Volume 5. Number 8. March 3, 1828, pp. 420-429.

• Attempt at a Restoration of the Ancient Order: To the Church of Christ in New York by John Hoskins and Edward Cooke, pp. 420-421.
• Ancient Gospel.--No. III: Immersion by Alexander Campbell, pp. 421-423.
• [Letter to the Editor] by Amos, pp. 423-424.
• [Reply to Letter to the Editor from Amos] by Alexander Campbell, pp. 424-425.
• Letter to Bishop Semple.--No. I. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 425-427.
• Soliloquy.--No. I. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 427-428.
• A Restoration of the Ancient Order of Things.--No. XXIII.: The Church by Alexander Campbell, pp. 428-429.
• [On Walter Scott's Success] by Alexander Campbell, p. 429.

STEPHEN-STREET, DUBLIN.      

      BELOVED BRETHREN--Your desire of communicating with the various societies throughout the world, (united in the bonds and profession of the faith of God and his Son Jesus Christ,) for the purpose of paying obedience to the commands of his written word, is worthy of imitation, and calls for the cheerful correspondence of all that have in view the same object. Should the Lord ever restore those enviable days, when the multitude of his disciples were of one heart and mind, it is probable he will employ such means as those now resorted to by you. Alas! to human sight those days appear to be far distant. For though, by a comparison of our times with those that immediately preceded us, it would appear that Christ's ordinances have been brought to light as though a copy of the laws of his kingdom had lately been discovered buried in the ruins and hidden under the rubbish of antiquity; yet does it seem that an adequate understanding of his laws is a discovery still wanted, and the spirit of interpretation rather to be desired than presumed. Whilst most disciples profess and lament this their ignorance, few are deficient in confidence: and in our impatience at the dulness of others, we all seem to forget the tardiness of our own progress. You will probably, in reply to your letter, receive communications from many bodies of disciples in this country, some of whom, though meeting in the same city, are well known to each other as brethren in Christ Jesus. Many of these different bodies were once united in association; but discussions having arisen among them, not concerning the principle of obedience to God's word and the apostolic authority, but concerning the meaning and force of certain precepts which perhaps for years were the subject of their doubts, they settled at length, each in the confidence of his own interpretation, and esteeming all difference to be disunion, they divided. On the contrary, we who now address you hold that difference is not necessarily disunion, and therefore it is that we deem disciples of this day deficient in the spirit of the apostolic practice. That the apostles demanded implicit obedience to all their precepts without exception, we doubt not; and all disobedience must have been esteemed equivalent to a rejection of the authority deputed to them by Christ. But we cannot perceive that every misconstruction of an apostle's precept amounts to such a rejection. The servant who knows not his master's will may be distinguished from the servant who knows and disregards it; it is difficult, in many instances, to ascertain the difference, but surely the maxim is acknowledged by the Lord himself, and was acted on by him towards his disciples. That errors can be imagined which the Lord would not have borne with, we deny not; but that he did bear with errors, even after the plainest declarations, is most manifest. We doubt not, brethren, that all blindness, as to apostolic precepts, is chargeable on the folly and slowness of our hearts. The same folly and slowness of heart prevented the apostles from receiving many truths at the mouth of Jesus; but as their folly and slowness of heart was not indicative of a rejection of Christ, so neither in these days do we apprehend that the folly and slowness of professors to receive many truths in the apostolic records, is in all cases indicative of a rejection of their authority; and as the Lord bore with the apostles, we see not but his example was recorded for our imitation.

      In the apostolic days all mistakes concerning their precepts must speedily have been brought to an issue, for their own explanation was not hard to be obtained; and after reference to them it would soon appear who were disobedient and who acknowledged their authority. Moreover the practice of the various churches being then recently instituted, derived immediately from the apostles, and recorded in every place where disciples associated, there was not equal room for mistake among them as in these days. Will any man assert, that now, after the lapse of centuries of darkness, during which time antichrist [420] has perplexed the meaning, perverted the language, mimicked the institutions, and obliterated the customs of the first churches; during which time the records of the apostles have slept for near two thousand years, and the very language of those records become almost hieroglyphic, and open to the access only of the learned; will any man, we say, consider this, and assert that diversity of opinion argues in all cases the same spirit of disobedience now as formerly? Do they who carry the principle of uniformity to the utmost degree of non-forbearance, do they doubt that a criminal blindness of heart obscures yet from their eyes much of the Lord's will concerning his church? And do they conceive that their present attainments are the measure of universal progress, and the criterion of faithfulness among all God's people? Therefore it is, brethren, that we of Stephen-street, in this city, hold it to be very possible for a faithful disciple of Christ to deny or to acknowledge the doctrine of baptism--the kiss of charity--the washing of the saints' feet--the anointing of the sick, and many other things which the word of God mentions. And therefore our union as a body depends upon two things--a profession of faith in Jesus Christ as the Saviour of sinners without works; and a recognition of the principle that the apostles were authorized by Christ to order the practice of his household. Where the sentiments or conduct of a professor palpably militate against the former of these principles, he would be removed from among us; where palpably against the latter, he could not be admitted a member of our association. We doubt not but there may be, and are, many servants of God in associations which we deem to be constituted chiefly of unbelievers, and ordered by the establishments of human authority. With such professors of the faith we scruple not to converse as believers; joining with them in prayer, where believers should happen to meet for conversations on the scriptures; while they could form no part of our assembly, which has associated for the express purpose of studying and conforming with the apostolic precept. We have dwelt on this subject, brethren, at some length, because it is of the very last importance to the churches of God throughout the world. At the same time we confess that we hold these sentiments with fear and trembling, lest peradventure they be opposed to the will of God. And we are more particularly attentive to the arguments of those associations who differ in this matter from us, because they appear to be almost the only professors of a pure and unadulterated gospel, and because their walk in life is, with the exception of such instances as must have occurred occasionally in the first churches, becoming the doctrine which they profess.

