Volume 5. Number 7. February 4, 1828, pp. 410-420.

• On the Influence of the Holy Spirit in the Salvation of Men.--No. I. by Paulinus, pp. 410-412.
• [Remark on "On the Influence of the Holy Spirit in the Salvation of Men.--No. I."] by Alexander Campbell, p. 412.
• An Extract from a Dialogue between a Baptist and a Baptist Clergyman by A Correspondent in Georgia, p. 412.
• Review of Dr. Noel's Circular.--No. VI. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 412-414.
• Attempt at the Restoration of Ancient Order by William Jackson and Benjamin Beddome, pp. 414-415.
• Ancient Gospel. No. II.: Immersion by Alexander Campbell, pp. 415-417.
• [Letter to the Editor] by W., pp. 417-418.
• To Mr. W. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 418-420.
• A Year's Labor (on John Secrest) by [Alexander Campbell], p. 420.
• Quarterly Meeting (On Walter Scott) by [Alexander Campbell], p. 420.

      WHOEVER reads the sacred pages, with an enlightened and attentive mind, will discover that the operations of the Spirit of God are various and manifold. To this wonder-working Agent are ascribed creative energy--miraculous events--extraordinary qualifications--and sanctifying influences on the souls of men. It is only "parts of his ways" that we can undertake to speak of; or, indeed, of which we can have a conception. Those classes of divine operations, which appear more immediately to concern the salvation of men, are, the miraculous and the sanctifying. Of the first class of these operations, it is not my intention now to treat: and, indeed, any attempt of this sort, on my part, is amply and ably forestalled by a series of essays in the Christian Baptist, vol. 2. to which I would refer the reader for a luminous view of this part of the subject. The other class of divine operations, namely, those of a sanctifying nature, will furnish the subject for this undertaking; in the execution of which, it will be my aim to be short and plain.

      The view which I wish to exhibit contains three points: First, the reality of a divine influence on the souls of men, in effecting the work of salvation; secondly, some of the principal effects produced by this operation; and, thirdly, the high practical import of this truth. To the first only I can attend to the present number.--And here I desire it may be observed, that I do not assume either Calvinian or Arminian ground, as being either of them exclusively necessary to this view. It is on scriptural ground that I propose to proceed: about any other term that may be used, I am not solicitous.

      First, then, I lay down this position: that the influence of the Holy Spirit on the souls of men, in effecting the work of salvation, is a scriptural fact. That many have abused this sacred truth, by wild and fanciful imaginations, is readily conceded:--as what point of christian doctrine, indeed, has not been abused? But this, we contend, is no argument against the reality of the thing.

      Let us endeavor to enter into this matter. And I begin with observing, that a persuasion of the necessity of an influence from the Divine Spirit, to a proper preparative for the more ready admission of that fact. Does this necessity then appear to exist? Let the scriptures of truth testify. "Without me, (said Jesus,)--or severed from me--you can do nothing:" John xv. 5. With this Paul accords; 2 Cor. ii. 5. "Not that we are sufficient of ourselves, to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God:" ¹ and to this, the consciousness of every quickened soul responds: "Turn thou me, (is the language of all such,) and I shall be turned;" Jer. xxx. 18. We might here enter into a view of that depravity of human nature, as represented in the scriptures, which appears to render it necessary that we should be visited with supernatural operations; but it is not deemed requisite to our present purpose. Suffice it to say, that our carnal minds are at enmity against God; and, therefore, need the changing efficacy of a divine influence; that we are naturally weak; and, therefore, have need to pray 'Strengthen you me according to your word." To what has been advanced, to shew the necessity of which we speak I add the apostle's declaration, Rom. viii. 9. "If any one have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."

      We shall now come nearer to those evidences in favor of the point in hand, which are of a more direct nature. And in doing so, I shall be careful to distinguish between such passages of scripture as refer to miraculous operations, and such as regard those graces of the Spirit which we need as much as any in the time of primitive christianity could need them.

      Many of the prayers of the inspired writers, (as Mr. Scott has justly remarked,) obviously imply the truth of our present position. David prays, "Take not your Holy Spirit from me," Psalm li. 11. Surely he considered himself favored by the influences of that Spirit. "Restore to me, (he adds,) the joy of your salvation; and uphold me with your free Spirit." He certainly believed a divine energy to be necessary to his support. Paul prayed for the Ephesian brethren to this effect: "That the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of Glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of him, (or for the acknowledgment of him;) the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of his calling," &c. Eph. i. 17. 18:--these are the blessings of salvation; not miraculous gifts. And again, "That he would grant you, according to the riches of his glory, to be strengthened with might, (or mightily strengthened,) by his Spirit in the inward man; that Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith," &c. ch. iii. 16. 17. These again are the things that accompany salvation: they are such as we now all need; and any argument brought to prove that they were peculiar to the season of miracles, would go as effectually to prove, that so likewise were faith, and hope, and love, and every christian grace peculiar to that season; and thus the very essence of christianity might be banished from the world! To the same effect is the apostles prayer for the Colossians; i. 9. 10. 11. "That you might be filled with the knowledge of his will, in all wisdom and spiritual understanding," &c.--"Strengthened with all might, according to his glorious power," &c.--and so for the Romans; xv. 13: "Now the God of hope fill you with all joy and peace in believing; that you may abound in hope, through the power of the Holy Spirit." Other instances of the same sort might be adduced; but these are sufficient.

      To the evidence arising from the prayers of the inspired writers, let us add some direct declarations--still cautiously regarding the difference between miraculous gifts and sanctifying operations. A few out of many must suffice:--"The love of God, (says Paul to the Romans) is shed abroad in our hearts, by the Holy Spirit which is given to us;" Rom. v. 5. Now, whether "the love of God" be taken here to mean a sense of God's love to us, or the exercise of our love to God--(for the phrase is ambiguous, and the better in this case for being so,) it will be allowed to be requisite that we possess it; and the Holy Spirit, as given to us, is the Agent to which it is ascribed. Again, chap. 8. ver. 9. "But you are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit; if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you; or, because the Spirit of God dwells in you." This, [410] verse 10, is termed "Christ in you;" and verse 11, it appears to be that Spirit which raised up Christ from the dead, and which is also to quicken the bodies of the saints. It must therefore be, not merely a holy spirit or temper in us; but truly and properly the Spirit of God. In verse 10 he affirms that "the Spirit itself bears witness with our spirit that we are the children of God." I shall not stop here to discuss the question, How the Spirit bears witness; whether directly and immediately, by suggesting a sense of our adoption; or mediately and indirectly, by producing that temper of heart which corresponds with the word of God, and enabling us thence to infer our adoption; or whether we ought not to admit both these views: it is enough, to our present purpose, that it is "the Spirit itself," as distinguished from our spirits, and from every other object. To the Galatians the same apostle says, chap. iv. 6. "God has sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father." Allowing the Spirit of his Son here to mean, a spirit wrought in us, namely, the spirit of adoption, still it is expressly said to be sent forth from God; and of course must be the production of the Holy Spirit. The Ephesian brethren are represented as a part of that building, that "holy temple in the Lord," which is designed "for a habitation of God through the Spirit;" Eph. ii. 21. 22. We here remark, that God dwells in his church, in a manner in which he does not in the world; and that this inhabitation is through the Spirit: and this Spirit is said, Rom. viii. 26. "to help our infirmities," and "to make intercessions for us with groanings which cannot be uttered," or by inarticulate groanings.

