderate! The church now proceeded to--what I afterwards understood was a stated part of their service every Lord's day--the observance of the Lord's supper. The simplicity with which this divine ordinance was attended to, was, in itself, edifying. I beheld a representation of the unity of the body of Christ, which I never before witnessed. The words of the institution were read by one of the elders, a few remarks were then made on the nature of the Lord's supper, and on the spirit in which it ought to be observed. He then gave thanks; and then breaking the bread gave it to the disciples, who divided it among themselves. Having again united in thanksgiving, he gave also the cup, and when all had drank of it, concluded with a short exhortation, and singing an appropriate hymn. This part of the service being closed, the elder said, "Let us now, brethren, attend to the ordinance of mutual exhortation:" when some of the members spoke, for a few minutes alternately, with much simplicity, earnestness, and evident humbleness of mind. The addresses of the brethren were, properly speaking, exhortations--calculated to excite to the performance of duty, and to bear, with patience, the various sufferings of the present life: each of them had some relation to the others, and their combined influence was highly salutary. Is not this, said I to myself, an exhibition of what the apostle means, when he speaks of "the body of Christ edifying itself in love?" The exhortations of the brethren were followed by an address from one of the elders, in which he briefly recapitulated the topics brought forward by the members, and enforced the duties to which their attention had been called. One of the brethren was again called on to pray. After again uniting in praise, the elder, in a short prayer, implored the divine benediction on all their services, and entreated the blessing of God, while they attended to the fellowship of the saints. The church then sat down, when a collection was made, and the worship closed. The two hours which I thus spent with these dear people, were among the happiest and most profitable I ever enjoyed on earth. I bless God, that unexpectedly I had an opportunity [244] of witnessing the order of a church, which commended itself to my mind, as combining all the ends of christian association, and of which I had previously formed some idea from reading the New Testament. After an interval the service proceeded, and the time was occupied by prayer and praise, the teaching of the elders, and the reading of the word of God; which last, I observed, throughout the day formed a conspicuous part of their worship.