      The order of our worship wherein we do not deem preciseness to be matter of importance, is nearly the same as your own. We have as yet no elders, though we much lament the want of, and desire the supply of them. We are not fully agreed on the qualifications necessary for an elder. Some conceive that a man twice married is disqualified for the office; others, that an elder must have children, the well regulating of his family being, in their opinion, the criterion of his ability to rule in the household of Christ. Of the nature of the deacon's office we are very undecided in opinion. Many of us are baptized and many not. We do not understand that there was such an ordinance as a love feast among the first disciples, though we doubt not that their hospitality was much evinced in opening their houses to the brethren, and especially to the poor. Would that we were given to follow their example more affectionately than we are. Few, if any of us, hold the kiss of charity to be an ordinance, though many of us have great doubt on the subject. The washing of the saints' feet, we, for the most part, hold to be an expression synonymous with showing hospitality, and by no means a form or ordinance to be observed in any other sense. As to our intercourse with the world, and the other things wherein you have intimated to us your practice, it corresponds with our own sentiments. We cannot pass by one observation of your letter concerning the love feast without remark: "This (you say) not appearing to be of the same strict obligation, is made to give way to circumstances." We hold that every obligation is strict in the highest sense of the word, and that no one command is less obligatory on a disciple than another. Perhaps we have mistaken your meaning on this point; if so, you will not be offended at the remark. Indeed we trust and feel confident that you will receive these few observations as we have received yours, without any offence, but with affectionate consideration of your concern for the spiritual welfare of brethren. We must also make one other remark, which perhaps may show that we have also mistaken your meaning. We allude to the confession of one to be received into fellowship. We should require more than a confession that Jesus is the Christ; we are sure that every man calling himself a Christian would make such a confession. We should therefore inquire, What such a person meant by that confession, and if we found that he meant no more than that Christ was the Son of God, we should not receive him; but if he appeared to be acquainted with the meaning of the word Christ, and with the nature of his great salvation, whereby forgiveness is revealed to the most deplorably guilty and spiritually wretched, through belief in his name alone, without works, or even the help of a good thought or intention to co-operate in the matter of salvation, we should receive him, and we should receive no man who held any other sentiment. The church at present consists of about a hundred. We have been associated eight years. And now, brethren, we commend you to the grace of God, who is able through his Holy Spirit to build you up, and keep that which we have committed to him, even the salvation of our souls to the last day, when we hope to meet you and to join with you in praising him where all obscurities will be removed, and where there will be no need of the sun, neither of the moon, for the glory of God shall enlighten us, and the Lamb shall be the light. Now to God the only wise, be glory through Jesus Christ for ever.

      Signed in behalf of the church,      

	JOHN HOSKINS, EDWARD COOKE.
June 24, 1818.

      1. THAT the apostles addressed Christians as having their sins forgiven, was fully proved in our last. 2. That frequent allusions to baptism in the apostolic epistles represent it as an ablution or purification from sins, was demonstrated. And 3. That it is expressly said, and explicitly taught in the New Testament that God forgives men's sins in the act of immersion, was also attempted to be shown. In this we had advanced so far as to state that when Peter, to whom was committed [421] the keys of the kingdom of heaven, opened that kingdom to the Jews on Pentecost, he opened it by an authoritative annunciation of the remission of sins through immersion into the faith of Jesus. When asked by thousands what they should do to escape the impending vengeance, and to obtain forgiveness for their transgressions, he said, "Reform," or, as in the common version, "repent and be immersed every one of you for the remission of your sins, and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." When he commanded them to be immersed in the name of the Lord, or by the authority of the Lord, into the name of the Lord, it was for some end, and that end or object was stated so explicitly as to authorize us to conclude our last essay with the declaration of one fact of immense meaning--viz. That the first three thousand persons that were immersed after the ascension of Jesus Christ into heaven were immersed for the remission of their sins. When any action is performed for any purpose the purpose is gained, provided that there is an established connexion between that which is done, and the purpose for which it is done. This must be the case always when infallible wisdom and perfect benevolence appoint the action and the end. The laws of grace are as sure in their operation, and as certain in their effects, as the laws of nature. When I put my finger into the fire, by a law of nature, it is burned: and just as certainly am I forgiven of all my trespasses, by a law of grace, when in faith I am immersed in water into the name of the Lord Jesus. This is the apostles' doctrine, and to all believers in revelation, this being proved, the above assertion is proved. To those who are aware of the use and importance of being explicit in the promulgation of law, or in the commencement of any institution, it will at once appear that had not christian immersion been designed primarily for the remission of sins, the apostles committed a most injurious error in giving birth to the idea, and in raising the expectation of an inquisitive audience to look for the remission of sins by or through immersion into the name of the Lord Jesus. Suppose, for example, when these three thousand were afterwards dispersed through the community, as many of them were to a great distance from Jerusalem, and that one or all of them had been asked, for what they had been immersed on the day of Pentecost; what answer could they have given but "for the remission of their sins?" If they believed either the words of Peter or their own experience they could not otherwise respond. Had not this been the true meaning of immersion, the apostles laid the foundation for universal imposition and deception, by thus commencing the administration of the reign of heaven. If ever any practice demanded circumspection in the institution and explanation of it, this one did; and if ever any person or persons were qualified so to do, these persons were. So that the inference is inevitable that the apostle meant what he expressed, and that in the act of immersion the remission of sins was bestowed.

      That such was the universally received sense of immersion amongst the teachers and preachers of christianity, is most certain from express declaration and incident. For example: When Paul was immersed, it was declared and understood by the parties that all his previous sins were washed away in the act of immersion. The person sent to immerse him was sent expressly by heaven--Ananias said to him, "Arise and be immersed, and wash away your sins, calling upon the Lord." He obeyed and was immersed, and his sins were washed away. Had any person met Paul and Ananias when on their way to the water, and asked Paul for what was he going to be immersed; what answer could he have given, if he believed the words of Ananias, other than, I am going to be immersed for the purpose of washing away my sins? Or had he been accosted on his return from the water, and requested to tell what benefit he had received through or by the immersion, what answer could he have given other than, I have washed away my sins? I argue, and who can argue otherwise? that whatever immersion was to Paul, it is the same to every person, man, woman and child; barbarian, Scythian; bondman or freeman, who has the same faith Paul had when Ananias immersed him.