      These quotations appear to have reference to the case of believers; to their needs and their supplies. If believers must have the Divine Spirit to enable them to bring forth the fruits of righteousness, and prepare them for ultimate glory; then well might we opine that the unregenerate need the influences of that Spirit, to bring them into a gracious state: and this accordingly we find to be the fact. Christ assures Nicodemus, John iii. 7. that men "must be born again;" and this new birth is said, verse 8. to be "of the Spirit." The Spirit, then, of course, is necessary to the production of that change, without which there is no salvation. The Ephesians, in reference to their unbelieving, unregenerate state, are represented as having been "dead in trespasses and sins;" Eph. ii. 1.--in verse 5 the apostle includes himself, as in the same condition; and in both places ascribes to God the quickening (or life-giving) influence which they had experienced. In verse 10 the figure is changed; but the same idea is presented of a divine energy in their conversion to God: "For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to good works." I am aware, indeed, that the figures employed to express this important change, have often been abused; and that divine truth has thus been misrepresented by an extravagant zeal to establish some particular system: but surely there is an analogy which justifies the use of such figures; there is a strong meaning intended to be conveyed; a meaning which goes obviously to shew our natural alienation from God--our destitution of the principle of holiness--and the necessity of an influence from the Divine Spirit, to restore us to a meetness for the heavenly inheritance. Let one more particular reference suffice. In Titus iii. 5. salvation is ascribed, not to works of righteousness performed by us; but to divine mercy, "by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit." Comment here seems unnecessary, as I cannot conceive how language could more explicitly represent the agency of the Divine Spirit in the work of conversion.

      I have mentioned above our natural alienation from God, and our destitution of the principle of holiness: and I here take occasion to repeat what I have before said--that this state of human nature, (which is so plainly held out in various parts of the sacred writings,) appears to be the ground of that necessity which exists, for a supernatural, regenerating influence from the Holy Spirit. But here it may possibly be objected that, allowing such to be the state of man, the Holy Spirit has so fitted the word of truth to our condition--has so adapted the means to the end, that no farther divine agency than what was employed in producing this word of truth, should be requisite in effecting the desired end. To such an argument I would reply, first, that a fair construction of the passages quoted, and of others that might be quoted, will not allow of such an idea: and secondly, that the fitness of the word to the condition of man, is no argument that regeneration and sanctification will follow, without a divine influence accompanying the truth:--no more, I say, a valid argument, in this case, than it would be to contend, that because seeds are adapted to vegetation, we may therefore expect a crop without the influence of sun or rain. That there is a happy, a beautiful adaptation of the word of truth to the condition of man, I readily admit; indeed it is one of my favorite ideas: this, however, does by no means supersede the necessity of a divine, spiritual influence, to give effect to the truth revealed. But possibly it may be further suggested, that the same effects are, in many cases, ascribed to the word, which are also ascribed to the Spirit. This too is admitted; and I may add, the same effects are, in some instances, ascribed to the preacher, as the dispenser of the word. Thus, we are enlightened by the Spirit: "Open you my eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of your law;"--and we are enlightened by the word: "The entrance of your word gives light." We are born again of the Spirit: "So is every one that is born of the Spirit;"--and we are born again by the word: "Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God," &c. We are sanctified by the Spirit: "But you are washed, but you are sanctified," &c. "by the Spirit of our God;"--and we are sanctified by the word: "Sanctify them through your truth: your word is truth." It belongs to God to open the eyes and to turn the sinner;--and Paul was sent to the Gentiles "to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light." These instances are sufficient to illustrate the fact which has been admitted; that the same effects are, in some instances, ascribed to the Holy Spirit--to the word of truth--and to the preacher or publisher of the gospel. It remains for us to see how this matter is to be understood.

      Briefly, I remark, that the same things are ascribed to different objects, pretty much in the way in which the same effect is ascribed to the agent and to the instrument. My pen, the instrument, being adapted to the purpose of writing, forms these letters; and I, the agent, giving my pen direction, form these letters. The seed and the earth produce vegetation: the sun and the rain produce vegetation; and, in a certain sense, the man who sows the seeds and cultivates the earth, may be said to produce vegetation. I know, indeed, that such figures cannot [411] adequately represent spiritual and moral objects. They are introduced only by way of illustration and I do by no means intend, by the use of them to reduce men to mere machines, or the operations of the Divine Spirit to mere physical energy. When Paul says to the Corinthians, "You are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the Living God,"--there is a beautiful analogy which justifies the use of the figure; and we see in it the agency of Christ, the instrumentality of the preacher, and the influence of the Spirit. But he who should undertake to disprove the moral agency of man, would, it is presumed, pervert the truth by the abuse of a metaphor. If, however, on the other hand, one should be disposed to attribute to the efficiency of the instrument, what belongs to the efficiency of the agent, the apostle would certainly correct his error, by saying "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom you believed even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then, neither is he that plants any thing, neither he that waters; but God that gives the increase." 1 Cor. iii. 5, 6, 7.

      The sum of these remarks on the effects ascribed to the Spirit and the word is this: that the word of truth is God's great instrument in effecting our salvation. By this, or with this, his spirit operates to the renewing and sanctifying of the soul; while under its influence, the soul itself becomes active in holy exercises: and thus, with Peter, we may say to believers, "You have purified your souls, in obeying the truth, through the Spirit." How God may otherwise work, I know not; though I would by no means "limit the Holy One of Israel," as to his designs or operations, in any respect whatever.

      I now dismiss the first position--the reality of divine influence on the souls of men, in effecting the work of salvation. This was my leading object in the present undertaking. The other two points proposed will probably be treated on with more brevity: they must be reserved, however, for another number.

PAULINUS.

November, 1827.

      [We make no remarks on the preceding communication until we have received Paulinus, No. II.]--ED. C. B.

      Baptist. WELL, sir, have you had time to examine those pamphlets I gave you?

      Clergyman. I have examined them all, with the exception of the two last numbers.

      B. What do you think of them?

      C. I think some parts of them are good; but cannot agree as to that part respecting weekly communion.

      B. By reading the seventh verse of the twentieth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, I am led to think that the disciples mentioned there, met on the first day of the week, and that it was for the purpose of breaking bread that they met.

      C. I have no doubt but that the first disciples broke bread each first day; but the disciples now, must be regulated in this, by time and circumstances.

      B. If you depart from what you admit may have been the order of the first churches, how often now should the churches attend to the breaking of bread?