      "Being under the necessity of leaving this town early next morning, I was very desirous of learning their history. Accordingly, when worship was over in the evening, I accosted a person whom I had noticed among the members: "Sir," said I, "I am a stranger in this place, and was happily led to your place of worship to-day. Although unknown to any of you in the face, I trust I am one with you in the faith and hope of the gospel. I was very much edified with your order, and would esteem it a great favor if you would give me some particulars of your history." He very kindly invited me to his house, and gave me the following interesting detail:--"I have no doubt," said he, "that the motives of your inquiry are good; I shall, therefore, without reserve, give you the information you request. We have met together as a church for these six years past. The original members were intimately acquainted with one another. Each of us had, for a considerable time, been groaning under the defects of the societies with which we were then connected. We clearly perceived that they bore none of the features of the churches set in order by the apostles; but we sinfully contented ourselves with our condition. Our chief comfort, as to christian society, arose from assembling together once a-week in what is called a fellowship meeting. On one of these occasions a member spoke with some freedom on the distress he felt, arising from the cause above mentioned. This led the way to a free conversation; and we soon found that our distress was not that of an individual, but common to us all. We therefore resolved to walk together as a church in all the ordinances and commandments of the Lord Jesus, diligently searching the scriptures to know his will, and fervently praying to be guided by him. From that period we have assembled regularly on the first day of the week. The Lord has been pleased graciously to countenance us. Our beginning was indeed small; we were few and despised; but walking, as I trust, in the fear of the Lord and in the comfort of the Holy Spirit, we have been greatly multiplied. We had soon the satisfaction of choosing two of our brethren, with whose qualifications we were entirely satisfied, as our elders. Their labors of love have been much blessed, and one and another has from time to time been added to our number. Our communion commenced," he continued, "in the full conviction that we were yielding obedience to the Lord Jesus. And now we have increasing experience of the truth of our Saviour's declaration, that if any man do his will he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God. We have no standard but the will of our Master; and this we find so clearly stated in the scriptures, that, with the teachable spirit of disciples, we are in no danger of misunderstanding it." "The brethren," said I, "appear to have much love to each other." "Yes," he replied, "we know the benefits of christian fellowship, by coming together into one place on the first day of the week, and regularly observing the ordinances of Christ, we not only get better acquainted, but our interest in each other is greatly promoted. If a brother or a sister be absent they are immediately missed, and inquiry is made for them. Our elders know well the situation of every individual; and in case of distress, the church is particularly informed. Thus our sick, or otherwise distressed brethren, are not neglected. Christian sympathy is excited, and we are stirred up to the duty of weeping with those that weep. In short," continued he, "we have convincing proof of the wisdom of all the appointments of Christ, and how eminently the observance of them is calculated to cherish and mature every christian grace, the people of God are not aware of the loss they sustain by neglecting any one of them." "I was much gratified," said I, "by the short exhortations of the brethren to-day; is every brother called on to exhort in the church?" "Yes," he answered, "we think the commandment to exhort one another, can be limited no otherwise, than by a brother possessing no talent for it. It is the duty of our elders to take care that the edification of the church be not marred; and if a church be composed of real disciples abuses will rarely occur. We have no right to make laws to ourselves; it is our province to follow implicitly the injunctions of our master. A few Sabbaths ago, one of our brethren spoke on the consolations which the gospel affords to believers under the heaviest trials, and with much feeling urged the duty of cordial submission to the will of God. The advice came with peculiar impression, from one whose deep affliction was well known to his brethren. Indeed, who that knows the Lord is not fitted to suggest a word in season, and how gracious is the Saviour's appointment, that his disciples should comfort one another with the words of truth. Individual experience thus becomes a general benefit. The Lord Jesus, my friend, bestows gifts on his people, and every one knows that gifts are improved by exercising them." "But does not the singularity of your observances, draw upon you the censure of others?" "I believe it does; but," added he, with a look of peculiar satisfaction, "a full conviction that we are obeying the commandments of the Lord Jesus, raises us superior to these little obstacles. While we follow our own convictions of duty, and are thankful, that, in this highly favored country, every man enjoys liberty to worship God according to his own conscience, we, at the same time, cherish a loving spirit towards all who truly fear God; we earnestly desire the universal spread of the gospel; and use every means in our power for the salvation of perishing sinners around us." I thanked this worthy man for the free and open manner in which he had talked with me, and, with much regret, bade him adieu!

      Next morning I pursued my journey, but not without casting a wishful eye on the spot where these disciples sojourn. The occurrences of this day I shall not soon forget. Never do I read of the churches of the New Testament but I realize the christians at --------. Send forth, O God! thy light and thy truth, unite thy people. Thou hast indeed given them a good law; thy commandments concerning all things are right. "Thus says the Lord, I am the Lord your God, who teaches you to profit, who leads you by the way that you should go. Oh ! that you had hearkened to my commandments, then had your peace been as a river, and your righteousness as the waves of the sea!"¹ [245]

      THERE is as much wisdom exhibited in concealing some things as there is in revealing others. Parents, in relation to their own children, have incontestable proofs of this, if they are parents of discernment. Our Heavenly Father, in revealing himself and his designs to the children of men, has purposely concealed many things which it would have been unwise, in relation to all ends and results, to have discovered. There was evidently some principle, some statute in the counsels of the Omniscient, which allowed the discovery of certain things, and forbade the disclosure of others. When this principle or rule of revelation is apprehended many important results are acquired, many reflections present themselves which are of much value to the student of the Bible.

      We have no doubt but it is quite practicable to ascertain the rule or principle which authorizes the revelation of some things, and which withholds from mortal man the knowledge of others.

      When we take into view the object proposed, in giving to the world the bible, we have got into the possession of more than half the secret. And what was this? It will be said, The illumination of the world. But in reference to some end? Assuredly in reference to some end; for, without this end in view, there could be no selection of items or topics on which to address men. God has not disclosed the principles of astronomy or navigation in any part of his revelation; yet if the object of his revelation had been the mere illumination of the mind on subjects hitherto unknown, the systems and laws of astronomy or chemistry, would have been in times past a proper subject of revelation. But it is not the mere illumination of the mind which constituted a primary object in any communication from God to man.