      What made the Eunuch go on his way rejoicing? Was it because he had some difficult texts explained? Or was it because he had some distant hope or remote prospect of enjoying pardon and acceptance after death, or after the lapse of certain years of travail and of trial? No, indeed; he had found what thousands before him had experienced, peace with God, from a conviction that his sins had been actually forgiven in the act of immersion. Indeed the preaching of all the apostles, as well as all their writings, embrace this as a fact never to be called into question. And it is impossible for us to understand many things which they have said upon other subjects unless we understand them aright upon this one. This is a beautiful and well-defined stripe which runs through the whole evangelical web. This authorized John the apostle when he wrote to the least child in the christian church, to say, Thy sins are forgiven thee--"I write to you, little children, because your sins have been forgiven you for or through his name." This authorized Peter to say, "Immersion does now save us; not the putting off the filth of the flesh in the water; but the answer of a good conscience, through the rising of Christ"--denoted in our rising with him in immersion. Hence, says Paul, "If, indeed, you are risen with Christ, (as you say you were both buried and raised with him)--if then you be risen with Christ, seek the things which are above, where Christ sits at the right hand of God."

      Paul, in the sixth chapter of his letter to the Romans fitly illustrates the practical uses of this doctrine. He argues that as the disciples had died by sin, and were buried in water, in consequence of having died by sin; and as they had been raised to a new life out of the grave of water in which they had been interred, so they were as cleansed in conscience to live a new life. The argument for a new life is therefore drawn from the fact of a death by sin, of a burial and a resurrection with Christ, in this institution; and as "he that is dead is freed from sin," can sin no more, so he that is immersed is freed from the guilt and dominion of sin; because he is, after his metaphorical resurrection, in or under a new dominion. "Sin, says the apostle, shall not lord it over you, for you are not under law, but under favor."

      Still it is possible for persons to sin under favor, and should they be deceived into transgression after they have been purified from their old sins, through confession, reformation, and petition, the blood of Christ will cleanse them from this also. The most effectual argument which Paul and John could urge upon christians to abstain from sin, was drawn from the love of God exhibited in the gift of his Son, and from the fact that they had been pardoned in baptism, and were under favor and not under a law which kept up a [422] remembrance of sin Some weak and erroneous philosophers have argued that to guard against a licentious tendency it is best not to make the forgiveness of sins a matter too cheap. They who found their plea either upon the cheapness or dearness of pardon, reason not as christians but as men who never knew the love of God. No heart that has felt the sovereign charms of that love can from a sense of its forgiving favor be induced to guard less against every appearance of evil. But this is only by the way and not exactly in the path now before us.

      Let us now look back. It has been shewn that the Apostle Paul taught that immersion was the bath of regeneration. Now if a person can be regenerated and not forgiven; if he can have a pure heart, and a guilty conscience at one and the same time--then is my reasoning erroneous, and my conclusions false. But if immersion is the bath of regeneration, and if a pure heart must have a good conscience, as Paul teaches, then is my reasoning correct, and my conclusions to be relied on. "The end of the commandment, or charge, or gospel, is, Love out of a pure heart, and a good conscience, and a faith unfeigned." This is the philosophy of Paul. But why reason to prove that for which we have a broad precept, an explicit promise, unequivocal precedents, and apostolic reasoning? Faith is not more evidently connected with immersion, than is immersion with the forgiveness of sins. In the ancient gospel, it was first a belief in Jesus; next immersion; then forgiveness; then peace with God; then joy in the Holy Spirit. Thus it stood in the order of nature; though the effects of pardon, peace, and joy, appeared in many instances to be simultaneous. But I must reserve something for another essay.

EDITOR.      

KING AND QUEEN, 4TH JANUARY, 1828.      

      Brother Campbell,

      DEAR SIR,--AMIDST the numerous sources of pleasure and pain to the mind, the attainment of truth, seems so certainly to produce one or the other of these effects, as to become worthy of our pursuit upon all subjects particularly connected with our well-being. Many, and various circumstances tend, however, to increase or diminish our enjoyment from this source, and unavoidably, in many instances, our inquiries become productive, in temporal matters, of disappointment and unhappiness, and in spiritual concerns, the investigation of the natural and moral relation existing between other beings and ourselves, of the most acute sorrow. And we discover, that in proportion to the value or practical utility of any subject, to ourselves, or more remotely to others, or its pernicious operation upon us or them, will be the degree of enjoyment, or an opposite sensation, experienced in our own minds as the result of manifest truth on such subjects. Of all the subjects that have, at any time, engaged the studious care and researches of man, religion stands pre-eminent. The best form of civil government, and through such, the consequent amelioration of the present condition of the human family, is a subject, though old, still worthy the laborious study of the most comprehensive, philanthropic, and discerning mind;--the arts, sciences, and literature, exhibit subjects that require and merit the most profound attention of genius--ascending, intuitively and by the aid of science, amidst the starry hosts, and with a giant grasp seizing upon those objects far removed from common vision and ability, and embracing, with delight, those resistless principles that emanate from the mind of Jehovah for the government of the Universe, is a theme, inviting to the most exalted favorites of knowledge. But what are all these, and the result of that truth which they earnestly seek, when found, in comparison with the religion which Jesus of Nazareth has introduced into the world! By this, we are taught to know ourselves--to know God the maker of all--Jesus who saves us--our duty as individuals to our God, and those mutual, social relations that bind, and should ever endear us to each other, as members of a common family. This religion, unfolds to the eye of faith, scenes too remote, and could they be seen, too dazzling for the pleasure or discrimination of the natural eye. Though millions have explored, none but the Sun of Righteousness has illuminated the dreary valley and shadow of death--though millions have been bound by the narrow limits of the grave, till Christ came, none had burst the bars of death--though thousands had dreamed of future glory, none but Emanuel has brought immortality and life to light! All these inexpressibly valuable blessings, have been brought into being through the gospel of the blessed Saviour, which, in its own comprehensive and emphatic language, "is truth." If through the grace of God we have arrived at the knowledge of this principle, in reference to heavenly things, happy are we! Then may we with an apostle say, "Having been regenerated, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, through the word of the living God which remains forever; all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass--the grass withers, and the flower of it falls down; but the word of the Lord endures forever."