      C. With the Baptists we think it proper to attend to it once a month.

      B. But others think it also proper to break bread once in three months, some once in six months, and others only once in twelve months. But you think it proper to break bread once each month. Your convictions that it is proper does not arise from the word of God. For it is silent on breaking bread once each month. It arises, as already admitted, from the distance of time and change of circumstances since the first churches of Christ. Now are you sure that distance of time and change of circumstances will justify your departure from breaking bread each first day, to that of once each month. We have all to appear before the judgment seat of Christ to give an account of the actions done in this life. Now as it is his word that we are to be judged by, whether is it more safe to break bread at such a time as can at best have the appearance of being supported only by distance of time and change of circumstances, or attend to it each first day, having the first churches for our example, and of course supported by that word by which we are to be judged?

      C. But some have thought that breaking bread so often might be the means of abusing this ordinance.

      B. Yes, the men of this world have thought so, for they do abuse it if they attend to it so much as once in their lives. But I am sure that the saints will never abuse this ordinance willingly. For if they are saved only if they keep in memory what Paul at first received, and what first of all he delivered to the Corinthians, viz. that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, was buried, and rose again on the third day, according to the scriptures. If the saints are only saved by a remembrance of the death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus, then instead of their being alarmed at breaking bread as often as the first churches, they have cause to rejoice indeed, that they have the privilege of the same frequency as they; for if it tended to encourage and impress a remembrance of him who died for their sins, surely the same frequency is necessary to be observed by us so as to encourage and impress a remembrance of him who died for our sins. And if there is an aptness to forget these things, and we are only saved if we remember them, or, in scripture language, keep them in memory, how thankful ought we to be for this ordinance, each first day, which brings to our minds and memories Christ's dying for our sins, that we might not perish, but have everlasting life. Away, then, with monthly, quarterly half yearly communions, as times fixed on by men, and not by God, periods which have been and still are opposed to the interests of the saints, and let the will of the Lord Jesus in his ordinance, as expressed by the example of the first churches, be our only rule, and by thus walking by his word, we will be justified whatever men may say. Whereas, depending on distance of time and change of circumstances, for justifying our departure from any part of the word of God, is at best but a sandy foundation. The mass of the great body called christians, practise and justify this departure; but we will esteem their applause but little, and the having had it will be but poor consolation to us, if we have been found opposing the truth when called upon to appear before the judgment seat of Christ.

      I AM not conscious of having passed by a single sentence in this honored circular, containing [412] any thing in the form of an argument, which has not been embraced in the preceding essays on its contents. If, however, the author thinks otherwise, on his suggesting such a sentence to my notice, I will pay a more ceremonious regard to it. What now remains is to answer the Doctor's five triumphant questions, which he proposes as though the mere submission of them were to silence the whole race of believers in the all-sufficiency of the Holy Oracles.

      "Let those," says the Doctor, "who oppose the use of creeds, answer these questions." Surely after this challenge we must expect to find some pith in them. We shall, with all due complaisance, attempt to answer them, in confident expectation that the Doctor will be as complaisant in turn, and answer me five questions in return.

      Query1st from Dr. Noel.--"Has the Head of the Church made no qualifications necessary for the admission of members into the church." I answer, He has not made "a creed," nor an assent to it, in the popular sense of these words, a necessary qualification. But he has required just the same qualifications for admission into his church in Frankfort, which the twelve apostles required of the three thousand receive in one day into the church in Jerusalem, A. D. 34.

      Now, in return, I propose my first question to Dr. Noel. Seeing he has, for once, done homage to the authority of the Head of the Church, I ask, 1st. Has the Head of the Church made your own little creed, or an assent to it, a qualification necessary for admission into his church?

      2d Query from Dr. Noel.--"Has he made no qualifications necessary for admission into office?" I answer, Paul's letters to Timothy and Titus very explicitly lay down certain qualifications for office; but amongst all the qualifications found in the volume, that of subscription to the Romish, Episcopal, Presbyterial, or even Dr. Noel's own summary, is not mentioned as any qualification to office.

      In return I propose my 2d query for the Doctor. Has the Head of the Church any where referred to any other writings than the apostles', or has he in any of these writings commanded any epitome or summary exhibition to be drawn up or referred to in the admission of any person into office in his church?

      3d Query from Dr. Noel.--"Has he established no tribunal on earth to judge of these qualifications?" We answer, Yes--namely, the Pope and his Cardinals at Rome--the Archbishop of Canterbury and his court in London--the Annual Assembly of the Church of Scotland in Edinburgh--and Dr. Noel's "called Presbytery," in Frankfort, Kentucky. These four tribunals, for the four quarters of the world, are established, and authorized, and by good ecclesiastical law appointed, to constitute the holy office of inquisition; when, in their judgment, the interests of religion may require it. These sacred tribunals are to judge of two things above all others: 1st. of the qualifications for office; and 2d. to decide who possesses them.

      Our third query for Dr. Noel is--What punishment have these tribunals to inflict upon those destitute of these qualifications claiming these high offices?

      Query 4th from Dr. Noel.--" Is an Arian, Socinian, or Universalist, qualified for either membership or office?" I answer, No. Because the apostles have so decreed. But I will amend the question in my 4th query to Dr. Noel, viz. Is an Arian, Socinian, Universalist, Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, or Methodist, qualified for either membership or office? But his 4th question is intimately connected with his 5th--namely:

      Query 5th from Dr. Noel.--"Can it be said they are not without respect to a creed?" I answer, Without respect to such a creed as you espouse. (See my second No. on his circular, in which it will appear christian churches have a divine creed, and human churches have a human creed.) But I must also intimately connect my fifth query to my fourth as has the Doctor--and it is this:

      5th Query for Dr. Noel.--Is not the Arian, Socinian, Universalist, Catholic, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, and Methodist, excluded from your church because they have a creed different from the sacred writings, which is the only creed I subscribe? If they had not some other creed than the bible, you surely could not exclude them. And here, Doctor, your five triumphant queries terminate. They are your "five points;" and sharp points they are, for they have pierced you through. For if you answer the above five queries as complaisantly as I have done yours, you must come to the conclusion that it was not for the want of a human creed, but because they had a human creed, that you exclude from your church the Arian, Socinian, Universalist, Presbyterian, Methodist, and Episcopalian.