      To come directly to the point before us, it must be observed that the volume of revelation was not given to angels, nor written for them; nor was it given to man in his primitive state, nor adapted to a perfect innocent being; but it was designed for, addressed to and conferred upon fallen and polluted human beings, composed of soul, body and spirit, in such circumstances as those in which we first find ourselves when introduced to life. From all which the inference is unavoidable, viz. That the bible is designed for, and adapted to, the children of men in their present circumstances, to improve their condition here, and to fit them to become members of a pure, refined and exalted society hereafter.

      It has long been discovered, and almost universally admitted, that three words constitute the sum total of human misfortune in this life. These are, ignorance, guilt and bondage. From the brutal ignorance of the Hottentot, up to the refined ignorance of a sceptic philosopher, there are many intermediate degrees; but as respects the true knowledge which the bible communicates, there is a total blank in the extremes and in all the intermediate degrees.

      To fit man for heaven, in one sentence, is the design of the whole volume. This being admitted, then it follows that nothing is revealed which is not directly or indirectly conducive to this end. The grand rule or principle on which all revelation has ever proceeded, is this--whatever may or can purify man, is lawful and benevolent to communicate; whatever cannot accomplish this, Wisdom says, Disclose it not.

      Curiosity has prompted a thousand queries, to which the bible deigns no reply. And why? Because, if answered, they would contribute nothing to the purification of the heart, or to the reformation of the life. God's sublime and glorious scheme of ameliorating and reforming the world is founded upon the actual condition of man. And as intelligence, purity of heart, and rectitude of life, are as inseparably connected with present and future happiness, as ignorance and guilt are with bondage and wretchedness, both here and hereafter, the bible is prepared, was bestowed, and is adapted, to the promotion of intelligence and purity, as prerequisites, as indispensables, as a sine qua non to happiness. "The whole scripture is divinely inspired, and is profitable for teaching, for confutation, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, and thoroughly fitted for every good work" Intelligence, purity of heart, and uprightness of life, are the sole objects for which the bible was bestowed on the world. As ignorance, guilt and bondage, constitute the sum total of human misery, so intelligence, purity and the freedom of the truth, comprehend the whole object, design and end of divine revelation.

      Christians, then, egregiously mistake, who value themselves on the account of their superior intelligence, or who pursue information in the things revealed, merely for its own sake. Unless this knowledge is conducive and allied to the art of living well, it merely puffs up and avails nothing. I have seen some christians who seem to think that the clearness of their views and the comprehension of their understanding would invade the kingdom of heaven and take the citadel of God, whose piety and purity were far below the standard of a Syrophoenician woman, were far below the scale on which Zaccheus the publican was measured. In fact, a man who glories in his intellectual attainments in the bible, (and of this class there are not a few) and pursues the knowledge of the volume for its own sake, resembles a foolish husbandman who boasts of his thousand measures of wheat and his thousand measures of corn, who, as yet, has but ploughed his fields, and intends nothing more until harvest. Yet intelligence is one of the noblest of all things; for without it there is no purity. It is only, however, when it is pursued and acquired for the express purpose of living piously and virtuously, that it is a blessing to the possessor. We sometimes meet with more piety, purity and virtue, amongst those of inferior intellectual endowments, than amongst those of superior attainments. "For knowledge puffs up." As, therefore, the bible was written to impart intelligence to men, as this intelligence was designed to promote purity, and as purity is essential to happiness, we may see what ought to be our constant aim in all our studies, in all our inquiries into the meaning of the bible. And that, as Solomon says, "the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom," so the conclusion of the whole matter is, "Fear God and keep his commandments," for this is the whole happiness of man.

EDITOR.      