      The word of God, as a complete system, is most correctly designated by way of a peculiar characteristic, as truth; consequently, its numerous parts, as a revelation, are equally entitled to this distinction. The visions or prophecies--their accomplishment--and the teaching of Jesus and his apostles, are equally emanations from the divine mind--equally true, and adapted to all the designs of the author of truth. But among a multiplicity of subjects upon which the divine will has been expressed, some are more easy of conception, and some, when understood, more readily received than others. While some portions of the sacred record strike every enlightened mind with a unity of aspect, many other portions seem to convey, either no distinct meaning, or a variety of interpretations. Reasons are assignable for this diversity of conclusion from the same premises; but we believe that the former diversity of gifts and operations of the Spirit, or its present guidance, cannot fairly be included among the number. Natural differences between men; education; prejudices growing out of sectarianism; remaining darkness, from a want of a more perfect image of Jesus in the heart; and an apathy still indulged in relation to the existence of those causes, connected with an inordinate love of the world, are probably to be recognized among the reasons of that distraction and discordance of sentiment, that seriously disturb the proper harmony of the christian body.

      Now it is with an eye to some of these differences of opinion, and to that unity of spirit and action, and for the diffusion of that truth which imparts peace to the mind of its recipients, which only, can bring about the happy period, when the lion and the lamb shall lie down together, that I now take the liberty of addressing you. Though I cannot say that I have read your works with unmingled emotions of pleasure, [423] (there being a few points upon which I could desire to hear you farther, more explicitly,) yet, I feel grateful to the "giver of every good gift," so far as I am individually concerned, that the day in which I live should produce even one able advocate of that "order" of things, which I am induced most confidently to believe, both from the present state of man, especially the Christian community, and the word of God, must again be restored. I feel no disposition to compliment you improperly as a man, whether good, bad, or great, for it would be a vain service; nor to flatter you, because that would be not only personally insulting to you, but highly inimical on my own part. My design is to hear testimony in the simplicity of candor, to the utility of those labors, which, I trust, at no very distant day, will be found to have been one of those tributary streams, that will make glad the city of God, when the children of the Great King will sit together in heavenly places, and in the solemnity, joy, and unity of spiritual devotion and intercourse, receive the droppings of the sanctuary.

      Knowing your unwavering objections to questions of any kind, merely sectarian, and admitting your discretion to adhere to the plan that you consider best adapted to effect your designs, I shall not put you to the trouble of refusing an answer to an inquiry of that sort.

      The understanding and proper application of the word of God, and the manifestation of a cheerful obedience thereto, seem to constitute the proper existence of the Christian religion in the heart of man. And in proportion to the prevalence of these essentials will Christianity be conspicuous or depressed. It is of great importance, then, that we understand the things written: otherwise our applications will be improper, and our obedience, rather the gratification of our own feelings, than the fulfilment of divine institutions.

      Several questions of interest have occurred to me; but I shall propose only two at present.

      What are we to understand from, and to what description of persons or character, are we to apply the language of the apostle in the seventh chapter of Romans!

      Is the example of the Saviour, as given in the washing of feet, of literal obligation throughout all ages, upon all disciples; (See 1st Tim. v. 10.) or was it limited to those "sent," and confined to that age!

      A word, in conclusion, to our baptist brethren: I feel confident that every one who has sought diligently the spirit of his Master, has contemplated, with pain, the schisms that mar the harmony of christians, and deform, in a great degree, the most lovely as well as the most glorious system the world ever saw, and with anxious desires not unfrequently implores the mercy of God in bestowing peace upon Israel. The language of scripture itself, sometimes affords a latitude of interpretation, that proves inimical in the hands of man, to the harmonious propagation of truth. As an instance of this sort, we need only direct your attention to the word baptize. Different acceptations of this term, lead into very different applications of water, and consequent doubt, in numerous instances, if nothing more, whether all those various actions should be considered as acts of obedience. And among those who dissent from the "one immersion," and contend for a wider range of application, it has become a matter of common inquiry by those who are not present when they have administered this ordinance, "What action was employed!" Now, though it be known what action we observe in the use of the ordinance, would it not still be better for us to drop, as far as possible, the use of the word which has created so much disturbance! The term immersion is of very ready expression and application, and seems to stand fairly justified by many of the most eminent Paido-baptist critics. It is highly probable that no very immediate effects of a favorable kind will be thus produced; yet time, and the approbation of God, if he should be pleased to confer it upon what seems to be a proper use of his word with proper motives, may ultimately contribute to bring about a union both in language and action. We can at least go on our way in "one faith, one Lord, one immersion," and endeavor, for the sake of the truth, of the approbation of our Master, and of that crown that awaits us, to obey him in all things.

AMOS.      