      To conclude a disquisition which already has far transcended its due merits, I will just state and briefly illustrate a single position of some importance in this controversy. It is this: These heretics, called Arians, Socinians, Universalists, Catholics, Protestants, &c. &c. are kept in existence and their numbers augmented by the seasonings of such philosophers as Dr. S. M. Noel. Destroy the Socinian's creed, and where will you find the Socinians? Let all his glosses, interpretations, and dogmas, be a dead letter, neither printed nor read, neither spoken nor heard, and where would the sect be in a generation or two? It would be so of all other sects. Consequently, these creeds keep up all these sects. Now each one contends for his creed as better than all others, and thus justifies himself to himself. But let him remember that this creed derives all its consequence and superiority in his own estimation, from a comparison of it with others. If there were none with which to compare it, its excellencies would be all invisible. If, instead of making inquisition for opinions; if, instead of condemning a person for his interpretations, glosses, or dogmas, we, as worshipping congregations, turned our attention to the behavior of others, and condemned professed disciples for their impiety, immorality, and indevotion--the church and the world would very soon exhibit a quite different aspect. If a man speak of any christian topic in any other language than did the apostles, hear him patiently. If he will force his opinions upon us in terms contrary to those furnished by the Holy Spirit, let us admonish him. But if he will not be admonished, and still aims at imposing his opinions or terms upon us, he then becomes what the new translation calls "a factionist:" and the common a "heretic;" and after a second admonition we are commanded to reject such a person. Not because of his opinions, even at last, but because of his dogmatical and faction-making spirit. If a man speaks of God our Father, and of Jesus Christ our Lord, in all the sentences and words of the Holy Oracles; if to this unexceptionable style he adds a holy, devout, moral, and unexceptionable life, the church of Jesus Christ has nothing more to inquire of him, or require from him. If he should be called a Socinian, a Universalist, [413] a Presbyterian, or a Methodist, it matters not; if he speak in bible terms only, no man can justly impeach him, and by his works he must stand or fall in the estimation of all christians, as by these he must stand or fall in the day of the Lord Jesus. Now in this course it is easy to proceed without synod, or council, or creed. For if any man call Jesus Christ a "mere man," or a "mere creature," or an "eternal Son," and will insist upon our calling him so; we open the bible, and call for the express warrant. None can be produced. This being easily decided, the person is admonished; if he will still insist upon it, we admonish him a second time; and if still unreclaimed, we cast him out, not because his opinion differed from ours, but because he would lord it over our faith and conscience, and aimed at heading a faction. This most unquestionably is the meaning of all that is said upon this subject in the bible.

      Now to test the correctness and utility of the course advised, we have only to consider how it would operate if universally adopted. Then if the result be obviously salutary on a general scale, no man can object to it either in principle or practice, if when only adopted by a few it does not do as much as if adopted by all. And this is precisely the logic and drift of all that the creed advocates, whether Catholic, Presbyterian, or Baptist, urge against our logic in this controversy. They say they must have a creed because other sects have a creed; and that although they should adopt the scriptures only, still sects would exist, and controversies would not universally cease. If there is any propriety in their logic, these sects or heresies, creeds and divisions, must, in defiance of the hopes of a Millennium, continue to destroy the peace and happiness of society for ever, or while time endures.

      If Dr. Noel will clear up that "little moral impropriety," concerning which I spoke some two or three months ago; and if he will take up my reasonings in good earnest, piece by piece; or if he will agree to my publishing the whole of this Circular and this Review in one pamphlet, and if he will take and distribute the one half of the edition--I will still call him Brother Noel, and embrace hire in the bosom of that charity which calls for nothing but the image of eternal truth stamped upon the heart, and reflected in the life, to arouse its energies, and to bound its fraternal activities.

EDITOR.      

Dearly Beloved,

      WITH one heart and one mind we unite in gratitude and praise to God our Saviour for the good news which your acceptable communication to the churches of Christ, scattered over the earth, brings to our ears; greatly rejoicing that you have been led, through the grace and mercy of God, to renounce the commandments of men to separate from every religious connexion which walk not in all things according to the precepts and example of Christ and of his apostles; and to come together in one body for the observance of all the ordinances and institutions of our Lord and Master, continuing in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and breaking of bread and prayers. And upon every remembrance of you, we cease not to pray for you, that you may be kept by the Spirit of Truth from the errors that abound in the world, and stedfast, immovable, in the faith and hope of the gospel. We give praise to the God of all grace and mercy for your near approach in faith and practice to the first churches of Christ in Judea, and are persuaded you are desirous to walk in the footsteps of the flock. In the fullest conviction of this, we proceed to give you the required information.

      In March, 1810, we first met in public for worship, only three in number, and continued till 1817 without any persons being appointed to discharge the duties of elders or deacons; notwithstanding, we observed, as our privilege and duty, all the ordinances of worship taught by the great Shepherd to his flock, as far as we knew them.

      We are now thirty-three in number, several of our brethren having, from various causes, removed to other parts of England and Scotland, and three to America, viz. James Thornton, one of our first deacons, to Montreal; George and Elizabeth Flemming, (the latter one of our first deaconesses) to Baltimore.

      The servants appointed, and still enjoyed, by the church, are one elder, one deacon, and one deaconess; to which will be added, from time to time, such persons as Jesus may give us for the edifying of his body, the church.

      It is with unspeakable pleasure we observe such a general agreement between you and us in what relates to "The Faith," the influence of "Truth," working by love, as it appears in the life and conversation of those who believe it, and the order of worship enjoined upon such. And to avoid going over the subjects which you have so clearly and scripturally stated, we declare our entire agreement with you, except in the instances which will be particularly noticed: and as some of those relate to the order of our worship, we shall state the way in which we proceed.

      1st. We meet three times on the Lord's day--in the afternoon separate from those who are not of our number. We commence by our elder, who presides, selecting a suitable hymn, in singing of which we all stand up and join.

      2d. We all kneel down when our elder, or one of the brethren named by him, offers up prayers, supplications, &c. wherein brevity, and the scripture mode of expression, are preferred.

      3d. A portion of scripture is read both from the Old and New Testament.

      4th. Prayer, with a view to the fellowship, which follows.

      5th. We greet each other with a holy kiss.

      6th. After reading or repeating the words of the institution, we attend to the Lord's supper, giving thanks for and then breaking the bread. We give thanks also for the cup, and we all drink of it in remembrance of the death of the Lord Jesus.

      7th. A hymn suitable to the occasion is then sung.

      8th. The brethren are requested to teach and admonish one another; but should they not be disposed, or time permit when we have concluded, our elder addresses the church, or those who are observing us, at the conclusion of which another hymn is sung--prayer is made--and we separate. This is our order in our several meetings on the Lord's day, with the exception of the fellowship, holy kiss, and the Lord's supper.

      We meet twice in the week also for prayer, reading the scriptures, exhortation and teaching We proceed to remark on those things in which we seem to differ. You say, 1st. In obedience to the command, 1 Tim. ii 1, &c. We also pray [414] for kings; and all that are in authority; but we think the words, first of all, mark the beginning of Paul's exhortation to Timothy, and not the order of worship in the church. 5th. You say, After each chapter is read, a pause is made, &c. This is not regularly done among us, though sometimes remarks are made in illustration of any thing read which particularly demand it.--You say the observance of the kiss of charity rises from special occasions exemplified in the New Testament. Acts xx. 37, 38, informs us that (after Paul had given his last solemn charge to the elders of the church at Ephesus, verse 17, &c.) they all wept sore, and fell on Paul's neck and kissed him; sorrowing most of all that they should see his face no more. This, we think, cannot be an exemplification of the command given to the church at Rome, Corinth, &c. "Greet you one another with a holy kiss," no mention being then made of any special occasions. You, beloved brethren, will doubtless perceive the word holy marks the divine appointment of the kiss, and the word charity the design of it. So we attend to it, when assembled together, without regard to age or sex, as a solemn expression of mutual forgiveness, and of mutual love, for the truth's sake.