      THE editors of the Baptist Recorder appear to be very strongly attached to dogmatic theology. With many, indeed, of the admirers of Aristotelian logic and the Geneva theology, soundness in the faith, means no more than pronouncing with an unfaltering tongue a few dogmas in the quaint style of puritanical divinity. Greater fears are entertained, and stronger doubts of my [246] orthodoxy are expressed by those zealous and sound divines, because I will not subscribe a few unprofitable and foolish dogmas, than if I had denied the resurrection of the dead and the final judgment--at least so it appears to me. Great efforts are made to enlist the feelings and prejudices of those with whom sound is infinitely more important than sense, against my endeavors to call the attention of christians off from the vanities of spiritual quacks, to the pure milk of the divine word. I am represented, if not in so many words, yet in effect, as "in the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity," because of my essay on experimental religion. In a late Recorder an extract is given from some Christian Secretary, pronouncing encomiums upon Messrs. Waller and Clack for their able efforts to expose my heresy, in which there is about a round half dozen of plump falsehoods, gravely told, and no doubt undesignedly from the overflowings of an honest zeal in defence of orthodoxy, which led the author to speak on a subject with which he was entirely unacquainted, and concerning a person of whom he scarcely knows the name. Yet this will pass very well with those whose "inward consciousness" is made a test of divine revelation, and whose "experience" constitutes a tribunal from which there is no appeal. May the Lord have mercy upon those who oppose the restoration of the ancient order of things, and teach them the lesson which Gamaliel taught his compeers in the Sanhedrim! Poor men! I can enter into their views and feelings, for I know their system; I know my own motives too: and were they a little wiser they would be the first to aid, and the last to oppose, what all who are born of God are praying for every day--the union, peace, harmony, and love of christians on the foundation which the Great Architect himself laid for his spiritual temple. Should they succeed in securing the attachment of the misguided to their moth-eaten systems, what reward can they expect, and what do they anticipate from the Judge of All? Will he praise them for preferring the dogmas of the schools to the testimony of the apostles? Will he commend them for flattering the people that they are just up to the model of the New Testament; that they are perfect in their views and practices, wanting nothing? Will he thank them for their zeal in maintaining the traditions of synods and councils in contravention of his own apostles? O! that they who have influence among the people, would use that influence to enlighten and purify their minds, and not to confirming them in cold, and sterile, and lifeless theories.

      The following dogmas are expressive of the views of the editors on one topic, in relation to which they have something in almost every paper.

      "1. The regeneration of the heart is the work of God, by his Spirit exerted immediately and directly upon the hearts and understandings of men."

      "2. The regeneration of the heart is not the work of God, by his Spirit exerted immediately and directly upon the hearts and understandings of men; but it is the effect of the word believed. The word itself is spirit and life. All that is necessary to produce what is called the new man, is an honest reception and firm belief of the truths of the gospel; for the operation of faith is always in perfect accordance with the nature of the truth believed."