Brother Amos,

      DEAR SIR--THE passage in the "Epistle to the Romans," to which you refer, is one of no ordinary importance, and is thought very generally to be one of no very easy interpretation. I find the following interpretation to be the most in unison with the apostle's design, and to be liable to no serious objection. (See New Translation; 1st ed. p. 291.) Paul in his own person represents the Jew from the days of Abraham down to his own conversion. "Where there is no law reaching to the conscience, and taking cognizance of our thoughts, we must be ignorant of sin. For even strong desire I could not have known to be sin, unless the law had said, Thou shalt not covet." For without this knowledge sin was dead; that is, gave me no uneasiness; but under the restraints which the law imposed, it wrought effectually in me all strong desire. Now the fact is, that before the law was given in the days of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, I was alive without law, I never felt myself subject to death, for where no law is there is no transgression. But when the law was given, or when the commandment came from Mount Sinai, sin which was dead in that state, revived or came to life, and from the day of the entrance of the law death was inflicted upon its Jews in a way of which there was no example before the promulgation of law. For from the night in which the destroying angel passed through the houses of the Egyptians, until the law was promulged, not an Israelite died; but no sooner was the law given than every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward--and all the way to Canaan death reigned through my transgression of positive law. So that the commandment which was to have been a rule and guide to the enjoyment of this life, I found to lead to death. "Besides is it obvious," says he, "that the law is spiritual, that is, has respect not only to the outward actions, but in some of its precepts reaches to the thoughts--but the people, of which I am one, to whom that law was given, were a fleshly people, enslaved to appetite.--Hence the conflict betwixt conscience and inclination. We, or I Paul, could not but approve the law in our minds; and yet we were by passion and appetite doing the things which we could not incline to do in our minds enlightened by law. So that it was not owing to any defect in the law, nor in my perceptions and approbation of it mentally, but in the inclinations and propensities to which a human being in this present state is unavoidably subjected--that I failed in [424] finding happiness, peace, or comfort under the law. In what wretched condition, then, were we Jews under this law; and do you ask how we are, or could be delivered from that state of sin and condemnation! I will tell you; through Jesus Christ our Lord, under whom we have no condemnation; for we are under him and not under law.

      These are, my dear sir, but a few hints, paraphrastically, submitted rather as worthy of examination, than of hasty adoption. On this plan, however, I have no doubt, but every word and sentence in the seventh chapter of the Romans can be well and fully expounded. I have confounded the first person with the third on purpose to elicit inquiry and to make this view more forcible. And had I leisure and room to paraphrase the whole paragraph, and to argue the whole merits of it, I think it might be rendered more than plausible. But a hint to the wise is sufficient.

      I must, being exceedingly embarrassed for time and room at present, refer you for an answer to your other query, to vol. 3, page 223.

      I have heard many wicked professors of christianity justify themselves by what they called Paul's experience as a christian. Paul, said they, was like us--the evil that he hated he did, and the good that he loved he did not; and thus they flattered themselves their experience would lose nothing in this respect on a comparison with Paul's. Many, however, thus interpret the scripture to their own destruction. May you enjoy the clear and glorious light of life forever.

      I had, in my haste, forgot to mention that your remarks on the use of the words immerse and immersion, in the practice of christians, when attending upon this sacred institution, are certainly worthy of the attention of all who wish the good of Zion. I have for a considerable time been wont to say on such occasions, "I immerse thee into the name," &c. And, indeed, in speaking to an English audience, I would concur with you that we should always use such language as is explicit, intelligible, and conducive to harmony. Some other excellent hints in your letter I could wish were universally regarded.

EDITOR.      

BETHANY, Va. Feb. 14, 1828.      

Brother Semple,

      DEAR SIR--THE love I bear to all good men constrains me to address you as a christian brother, although you may scarcely deem me worthy of such a compellation. But your being my christian brother depends not upon the will of the flesh, nor upon the will of man, but upon a higher and more exalted consideration. If you are a member of the family of God, (and few doubt it,) and if I should be recognized by the Great and Good Master as of the household of faith, our brotherhood is fixed as firm as the foundation of the earth, although it may not be indisputably evident to all who are acquainted with our standing upon the earth. But until l am proscribed by some new statute, I will claim my rights under an old statute of the reign of grace 49.

      I love all christians, of whatever name; and if there is any diversity in my affection, it is predicated upon, or rather graduated by, the scale of their comparative conformity to the will of my Sovereign. I do profess, before heaven and earth, to be a christian. I will claim this title, and defend it by that course of behaviour which I think my Master requires. This is the sole cause of my departure from the customs of my baptist brethren in those items, whenever they have departed from the customs of those elder brethren, the primitive christians. If I could have been satisfied in my conscience with that course which the populars pursue I would have greatly preferred it; but I cannot. For I remember that the Judge once taught, "Whosoever shall break one of the least of these commandments, and shall teach men so, shall be called the least in the kingdom of Heaven; but whosoever shall do and teach them, shall be called great in the kingdom of Heaven."

      You and some of my other brethren represent my views as "chimeras." Well, then, I, and thousands say, Prove them to be such. Nay, you say, this is not necessary; it is enough to call them "chimeras." Such is the meaning of your conduct. Now, brother Semple, yourself and some two or three other men of high standing have confirmed me more in the truth and reality of my views than all my other opponents. And if you ask me, How? I am prepared to tell you. Many men of very slender parts, and as slender attainments, have opposed me. I soon found their weakness; but my victory over them I was sometimes afraid to attribute to my cause. I had no assurance from their failure that it was owing to the reality of the views I entertained, but perhaps owing to their incapacity. But when I have elicited the notice of some of our greatest and best men, and have heard them call my sentiments, in derision, by some obnoxious name--I say, when I have seen them willing to oppose me, and actually engaged in the opposition so far as to bespatter my reputation with foul and reproachful epithets; and when called to the proof, beg to be excused; I am constrained to feel myself panoplied with victorious truth, and to rejoice in its mighty power.