      Our elder labors with his own hands, that he may live honestly and have to give to them that needs. But we are not sure that the faithful discharge of pastoral duties gives any right to elders to claim wages. Theirs is to be a crown of glory which fades not away, when the chief Shepherd shall appear; compare Acts xx. 34, 35, with 2 Thess. iii. 8, 12. To the twelve and the seventy disciples our Lord gave a right to wages, saying, "the laborer is worthy of his hire." Paul accordingly asks the Corinthians, "I only, and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?" 1 Cor. ix. 6, while he appears to blame them for suffering a man to take of them, 2 Cor. xi. 20. An individual going forth to preach the gospel to regions round about, by the appointment of the church, becomes his proper work, and we think him entitled to wages of those who send him. Other churches or individuals bringing him forward on his journey after a godly sort. 3 Ep. John.

      In all the measures and decisions of a church, unanimity is preferable to majority, when it can be attained. Our church, however, is composed of "babes" as well as of those "who have their senses exercised by reason of use to discern between good and evil." And we do not defer our decisions until "Christ's little ones" can fully comprehend the reason upon which such decisions are made. They are left at liberty therefore to keep silence, as Paul directs. 1 Cor. xiv. 37, 38.

      We attend to the Lord's supper in the afternoon, because all the examples we know of took place in the latter part of the day; for even the circumstance of time is not unworthy of notice in attending to an ordinance of commemoration, Deut. xvi. 6. compared with the institution, Exodus xii. 6. And we thereby cut off occasion from those who have, in this country, urged "an unnecessary deviation from their own professed rules," (viz. the apostolic examples,) against others who attend to this ordinance in the morning.

      We have also a love feast on every Lord's day. It is with great pleasure we read the reasons which induced you to write your epistle, to restore and promote the unity and prosperity of Christ's kingdom; and in order to lend our aid in this good cause, we have printed several hundred copies of your letter, which will probably bring you many communications from churches in Britain, various in their views of faith and order. And we pray that you may be preserved from receiving any thing contrary to the will of Christ, and that by manifestation of the truth you may commend it to the conscience of those to whose letters you reply.

      We should be happy to hear from you at all times, anticipating much useful information and a mutual growth of affection from an increasing knowledge of each other.

      Now, may he who is able to keep us from falling, preserve you blameless unto the second coming of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, to whom be glory and honor now and evermore. Amen.

      Approved and adopted by the church, and signed in their behalf, by      

	WILLIAM JACKSON, Elder. BENJAMIN BEDDOME, Deacon.
Manchester, Sept. 13, 1818.

      "JESUS CHRIST came by water and by blood." At the water he was proved to be the Only Begotten by the voice of his Father, and the designation of the Holy Spirit. Through the water of Jordan he passed into the vineyard of the Lord of Hosts, and began to do the work the Father gave him to accomplish. On the cross, and from the shedding of his blood to the moment of his interment, divine attestations, numerous and diverse, marvellous and grand, were afforded; all declaring that he was sent by, and came forth from God. With much propriety, then, and with great force, too, it is said that "Jesus came by water and by blood." In the same laconic style, we may say, that immersion, I mean christian immersion, is the gospel in water, and that the Lord's supper is the gospel in bread and wine. These two ordinances of the glorious and mighty Lord fully exhibit the gospel in the most appropriate symbols. The preaching of the Lord and his apostles, we all agree was the gospel in words. The historic books of the New Testament are the gospel in fact. Immersion is the gospel in water--the Lord's supper is the gospel in bread and wine--and a pure heart and a holy life is the gospel in its effects. But I am now to show that christian immersion, as instituted by Jesus Christ, (not as corrupted by men,) is the gospel in water. The whole gospel is exhibited in this symbolic action. The subject declares his belief of the testimony which God has given concerning his only begotten Son, all summarily comprehended in this one sentence, Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of the only true God. But why recognize him in this character? Why submit to be immersed into this belief? Aye: that is the question. I say again, Why submit to be immersed into the faith of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, as an act of obedience to Jesus Christ? Tell me, ye mitred heads! ye learned Doctors of Divinity. Many reasons ye may give, perhaps, without giving the only one which gives deep interest to the ordinance. Shall I have to disclose the secret? We are immersed, then, that we may be christened: Very true, indeed: but how christened? Married to Jesus Christ, as some old-fashioned christians used to say. I will take it in your own terms, you sons of the English hierarchy; or in your terms, you sons of the Scotch hierarchy--"Married to Jesus Christ"--united to him by the New Covenant. Well, now, [415] let us hear the words of this matrimonial compact:--"I take you, O Woman, to be my lawful spouse; and I promise to provide for you all the days of your eternal life. I will succor you, defend you, support and comfort you forever. My name, my honors, and my fortune shall be yours. Your people shall be my people, and your God my God." In reply, she says: "I take you to be my Lord and master; my sovereign, husband; and I pledge myself, by putting myself under your control, to love and serve you faithfully all the days of my immortal existence." This is enough to constitute the parties one in law, in name, and in fortune. Shall we have now to prove that the sins of the church are washed away? I say, after reading the marriage covenant, one clause of which is in these identical words, "Your sins and your iniquities I will remember no more." I say, after reading this covenant, shall we hesitate to say, that the sins of the baptized are washed away? But, dismissing the obsolete style of the ancient founders of the modern hierarchies, let us turn over the leaves of the inspired volume.

      And now I propose to do three things. 1st. To shew that the apostles addressed christians as having their sins remitted. 2d. That frequent allusions to baptism in the sacred epistles, represent it as an ablution. And in the third place I must shew that it is as plainly affirmed in the New Testament that God forgives men's sins in the act of immersion, as that he will raise the dead at the voice of the archangel, or as that Jesus Christ will come again to judge the world.

      In the first place, then, let it be noticed that Paul affirms that the Gentile disciples of Christ (Col. ii. 13) had their sins forgiven: "And you being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, has he quickened, together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses." To the Hebrews he says, (chap. x. 17, 18,) "Where remission of sins is, no more offering for sin is needed." Therefore, inasmuch as no sin offerings are appointed for christians, remission of sins is enjoyed by them. This is necessary to make his argument conclusive. For the drift of that passage is to shew that one promise in the New Covenant secured the forgiveness of sins to all who embraced it; and that the fact of their sins having been forgiven, is the reason why there are no sin offerings under the New Testament.

      To the same purpose the apostle speaks in all his epistles. Of the Lord Jesus, he says in general terms, "In him we have redemption through his blood; even the forgiveness of sins," &c. I do not wish to make a display of scriptural authorities where it is not necessary. This matter needs not to be proved to, but only to be remembered by, all intelligent christians. Suffice it, then, to remember that the ancient christians, both Gentiles and Jews, were taught to consider that their sins were forgiven them. Now here the inquisitive will ask, When, or at what time, were these sins forgiven? This we are not now to answer.