      The first of these positions the editors declare to be a true one, and that the Baptists have long since "adopted" it. It is an alien, and they have adopted it. Who "adopted" the second position, the editors do not say, and for my part I do not know. For I have never met with a creed which says, "the regeneration of the heart is not the work of God, by his Spirit," &c. &c. I hope the editors are so far regenerated themselves as not to invent dogmas for others that they may injure the reputation of others, and gain credit to themselves for their orthodoxy. But they avow the first dogma to be their own Creed, and bolster it up by the "internal evidence, of consciousness" and the right it has to be true because the Baptists have long since adopted it. This last bulwark of the dogma I hesitate to admit. For neither the Baptist Confession of Faith says so, nor do I believe that the Baptists generally teach this dogma. However, whether they do or do not teach it, is, with me, a matter of no moment; for I am assured that neither John the Baptist, nor any Baptist congregation in the apostolic age, either taught, or entertained, or expressed such a dogma. But it is either expressed with ingenuity, or mental reservation; and where two opinions may be formed of an action or expression, charity says, always prefer the more favorable one. We shall do so. Now the proposition says, "the regeneration of the heart is the work of God, by his Spirit exerted immediately." Mark this word immediately, i. e. without the intervention of any other cause--independent of the word. So, then Messrs. Waller and Clack declare in favor of: this dogma, that the regeneration of the heart is the work of God, by his Spirit exerted independent of the word or revelation of God, directly upon the hearts and understandings of men.--This they positively declare to be, with them, the standard of orthodoxy. Now the question is, What advantage will result to any person from implicitly or explicitly believing, avowing, or teaching this dogma? It can effect no change in the heart or affections of any human being. "For men are regenerated by the Spirit of God, independent of the word," and, most assuredly, independently of this dogma. The believing of it can regenerate no body, if it be a true dogma. If this dogma be true, the Bible and the Alcoran are alike concerned in the regeneration of the human heart. This is no enthusiasm. It is the deliberate, premeditated, and written position of brethren Waller and Clack. The Spirit of God immediately and directly regenerates the heart! I have given Walker's definition of the term immediately, lest I should be supposed to give too high a coloring to the terms in which this position is expressed. There is one thing which they say of this position which I think passing strange. It is this: "On its truth are founded all their (the Baptists) exertions for the salvation of sinners." That is, because the regeneration of the heart is the work of God, by his Spirit exerted independent of the Old and New Testament, the Baptists are themselves to be the means of regenerating men by the Old and New Testament, printed, published, read, and preached, as the medium or means of regeneration; and all the while adopt, maintain, and proclaim the position that men are regenerated immediately by the Spirit of God. If notes of admiration were not too common things, we should here call for battalions of them. No wonder, then, that an improved version of the New Testament is considered by brother George Waller as a superfluous and useless thing. In fact, the reading of it in Greek or Syrochaldaic to an English scholar is just as useful, on the [247] adopted position, as profitable as any thing else. No wonder that these divines contend for a special call to convert men. Did I say no wonder? Yes, it is a great wonder; for what use is their call and preaching, if the Spirit of God regenerates the human heart independent of all second causes. I will not further expose the ruinous influence of such a dogma if it be true. I will just leave with these brethren one dilemma--either their dogma is true or not true. If true, then it matters not what doctrine is taught by me on the subject of regeneration; for the Spirit of God regenerates the human heart independently of all doctrine, true or false, even of the bible itself. But if untrue, then, indeed, to act under its influence is most injurious, as it will necessarily make the scriptures a dead letter, and all preaching vain.

      I have no disposition to enter into the field of speculation on such dogmas. But were I disposed to make the most of such a position, did I wish to gain an advantage over an enemy, I could not wish for a more favorable dogma; for I do not think that any other theorem of the Jansenites, not even their invocations for the dead, is more vulnerable than this dogma. I do fondly hope that these brethren speak and act otherwise than this dogma will authorize, in addressing men on the subject of religion. Perhaps there is some error in the composition of the sentence which they have overlooked, for I would rather account for it in any other way than to suppose this sentiment to be a principle of action with them. Indeed I almost know it is not a principle of action with them: however pretty it may look on the lid of a snuff box, or on vellum, I think it is not written on their hearts.

      But all such preaching and teaching, all such theory is worse than mere trifling. A theory about the formation of Adam out of the dust, whether his creation began with his head or his feet, or whether he was instantaneously or immediately complete, and all his members simultaneously formed, is just as useful, as profitable to men, as any theory of regeneration which I have seen; and I am always ready to shew that he who preaches any theory, orthodox or heterodox, preaches not the gospel of Jesus Christ. To this sentence I invite attention, and challenge investigation.

      I have not heard from the editors of the Recorder on my last. I have seen their ninth but not their eighth number, and seeing so much insinuation and indirect opposition to, I am persuaded, they know not what, I thought it expedient just to give them a hint how vulnerable they are, to assure them that their either propping an old theory, or attempting a new one, is out of the question altogether.

EDITOR.      