      I do assure you, brother Semple, that I never felt more strong in the faith that the popular systems cannot be defended, than since I have seen you draw your sword, and before it was quite unsheathed, return it to its scabbard. Had you never lifted either your tongue or your pen against my "chimeras," I should not have known how invincible they appear; but, my dear sir, since I have seen the result, I am become as bold as a lion. Brother Brantley, of the "Star," has also set to his seal that I am "more than half right." He gave publicity to your two letters, and in the greatness of his admiration of the weight of your name, either forgot or feared to look into the argument of your two epistles. At all events, to this day he has not dared to let his readers see my address to you. He has been nibbling at some spirit or ghost, which he calls the "Spirit of the Reformers," and yet he dare not let the phantom chew its face in one corner of his imperial sheet. But under the light of "Columbian Star," it is not to be expected that his vision can be so clear as those who enjoy the mid-day sun. Just think, brother Semple, how I must feel with these facts before me: neither the Presbyterian Luminary, Recorder, &c. neither the Baptist Recorder, Christian Secretary and Register, &c. not even "the Star that on Columbia shone," has yet dared to give to their readers my defence against their allegations, or to publish my defence against the charges to which they have given currency. Had they always been silent, I should never have thought my arguments so triumphant. But in their zeal to fight for their creeds, they showed that the fault was not in their [425] volitions if I was not defeated. Their timidity, (for so I must call it until otherwise manifest,) has confirmed me in the truth and certainty of the sentiments exhibited in this work. Some may call this boasting, and thereby traduce "the manner of spirit" of which I am; but, my dear sir, I only express the genuine feelings and results which your conduct, and that of other great and good men have produced.

      I would not, brother Semple, hurt your feelings for any personal consideration that would not affect my standing in the sight of Heaven. I do really feel tenderly for the awkward predicament in which the temerity of Dr. Noel placed you. He wanted your name, but deprecated your arguments against me. The former he coveted--but he trembled for the consequence of your attempt to argue the question at issue. He dragged you out. Your letters to him show that you lacked confidence in yourself, as well as disliked to be made a mere accuser. I think your conduct here was rather imprudent than unchristian, especially as you knew what adroitness and good management distinguished the reputation of Dr. Noel. He knows as well how to economize his resources in argument, and to make as large a per cent. per annum, from a small capital, as any other Doctor of Divinity, Baptist or Paido-Baptist, in the fertile state of Kentucky. When brother Brantley, of the "Star" was giving me a lesson upon the manner of spirit of the reformers, he might have been so liberal and philanthropic as to have bestowed a word of admonition to the spirit of Aleph or of Dr. Noel, which most certainly was to have been expected: for in censuring the spirit of the reformers, he ought to have contrasted it with a few specimens of the excellent spirit of the opposers of reformation. But these little specks in our great and good men, like the spots in the sun, only serve to brighten their general character, and serve as foils to increase the lustre of their reputation.

      But to return to the subject before us: Brother Semple, your charges and censures are, and were known both to yourself and your friends, to have some weight, and were intended to be a check to the progress of the sentiments inculcated in the Christian Baptist. You certainly consider them of much, or of considerable weight, when you were content merely to state them upon your personal credit. Your pretended friends, who drew them from you, thought so too. Now the question with me has been, What should I do! Shall I rebut these assertions, or shall I suffer the reputation of the wise and good to be every where urged as an argumentum ad modestiam, or as an argument to silence all farther inquiry and research. After much serious deliberation on this question, and after waiting for months to see what you would do of justice to me, yourself, and the cause; and having at length ascertained that you have, sine die, declined any other argumentation of the topics at issue than that contained in your two letters--I am resolved what to do.

      I will tell you, then, that I am about to make as much as possible of what light you have thrown upon the controversy, by a most minute analysis of your two letters to Dr. Noel. Seeing you will vouchsafe us no other means of being set to rights and converted from the error of our way than these two letters, I am resolved to examine them, ad unguem, that I may see and exhibit all their logic and scriptural authority. This I shall do without a single reflection upon yourself as a man, a scholar, or a christian. Nothing which I have yet seen can induce me to doubt of the ultimate triumph of the distinguishing sentiments expressed in this work. All wise and good men expect a millennium, or a period of great happiness upon earth. They all argue that greater light than that hitherto possessed will be universally enjoyed. They do not merely expect a universal subjugation of all nations, kindreds, and tongues, to the Lord Jesus: they do not merely expect a state of harmony, perfect peace and union among all the citizens of heaven; but they look for a vast accumulation of light and knowledge, religious, moral, and political. They do not, however, expect a new Bible or any new revelation of the Spirit, but only a more clear and comprehensive knowledge of the sacred writings which we now enjoy. This belief and expectation of all wise and good men, is unequivocally declarative of the conviction that the scriptures are not now generally understood, and that there are new discoveries of the true and genuine meaning of these sacred records yet to be made. The misfortune is, that while all sects and sectaries make similar acknowledgements, no one supposes that himself or his people have any advances to make. The Baptist thinks that all the world will be Baptists in the Millennium, and therefore supposes that the Paido-Baptist sects will make great advances in knowledge before they can come up to the light which he enjoys. The Presbyterian expects that all the world will be Presbyterians in the Millennium, and consequently that many advances by all the sects must be made in the science of church government. The Methodist supposes that in the Millennium all the world will be Methodists, and anticipates the day when one great conference of profound radicals will deliberate for the four quarters of the world. Thus it is that all hold fast their errors, never suspecting that they have any thing to cast away; and calculating that all others must come up to their standard if ever they enjoy the Millennial felicity. Thus every sect puts reformation and reformers from among them. Like some good hearers in our polite congregations, each suspects the parson means some lady or gentleman other than himself--and kindly and politely thanks the parson for his benevolence, and invites his neighbor to take a slice.