      In the second place, we proceed to the allusions to immersion, which represent it as an ablution, or a washing away of sins.

      Allusion 1st. Cor. vi. 11. "And such were some of you, but you are washed in the name of the Lord Jesus." We all admit that there is no public, outward, or symbolic washing in the name of the Lord Jesus, save christian immersion. To refer to it as a washing, indicates 'hat it was an ablution.

      Allusion 2d. Eph. v. 26. "That he might cleanse the church by a bath of water."

      Allusion 3d. Titus iii. 5. "God has saved us by the bath of regeneration."

      Allusion 4th. Heb. x. 22. "Our bodies are washed with clean water."

      Allusion 5th. 2 Pet. i. 9. "He has forgotten that he was purified from his old sins."

      On this last quotation let me ask, What are the old sins or former sins except those committed before baptism. We affirm that no solution can be given to this question, except that which represents it as referring to immersion in the ancient sense. Four things are fairly implied in these words: 1. That the ancient disciples were taught to consider themselves as pardoned. 2 That there was a time when, and a certain act by, or in which their sins were forgiven. 3. That they were not unconscious of this act at the time when it was performed, for it was an action which could and should have been remembered; otherwise, how could any person be blamed for having forgotten that he had been purified from his old sins. And 4th, it is implied that these sins were those which had accumulated during a state previous to this purification. Let any person illustrate this matter to himself, by considering what is implied in telling a person, You have forgotten that you have been married.

      Allusion 6th. 1 John ii. 12. "I write to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name's sake."

      This last allusion few consider correctly; but, in my judgment, it is just equivalent to saying, I have written to you, exhorting you, little children; because you have been immersed into the name of the Lord Jesus. To these might be added other allusions, such as those sayings concerning apostates--"The sow that was washed has returned to its wallowing slough." Such were they who had tasted the good word of God and the powers of the world to come. Such were they who had made shipwreck of faith and a good conscience. But those less explicit allusions we consider unnecessary, as the above six allusions are more than sufficient for our purpose.

      In the third place, I proceed to shew that we have the most explicit proof that God forgives sins for the name's sake of his Son, or when the name of Jesus Christ is named upon us in immersion:--that in, and by, the act of immersion, so soon as our bodies are put under water, at that very instant our former, or "old sins" are all washed away, provided only that we are true believers. This was the view and the expectation of every one who was immersed in the apostolic age; and it was a consciousness of having received this blessing that caused them to rejoice in the Lord, and, like the eunuch, to "go on their way rejoicing." When Jesus commanded reformation and forgiveness of sins to be announced in his name to all nations, he commanded men to receive immersion to the confirmation of this promise. Thus we find that when the gospel was announced on Pentecost, and when Peter opened the kingdom of heaven to the Jews, he commanded them to be immersed for the remission of sins. This is quite sufficient, if we had not another word on the subject. I say it is quite sufficient to shew that the forgiveness of sins and christian immersion were, in their first proclamations by the holy apostles inseparably connected together. Peter, to whom was committed the keys, opened the kingdom of heaven in [416] this manner, and made repentance, or reformation, and immersion, equally necessary to forgiveness. In the common version it reads thus: "Repent and be baptized every one of you, for the remission of sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." When any thing is done for any purpose, it is always understood that there is a necessary connexion betwixt that which is done, and the object in view. When a person is immersed for the remission of sins, it is just the same as if expressed, in order to obtain the remission of sins. But my limits are filled up, and I must interrupt my argument for the present, promising, all things concurring, to bring it to a legitimate or logical close in my next. In the mean time I have only to request my devout readers to remember one fact, which speaks volumes to all Christendom. It is this: The first three thousand persons that were immersed after the ascension of Christ into heaven, were immersed for the remission of their sins with the promise of the Holy Spirit. I am hold, therefore, to affirm, that every one of them who, in the belief of what the apostle spoke, was immersed, did, in the very instant in which he was put under water, receive the forgiveness of his sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. If so, then, who will not concur with me in saying that Christian immersion is the gospel in water.

EDITOR.      

CLINTON COUNTY, OHIO, OCTOBER 14, 1827.      

      BROTHER CAMPBELL,--A PERSON situated as you are, must submit to be assaulted on all sides, both by the wise and ignorant, and sometimes by persons of whom you have never heard, (which I apprehend is the case with myself.) Without further preface I shall proceed to inform. you that I am one of that class of people called "Christians," and that I have for a number of years been received as a teacher or "preacher" among them. Ten years ago I believed in Jesus, and entered the field as a soldier under the banners of the King of Heaven. I earnestly desired the salvation of sinners, and could not enjoy comfort whilst I refused to invite them to come. I had from my infancy been taught that God by his Spirit, abstract from his word, did, in every age of the Christian dispensation, call certain characters to preach the gospel; and that these characters, so called, acted under the same commission as the twelve apostles. This tradition, the feelings of my soul, and the opinion of those to whom I looked up as teachers in Israel, confirmed me in the belief that I was one of "the called by God." Accordingly, I went to work, and for about eighteen months labored in the word and doctrine, and some in tradition, (as I appropriated every thing said of the apostles to myself, and firmly believed myself an ambassador of Christ; that to me was committed the word of reconciliation, and that I had this treasure in an earthen vessel,) &c. At the end of this time an old brother ambassador took in hand to have me "ordained." Accordingly, inquiry was made of the church to which I belonged, if they had any objections to the measure. They made no objections: for in fact they believed the preachers had the hank all in their own hand; and accordingly I was "ordained" by three brethren, and believed myself then authorised to "administer" the ordinances of the Lord's house, throughout the whole realm, and that I was an elder of the church of Christ, though but a boy.

      For a number of yearn I labored for the good of my fellow mortals, without in the least doubting the propriety of the ground I had assumed. I at length heard of A. Campbell, his debates with Walker and M'Calla; and somehow I conceived a strong dislike both for the man and the course he was pursuing, without knowing any thing certain of either. At length some numbers of the Christian Baptist fell in my way. I read them, and felt desirous to read more; and from that time (though not a subscriber) I have been a constant reader of the Christian Baptist. Yes, and this same Christian Baptist has stripped me of my "call," my ambassadorship, &c. and has taught me that the treasure which the apostles had in earthen vessels I have in the Bible; and, in a word, has left me simply a disciple and a laborer in the vineyard in common with all others, according to our several abilities. Your essays on "the ancient order of things," have carried such conviction to my mind that I am ashamed I never understood the matter before. But I, like you, can make "the mists of the river Nile," an apology for my former ignorance in this case; but I am glad they have "ascended the top of the mountains," and I am now, with some others, engaged in teaching the necessity of a return to Jerusalem: and while thus engaged I have occasionally to hear that Alexander Campbell has "denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel;" that he has denied the "operation of he Spirit," the "divine call to preach," &c. and that from men too who bear the christian name and are viewed as teachers in Israel. Not withstanding this, my whole soul is awake to investigation, and I feel determined never to be chased from the field by the scoffs of the Rabbies and hem who wish to do them homage.