      THE ancient independent writers have poured forth abundance of nonsense about meetings for counsel and advice. Some of them have supposed that though Acts xv. does not afford a model for meetings of ministers to make authoritative decrees for the churches, yet that it sanctions such meetings for the purpose of giving counsel and advice to the churches. But it is not possible to explain this passage in such a manner as to establish the divine right of assemblies for advice. This meeting gave not advice, but decrees; did not submit opinions to be canvassed, but doctrines to be believed, and precepts to be observed. If it is at all a model for any foreign interference, it establishes absolute authority on the one hand, and passive and unlimited obedience on the other. I cannot see any thing that could tempt inquiring christians to adopt this theory, except that they have not been thoroughly purged from Presbyterian prejudices, or a desire not to appear all at once to go so great a distance from the churches of this world. Perhaps a mixture of these motives have operated with them. They are a little shocked themselves, and perhaps are afraid that others will be more so, with the idea of being so unlike to other societies called churches, in every distinguished feature. On the contrary, I am of opinion that we ought not to wish to hide from the churches of the world how much we differ from them. We ought to be solicitous rather to show them that, in every distinguishing feature, the kingdom of Christ differs from the kingdom of this world. We ought not to keep the worshippers of the Beast in countenance by making an image of the Beast. There is no reason to fear alarming the prejudices of the world, or of christians. If the cause is the Lord's, we may safely rest it upon his shoulders. If men will receive instruction from the word of God as to the nature of Christ's kingdom, it is well; but if any man will be obstinately and perversely ignorant, let him be ignorant. It is our duty to hold forth the word of life in every part of it; it is in the Lord's hand who shall receive it. He has no need of our wisdom to help forward his plans.

      But if such meetings are not instituted from this passage, jure divino, they cannot plead it to sanction their innocency. If they are not the offspring of the wisdom of God, they must be the offspring of the wisdom of man; and the Lord will no more countenance one human religious institution than he will another. To say that such assemblies are useful, yet not instituted, is to arraign the wisdom of Jesus as a legislator, and to deny the competency of his institutions. If they are not divinely appointed they cannot be useful, they cannot be innocent. I am bold to predict that wherever they are tried either an increasing acquaintance with the word of God, or a deeper knowledge of the nature of Christ's kingdom, will lay them aside, or they will degenerate into an engine of Satan. In the very first instance they must tend to damp inquiry in the churches, and gradually habituate them to allow others to have the trouble of thinking for them.--Carson's Reply to Brown on Discipline.

      "WE know," says Campbell in his Lectures on Ecclesiastical History, "who they were in ancient times that sought honor one of another, who affected the principal seats in the synagogues and the uppermost rooms at feasts, who loved greetings in the markets, and to be called by men, Rabbi, Rabbi. We know also who it was that expressly prohibited, amongst his disciples, such unbecoming emulation and worldly vanity, who enjoined them not to seek honor of men, or to contend who, in the judgment of men, should be greatest; but to seek that honor only which comes from God. We know also who it was that made usefulness the standard of greatness, and pronounced him to be possessed of the highest dignity who is most humble and serviceable; who, instead of courting, is solicitous to avoid such enviable distinctions. On which of these models the convention at Trent and other preceding councils were formed, I shall leave to the candid and impartial to determine. I shall conclude this lecture with a [248] story, homely indeed, but apposite:--An English country parson was bragging in a large company of the success he had had in reforming his parishioners, on which his labors, he said, had produced a wonderful change for the better. Being asked in what respect, he replied, that when he came first among them they were a set of unmannerly clowns, who paid him no more deference than they did to one another; did not so much as pull off their hat when they spoke to him, but bawled out as roughly and familiarly as though he were their equal; whereas now they never presumed to address him but cap in hand, and in a submissive voice, made him their best bow when they were at ten yards distance, and styled him Your Reverence at every word. A Quaker who had heard the whole patiently, made answer--"And so, friend, the upshot of this reformation, of which thee hast so much carnal glorying, is, that thee hast taught thy people to worship thyself."

      "IMPLICIT FAITH has been sometimes ludicrously styled fides carbonaria, from the noted story of one who, examining an ignorant collier on his religious principles, asked him what it was he believed. He answered, "I believe what the church believes." The other rejoined, "What, then, does the church believe?" He replied readily, "The church believes what I believe." The other, desirous if possible to bring him to particulars, once more resumes his inquiry: "Tell me, then, I pray you, what it is that you and the church both believe?" The only answer the collier could give was, "Why truly, sir, the church and I both--believe the same thing" This is implicit faith in perfection, and, in the estimation of some celebrated Doctors, the sum of necessary and saving knowledge in a christian."--Campbell's Lectures.

[TCB 242-248]