      Amongst those who admit that they have some things which they ought not to have, there seems to be a reluctance to begin to cast any thing off, lest the other sects would gain, or themselves lose something thereby. Many cannot humble themselves so far as to admit that any thing they have held or taught has been wrong. And so it comes to pass, that if we are not getting farther from the commandments and institutions of the Lord and Saviour, we are not getting any nigher. The greatest paradox to my mind in my moral horizon is this: How any man can love our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ supremely, (and if he does not he is to be anathema maranatha,) and yet be indifferent about knowing or doing any thing he has commanded. For my part I must confess that if my orbit has been eccentric--if my career hitherto has been marked with any eccentricities, the cause is, my fear of offending the great Lawgiver, and my desire to do his will. In this I am now, as I have been for years, immovable; and although I should be opposed all the days of my life by some of the wise and good, as well as by the ignorant and evil, I must persevere. Always open to conviction, but never to be silenced by detraction, defamation, not [426] by the mere array of a confederation of great and illustrious names. I have been too long acquainted with great and good men to stand in awe of their decisions. I know too that many men can make good bargains, and purchase reputation at a very low price. None of these remarks, brother Semple, are, in my judgment, applicable to you, but they are to many whose influence may be felt by other great men. I have been just writing a preface to a series of letters to be addressed to yourself on the contents of your correspondence with Dr. Noel, so far as that correspondence is before the public. It is now public property, and as such I claim my right to a share to its benefits. I am always glad to hear from you, and any thing you may have to say by way of amendment, correction, or explanation, on this or any other epistle addressed to you in this work, I assure you it will give me great pleasure to insert it in full; and believe me to be, most unfeignedly, the devoted servant of the common Saviour, in hope of eternal life.

A. CAMPBELL.      

      MEDITATION is a Species of soliloquy, inasmuch as when we meditate or reflect, especially on serious subjects, we rather converse with ourselves. Some persons, when deeply engaged in meditation, talk aloud, and not unfrequently argue and debate with themselves. Thus I have, when alone, frequently found myself carrying on a dialogue betwixt myself and some personified opinion, virtue, vice, or opposing interest. Some of these soliloquys I could have wished to have had written down immediately on coming to a close, for in them I have sometimes had the best views of things, and heard the strongest arguments, pro and con, on some subject of importance. A few I have penned down, and may now and then submit one to the examination of my readers. The following brief soliloquy originated from a temptation to be on the strong side:--

      How happy are they who sail with wind and tide down the stream of popular esteem, having the banks of the stream on which they are embarked lined with admiring crowds, waving their hats and bowing their heads in sign of approbation and admiration. How tranquilly they glide along. When the sun shines and all is calm, how easy and happy their voyage. When storms arise, they betake themselves to the shore, and find themselves safe and happy in the caresses of admiring thousands. How enviable they! Who would not desire and seek their happy lot. Contrast it with that of yonder small company in a little bark, toiling against wind and current, ascending the rapid stream of vulgar applause. How imperceptible their advances.--After whole nights and days of toilsome rowing, they appear not to have distanced the shadow of a man of tall stature. No cheers nor congratulations from the spectators who chance to cast an eye upon them from the bank, except now and then a solitary "God speed" from some obscure one perched upon some rock or island, who has himself been buffeted with hardships.

      Such was the prospect before me while I viewed the landscape with the wrong end of the telescope next my eye; but all of a sudden I turned the other end, and strange indeed was the change in the scenery. I now could read the inscription on the colors of the descending barge and that on the ascending skiff. I could see all devoted to present happiness and those too who sought happiness in both worlds on the side of those descending, but not one of the admirers of their course, nor of those embarked on that voyage, had yet died. I looked up the stream, and found, from the inscription and other hieroglyphics upon the skiff, that their destiny was not to any port on earth, and that their eye was fixed upon some invisible and distant good, of such charms as to make them sing and triumph at every pull they gave the oar. A small company of the living and all that had ever died looked upon them either with perfect complacency--with a wishful, or an envious eye. In presenting the two rival courses of the whole human race thus to the eye of my mind, I could better appreciate the wisdom and happiness which distinguish the respective courses of the sons of men. But am I not, said I, thus confounding my own reflections with a descriptive and symbolic representation of things addressed to the consideration of others? True, it appears so. But if I gain my end this way more readily, what is the difference?

      O my soul, do you not know that every good intention of yours, and every good effort of yours, were it only to subdue one evil inclination, is witnessed with admiration by all the excellent that ever lived. Do you not remember that the Saviour said there is joy in heaven over one reforming sinner, and even too amongst the angels of God; and can you think that one good deed of yours is viewed with indifference by any of the exalted dignitaries of the heavens! When you make one righteous effort to promote goodness in yourself, or in any human being, know that every good man on earth approves your course, and is upon your side; yes, and all the spirits of the dead. The wicked spirits know that you are wise, and cannot but approve your way; and all the holy and happy from righteous Abel, look down upon you with delight, and congratulate you on every advance you can make in goodness. Stronger and more numerous are those upon your side than they that are on the side of your opposers--When you are tempted to consult your reputation and your worldly advancement amongst men, O reflect how little they can do for you, and how much against your happiness. Can they soothe your troubles, can they heal your wounds, can they remove your fears, or tranquilize your agitations? No, no--full well you might know, from your past experience, how little they can do for you. When they once smiled upon you and congratulated you, were not your acts foolish, and did not the very deeds for which they praised you give you pain? Have you not found yourself distressed beyond the reach of mortal power and earthborn remedies to relieve; and will you now, when God has smiled upon you, pay your homage to human adulation, and seek to please the proud and the vain who cannot bless you? No, my soul, you cannot thus sin against your own felicity. Will it not be more than a reward for all privations and affronts in the way of goodness and self-denied obedience, to reflect how all the good and wise in Heavens estimation have toiled with you, and now approbate your progress; and when you struggle with allurements, they all with intense interest await the issue, and are ready to hail you with triumphant joy as victor. Be assured, then, in all your struggles in behalf of truth and goodness, that every just man upon earth, every happy spirit in the invisible world, every angel in heaven, and what is more than all, your Redeemer and your Heavenly Father, are all upon your side, and ready to put the incorruptible [427] crown upon your head, and to greet you with a hearty welcome, saying, Well done, you good and faithful servant. Let these reflections cause you never to despond amidst difficulties; never to faint in adversity; never to yield to temptation; never to seek the praise of men at the risque of forfeiting the praise of God. Remember that that day hastens with every pulse, when you would rather have the smiles of your Lord and Saviour, when you would rather be approved by him, than to be hailed by an admiring world as the paragon of every worldly excellence, as the sovereign arbiter of all the crowns and thrones that mortals ever coveted. Think, O think, how many smiles attest your conquests, and how many eyes with sadness would behold your discomfiture in this glorious struggle.--Fired by these considerations, the weak side becomes the stronger, and it is easy to burst through all the restraints which worldly pride and worldly policy would throw as obstacles in your way. "Remember Lot's wife."