      I am much pleased with your remarks on the bishop's office, his call, qualifications, &.c. but as it respects what is called "ordination," I am not prepared at present to say Amen to all you say. You admit that the seniors of the congregation did lay their hands on the bishops elect in case here was no bishop in the congregation, and when there was a bishop that he laid his hand on the bishop elect to manifest his concurrence with the choice of the people. What you may have learned from the "history of the world, or the pages of Jewish or Christian antiquity," on this subject, I know not; but for my soul I cannot find one word in the New Testament that proves to me that bishops were ordained by the laying on of the hands of any body. If there is such proof as the case requires in the New Testament, I wish to know it; and if not, I wish you to retract what you have said on the subject, for you are viewed by many as an oracle, and your wrong will become the wrong of thousands. I find in the New Testament that spiritual gifts were given by the laying on of hands; that the power of working miracles was conferred in the same way, and miracles were wrought by the same act. But I cannot find where a bishop was ordained by laying on of hands.

      In answer to a certain question, you say that the work of an evangelist is preaching the gospel to those who have never heard it. Paul left Timothy in Macedonia on a certain occasion; he then wrote certain things to him that he might know how to behave himself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God; and both the epistles show that Timothy's business was chiefly among believers; and Paul concludes the whole matter by exhorting Timothy to do the work of an evangelist, and make full proof of his ministry. This consideration has induced me to request that you find both time and room for the proof of your assertion. [417] In your last number of the Christian Baptist you say, "The Mahoning Association did one good work at their last meeting: they agreed to support one active, spiritually minded, and able brother as a messenger of the churches, &c. Brother Walter Scott accepted of the appointment," &c. Now, brother Campbell, I confess I am at a loss to understand you; and as I consider the matter an important one, I wish information on the subject. No man under the heavens has said more against the divine right of associations, synods, councils, conferences, &c. than A. Campbell, and no man has spoken to better purpose on the subject. I now ask, If they have no divine right, by what authority did they act when they made the above appointment, and how are you justifiable in styling the person so appointed the Messenger of the Churches? A person that so ably advocates the restoration of a pure speech ought to be careful not to use the language of Ashdod. You know according to the best historical account we can get, that for more than a century after Christ the churches were perfectly independent of each other, neither were they joined together by association, confederacy, or any other bond than charity: and I know that I need not tell you that your association is an unscriptural institution, and how can an unscriptural association act according to the gospel? I would have thought it a good work if they had made their will, and voluntarily agreed to die, and appointed brother Scott to preach their funeral. But, to be serious, I see as great an incongruity between your messenger and the messengers of the churches mentioned in the New Testament, as you can see between the present order of preachers and a New Testament bishop. The messengers mentioned in 1st and 2d Corinthians were brethren appointed to travel with the apostles to carry the liberality of the Gentile churches to the poor saints at Jerusalem. Your messenger is appointed by the Association, in the name and likely by the authority, of the churches who compose the Association. But where do the churches find any account of the ancient churches sending messengers to such an assembly, with the power to act for them there? I am certain they do not find it in the New Testament.

      There are seven messengers mentioned in the first chapter of Revelations, and, according to your view of their office, if it be proper to call it an office, they were men appointed to visit the old apostle in his banishment, and administer to his wants. This I have no doubt is the fact. But does not the circumstance of the Son of God walking in the midst of the seven candlesticks and holding the seven stars in his right hand, indicate that their business was something more than what you have stated? Is there not room for a strong presumption that they were men appointed, not only to administer to the wants of the apostle, but to teach that faith to others which the churches had professed, and that each church had one such messenger?

      What I have written I submit without any apology to you as to a friend, a brother in Christ, and request the favor of a private answer to what I have written, as I have no desire to appear in public in my present unlettered situation, hoping that you will not cast my uncouth production to the moles and to the bats, without giving me a christian answer; and wishing you every blessing you desire for time and eternity, I subscribe myself your brother in the bonds of the gospel.

W.      

      BROTHER W.--I DID, as you see, contrary to your desire, lay your letter to me of the 14th October, before my readers, because I believed it fraught with good sense, and because it gave me an opportunity of dilating upon one or two topics not sufficiently discussed in the previous volumes of this work. The first sentence in your letter which calls for my attention is this, "But for my soul I cannot find one word in the New Testament that proves to me that bishops were ordained by the laying on of the hands of any body." Let me ask you, Do you find from the New Testament that bishops were ordained at all? You will answer, Yes. I then ask, What was the sign, or token, or mode of ordination? To give you all the light I have on this subject from the volumes of holy writ, I will state a few biblical facts. 1st. Persons when appointed to an office, whether viva voce; by stretching forth the hand; or by lifting it up, are said to be ordained to that office. This, I presume, requires no proof. 2d. Persons have been elected to an office, and afterwards inaugurated, consecrated, or set apart, to that office; so that election to an office, and ordination or inauguration, are not always, nor necessarily, one and the same thing. This I also presume needs not a single quotation in proof. 3d. But in the third place, there was amongst the Jews, in all ages, a sign, token, or mode of ordination; and their sign, token, or mode of ordination was the laying on of hands. This I must attempt to prove whether it needs it or not:--

      1. When the patriarchs blessed or devoted their children, they laid hands upon their head; as, for example, when Jacob blessed the sons of Joseph.

      2. When any thing was devoted or consecrated to the Lord, hands were laid upon it, as upon the heads of the victims.

      3. When persons were ordained or set apart to some sacred offices, hands were laid upon them; as, for example, when Moses laid his hands upon the head of Joshua to ordain him his successor; or when the congregation or the seniors of the congregation of Israel laid their hands upon the heads of the Levites. See Numb. viii. 10-18. Numb. xxvii. 18-23.

      4. Hands were laid by the Saviour and his apostles upon the sick to impart cures; and thus the imposition of hands continued the sign of impartation and communication in the commencement of the christian era.

      5. The Holy Spirit, or certain gifts of the holy Spirit, were also imparted by the imposition of hands during the apostolic age.

      6. And, in the last place, ordinations to office, or consecration to a particular service were signified, on some occasions at least, by the imposition of hands. Thus the prophets or teachers in the congregation which was in Antioch laid their hands upon Paul and Barnabas, and thereby set them apart to the work to which God had called them. So much for the general history of the laying on of hands.

      Instances diverse from all these may be found in the Jewish and Christian scriptures, but these are the chief. From all which it is plain, that the laying on of hands, in a religious sense, was a very common act amongst patriarchs, Jews, and christians, whenever religion required it.--And although we are not told in so many words that bishops were inaugurated or ordained by the imposition of hands, yet it is fairly to be learned from the letters to Timothy taken in connexion [418] with the above sacred usages. Paul tells Timothy who was, and who was not, eligible to the episcopal office--advises to let the persons be well proved first, and cautions him against laying hands hastily upon any one; which phrase, taken in connexion with the whole premises, can mean, I think, nothing else than the ordination of bishops and deacons. It is worthy of remark, in this place, that persons invested with no office at all were employed in ordaining, by laying on of hands, persons to office. Thus "the laity," as antichrist calls them, were the first persons who ordained or inaugurated into office in the annals of the religious world. See Numbers viii. 9-18. It is also worthy of notice that persons of inferior office laid hands upon those who were to officiate in a higher capacity than they who ordained them. See Acts xiii. 1, 2.

      After these examples of the common people laying hands upon the Jewish clergy, (properly called clergy, for they were the Lord's lot or portion,) after the teachers in Antioch laid hands upon the apostles Paul and Barnabas to ordain them to an apostolic service--I say, after these instances by divine appointment too, there ought not to be much controversy upon the question, Who may lay hands upon those now appointed to office. To what has been said it may be added, that if the apostles ordained the seven servants of the Jerusalem congregation; and if, as the historian Luke tells us, Paul and Barnabas on their tour ordained elders or bishops in every congregation, the conclusion is unavoidable, in my judgment, that the sign or symbol of inauguration, devotion, or consecration was the same. From the time that the common people ordained the Levites, from the time that Moses laid his hands upon Joshua, to the time that Titus ordained bishops in Crete, and down to the death of John the Apostle, there is no ground on which, or from which, to conclude any thing else than that the sign of ordination was the laying on of hands. But as I am about to write on church discipline, I will not be farther tedious to you at present.

      You next request some farther illustrations of the work of an evangelist. Timothy did more than the work of an evangelist while in Ephesus. To "proclaim the word," or gospel, is the primary idea in the work of an evangelist; but Pain commanded him not only to proclaim the word, but also to read, exhort, and teach in public, as well as to reprove, rebuke, and entreat, with all long suffering and gentleness. Timothy, so far as he proclaimed the word, performed the work of an evangelist; so far as he read, taught, exhorted, and kept good order in the assembly, he performed the work of a bishop; and so far as he or Titus planted churches and set things in order which were wanting, they acted the part of apostles. In various capacities these men acted; for Paul employed them as his agents in the work to which he was called. They who have required any persons to do the works assigned to Timothy and Titus, have forgotten that no men stand in the same relations to the apostles and to the churches as that in which they stood. The apostles for a time were bishops, deacons, evangelists, and every thing else which the churches required; so were some persons whom they appointed to assist them. But in process of time the apostles gave into the hands of others all their offices except that of planting churches, in which they continued as long as they lived. When they appointed deacons, they performed those duties no more; when they appointed bishops, they attended on that work no longer in that place; when they appointed general agents, they gave over all their offices in that district to them. But now we have, in a well-regulated christian community, persons for every office, whose duty and work it is to attend on their ministry or service, whatever it may be.

      The primitive churches had messengers, both male and female, employed by them as exigencies required. A messenger of a church does any work which the church would and could do in the place where the messenger acts. He must always represent the congregation. If he carry twenty dollars from the congregation in New York to that in Columbus--when he comes before the church in Columbus, he appears there to do that which the church which sent him would have done had they been there in their individual capacity. He can represent any thing which they have done, or declare their mind on any thing on which they have declared their mind to him; but he cannot represent them in any thing else. If a church sends a person to declare the glad tidings to a people ignorant of them, to carry their contributions to those in need, to protest against the misdeeds of any individual person or community, or to do any other act or deed which religion or humanity requires, the person or persons so sent act as the messengers or representatives of the church sending them, and are to be received and treated as the congregation deserves which sent them. That this is fully in the import of the messengers of the primitive church, neither reason nor revelation will permit me to doubt. But for farther illustrations on this topic, I must refer you to my essays, yet to appear, on the Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things.

      As for associations, conferences, conventions, &c. presuming to act under the sanctions of a divine warrant, or claiming to be a court of Jesus Christ, to decide on any matters of conscience, or to do any act or deed interfering with, or in opposition to, the perfect independence of each individual congregation, or at all legislating for the churches in any district of country--it is altogether foreign to the letter and spirit--to the precepts and examples--to the law and to the testimony of the christian books. But that two churches or twenty may agree to meet at any given time or place to join together to worship God in all instituted acts of social worship; and if they think we can do any more good by cooperating in any public measure than they could in their individual capacity, I know of no law or rule of the Great King prohibiting such meetings or such attempts to do good, or to enjoy good. And moreover it may be said, that not only is there no law or precept prohibitory (which is of itself inadequate evidence or authority in favor of any practice) but the general scope of the apostolic doctrine on doing good, and enjoying good, sanctions all that was claimed by the Mahoning meeting, congregation, association, convention, or whatever it may be called. Their meeting was almost entirely occupied in acts of religious worship, or in public edification--and their concurring to support one person for one year as their messenger to proclaim the word, and to strengthen the things that were ready to die--to labor every day in the word and teaching--was as voluntary as would be the giving of counsel to those erring from the path of safety--and has no other divine warrant than the commandments and precepts, which say, "As you have opportunity do good to all men;" or "Let every man seek his neighbor's edification;" [419] or, "As every man has received a gift, so let him impart:" or "Whatsoever things are benevolent, pursue," &c. &c. These, and a few hundred such sayings scattered over the pages of twenty apostolic epistles, are still the authority, direct and indirect, authorizing the Mahoning meeting to seek to do good in that one specified way.

      In the essays on church discipline and ecclesiastical proceedings, the first of which you will see in the present No. we hope to make all these matters and things plain and consistent with all the grand principles taught in the Bible, and argued in this work.

      Being much entertained and gratified with the spirit and scope of your communication, I must solicit the favor of a letter from you at any time or on any topic which you may choose. In the mean time I subscribe myself your brother in the hope of immortality.

EDITOR.      

      ELDER JOHN SECREST, concerning whose success in announcing the gospel, some remarks have been made in a former number of this work, on New Year's day last addressed to me a few lines, from which I learned that during the last year he had travelled about three thousand miles and delivered about six hundred discourses, from one to three hours long; and notwithstanding these mighty exertions he said he enjoyed good health and spirits. He did not keep any account of the numbers immersed in the preceding part of the year; but during the last six months of the year he had, with his own hands, immersed five hundred and thirty persons. Let those who pretend to be called by God, specially and supernaturally, to preach, "Go and do likewise," and report progress to me at the close of the year.

      WALTER SCOTT, who is now doing the work of an evangelist in the Mahoning Baptist Association informs me, per letter of the 4th ult. that he had made an experiment in preaching the ancient gospel for the ten days preceding the date of his letter. He states the effects as having been immediate and astonishing. No less than thirty having been immersed in that time. He says, "After having announced the gospel in the terms of the apostles, I have awaked the lyre of Israel, and sung forth the high songs of salvation to all who believe and are baptized, declaring a just and a merited damnation to all who disobey God; piping forth the terrors of the Lord, and congregating the rebellious from Cain to Judas, and from him to the resurrection of the dead. A quarterly meeting is to be holden at Fairfield, Columbiana county, on the first Friday of February."

[TCB 410-420]