EDITOR.      

      "LET all things be done decently and in order," is a favorite saying, though seldom regarded with suitable respect by those who are wont to be charmed with the sound of the words. The two extremes in all associations, as respects government or rule, are despotism and anarchy. In some religious establishments there is, on the part of the rulers, an unrelenting and absolute tyranny, and on the part of the ruled, a passive servility, as if non-resistance and passive obedience were the cardinal virtues in a good sectarian. In other religious institutions there is, on the part of the rulers, no attribute of ecclesiastic authority, and on the part of the ruled there is the most licentious equality; which recognizes not either the letter or spirit of subordination. These doubtless are the extremes between which lies the temperate zone, or the "media tutissima via," the safe middle way.

      But there are extremes not only in one department of congregational proceedings; but in all. Let us take an example from some popular measures;--Here in this hierarchy "the canaille" or mass of the community have nothing to say or do in the creation of their teachers or rulers. They are neither permitted to judge nor to decide upon their attainments before they are invested with the office of public instructors. But there, in yonder religious establishment, every man, woman, and child, is constituted into a competent tribunal, and made supreme judge of the attainments of the person, and feel themselves competent to invest him with the office of a religious instructor, without further ceremony than their own unanimity or majority. For instance, Here is a church of thirty members, ten males and twenty females. One of the ten is, by some of the twenty-nine, supposed to be qualified to become a preacher, or as they under stand it, a public instructor. Now, of the nine males and twenty females, it so happens that there are six matrons who can read intelligibly the New Testament; and of the males there are about four of what might be called plain common sense, who can barely understand a piece of plain narrative composition. But among them, such as they are, they decide that A B is competent to be a public instructor, and then forthwith commission him to go into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Now the question is, Are they to be condemned or justified who consider this man legitimately introduced into the world as a teacher of religion? Is any other society bound to credit his pretensions or to receive him bona fide as a legally authorized teacher of the Christian religion, and ruler in the christian church? Remember the question is not, Had the twenty females and the nine males, by and with his own consent, a right to create, appoint, and ordain him a ruler and teach or over themselves: but whether they have reason or revelation on their side, when they introduce him to all the world, as a regularly initiated minister, or ambassador, or teacher of and for Jesus Christ? That any society politically considered have a right to manage their own affairs as they please, is at once readily admitted; that any ecclesiastical community have a right to govern themselves by whatever laws they please, as far as the state jurisdiction extends, is also conceded; but that any society has any right to frame any regulations for its own government on christian principles is what we cannot so readily subscribe. But without being further tedious on the subject of extremes, having simply shown that we are prone to run into them on both hands, I will proceed to my object in this part of my series of essays on the ancient order of things.

      As we have many volumes on church government and church discipline; and as the Episcopal, Presbyterial, and Independent, all have claimed a jus divinum, we cannot be expected to have much new on the subject, or to have little regard to the merits of the questions which they have with so much warmth debated. We wish however while we write, to forget all that we have ever read or heard on this subject, save what the apostolic writings contain upon such topics. And as we prefer perspicuity to all other attributes of good writing, we proceed to state--

      1st. That as the church, or congregation, or assembly, (as it is expressed by all these names,) is repeatedly called a kingdom--the kingdom of God, and the kingdom of heaven, it is fairly to be presumed, from the terms themselves, that the government under which the church is placed, is an absolute monarchy. There cannot be a kingdom, unless there be a king. They are correlative terms, and the one necessarily supposes the existence of the other. But we are not left to inference; for it was not only foretold expressly that "the government would be upon his shoulders;" but he claims absolute dominion in express and unequivocal terms, and lays all his disciples under the strictest injunctions of unreserved submission. All authority in the Universe is given to him--"Therefore, kiss the Son."--"I have placed my king upon Mount Zion."--"He shall reign over the house of Israel, his people, forever." On this, as a first principle, I found all my views of what is commonly called church government. All the churches on earth that Christ has ever acknowledged as his, are so many communities constituting one kingdom, of which he is the head and sovereign.--The congregation or community in Rome, in Corinth, in Philippi, in Ephesus, &c. &c. were so many distinct communities as respected their component members or individuals, but these were all under one and the same government, as the different counties or corporations in the state of Virginia are all component parts of the state, and under the same government. In every congregation or community of christians the persons that are appointed by the Great King to rule, act pretty much in [428] the capacity of our civil magistrates; or, in other words, they have only to see that the laws are obeyed, but have no power nor right to legislate in any one instance, or for any one purpose. The constitution and laws of this kingdom are all of divine origin and authority, having emanated from the bosom, and having been promulged in the name of the Universal Lord.

      There is no democracy nor aristocracy in the governmental arrangements of the church of Jesus Christ. The citizens are all volunteers when they enlist under the banners of the Great King, and so soon as they place themselves in the ranks they are bound to implicit obedience in all the institutes and laws of their sovereign. So that there is no putting the question to vote whether they shall obey any particular law or injunction. Their rulers or bishops have to give an account of their administration, and have only to see that the laws are known and obeyed, and hence proceed all the exhortations in the epistles to the communities addressed to submit to their rulers, as those who watch for their souls, and as those who must give an account of their administration.

      This subject, it has appeared to me, is very little or very imperfectly understood in many congregations, and their meetings for church discipline are generally conducted in such a way as to divest every one in the assembly of every attribute of authority, and to place every one in the character of an interpreter of the law; and if not legislators, at least, they are all executors of it. But of this more hereafter.

EDITOR.      

      BY a letter from brother Walter Scott, of the 10th ult. he informs me that his success in proclaiming the ancient gospel still increases. He and his associates have immersed in the first nine days of February, fifty-six persons--in three weeks, one hundred and one souls.

ED.      

[TCB 420-429]