THE MILLENNIAL HARBINGER.

No. 12. BETHANY, VIRGINIA: MONDAY, DECEMBER 3, 1832. Vol. III.

I saw another messenger flying through the midst of heaven, having everlasting good news to proclaim to the inhabitants of the earth, even to every nation and tribe, and tongue, and people--saying with a loud voice, Fear God and give glory to him, for the hour of his judgments is come: and worship him who made heaven, and earth, and sea, and the fountains of water.--JOHN.       Great is the truth and mighty above things, and will prevail.

May I be permitted to call you Brethren!

      THAT you and I are brethren, in the full import of your name, must be conceded. The word Baptist, which became a family name, about 275 years ago, as defined by your most elaborate historian, David Benedict, imports no more than this:--"A Baptist is one who holds that a profession of faith, and an immersion in water, are essential to baptism." This single tenet makes a Baptist; and as for any other, it is a sort of common property, held in copartnery by every voluntary association. This single tenet is your badge, your glory, and renown on earth and in heaven. No person will, then question my right to the name, as I have given full proof of my soundness in this your family tenet.

      But by intermarriages with other families, your kindred by affinity goes down to the end of the table; and we have as many sorts of Baptists as there are capital opinions in christendom. Whether our brotherhood will extend any farther than the patronimic above defined, is a question to be tried by some other dictionary than the Bible or Noah Webster's. So numerous are the bonds of union, that the heart of brotherly affection dilates no more on seeing a Baptist, than our humanity glows when we see a man. Adam and Eve have now so many children, that we forget that every man is our brother: and John the Baptist is such a common godfather, that a Baptist can worry and devour a Baptist, with as little contrition as a wolf devours a lamb.

      It may, however, not be amiss to remember that we are Baptists, though of what tribe we may never be able to ascertain. The former being unquestionable, we shall turn our thoughts to the latter.

      Our ancient ancestry cannot now be easily traced, as "it lies hid in the remote depths of antiquity." But, from the best accounts, our blood has run through heretics ever since the Flood! An attempt was made before Luther was born to attaint our whole family by an alliance with the Anabaptists and mad men of Munzer; but, by the zeal [577] and enterprize of some of our progenitors, that bill of attainder never became a law. One of our remote progenitors, who lived about 250,years ago, had six sons. From one of these all we in Virginia have sprung.

      "The first born placed the essence of baptism in the virtue of the person baptized; the second placed it in the form of words pronounced in the administration; the third, in the virtue of the administrator; the fourth, in the consent of the person baptized; the fifth, in dipping; and the sixth, or younger son, in both a profession of faith and an immersion." This was our father, who migrated from the fastnesses of Piedmont into England, and settled for a while in Wales; thence he removed to Cornwall, and married the great grand daughter of John Wickliffe. Their great grand son removed to London about the year 1616, and married a Miss Wightman, whose father was burned for his heresies, and was the last martyr who suffered death for religion in England. They had two sons: the one married a Miss Calvin; and the other, a Miss Arminius; and each of them became the father of a numerous and respectable family. The husband of Miss Arminius, whose name was John Nordin, a man of warm passions and pretty good intellect, raised a very numerous family in England. One of his great grand sons, Robert Nordin, in company with one Thomas White, a first cousin, sailed from London to Virginia in the year 1914. White died on the passage, and Nordin arrived safely in Virginia, settled in Isle of Wight county, at a place called Burely, and soon reared a family from a Miss Puritan, to whom he was betrothed before he left England. Mr. Nordin cleared out two or three farms in the Isle of Wight; but as he died without any male issue of sound understanding, in the year 1725, his widow sent to England for two of his cousins (Casper Mentz and Richard Jones) to manage his farms. Jones removed to Surry county, and married a Miss Mary, the second daughter of Robert Nordin, by whom he had several children; but, his children being sickly, as soon as they were grown they migrated to North Carolina in company with many from the Isle of Wight; and so their farms went to ruin in about forty years.

      Between the years 1743 and 1756, three families from Maryland, of Catholic, Episcopalian, and Presbyterian descent, moved into the counties of Loudon, Rockingham, and Berkley, Va. and intermarrying with the remains of the family just now mentioned, made considerable settlements in these counties.

      About the year 1751 Messrs. James Miller, David Thomas, and John Gano, who had all married into the family of Mr. Particular Election, came from the Philadelphia settlement, seeking alliances for their children in Virginia. Only one match was the result of their tour.

      About this time a very beautiful lady arrived in Philadelphia, from England--a Miss Whitfield, who, after many a courtship, refused to become the wife of any of her Pennsylvania suitors. She was at last importuned by a Mr. Separatist, of the Nordin blood, to whom she gave her hand; but it was never understood that her heart [578] accompanied it. They lived together for about 25 years; and from this union arose: one of the largest families in Virginia.

      This was a very remarkable family, and much addicted to festivity and great social meetings. At these meetings the most declamatory addresses were delivered, and ecstatic swoonings and even epilepsy seized the visitants. The consequence was, that the whole issue became debilitated; and to this day some of their descendants cannot endure, without a fit of swooning or epilepsy, a pathetic address, or even a melancholy or joyful sound, without great excitement.

      We should have mentioned that these settlements were much annoyed by the Indians and Episcopalians for some time before and during the revolutionary war. The insolence of James Ireland, whose first wife was a Separatist, and his second a Miss Regular Baptist, contributed much to these hardships. Some other branches of these families, Lewis and Elijah Craig, John Waller, James Childs, and John Burrows, were also constantly making depredations on the Episcopalian settlements, taking the land from the Indians, and the people from the Episcopalians; and this caused the jails and pillories of the Old Dominion to be put in requisition, for the accommodation of these depredators.

      They pretended to have been called of God, and sent to take the land from the Indians, and the people from the Episcopalians; as Moses and Joshua to take the land of Canaan from the seven nations, and to make the inhabitants tributary to the Jews. For all these pretensions and all this insolence they were made to suffer much, and were repudiated from all decent society. But they endured reproaches and persecution with the enthusiasm of Christians, and for a while grew and increased like the sand upon the sea shore.

      Finally, however, the Indians were driven back, and the Episcopalians lost the sceptre. These families also degenerated in their zeal and efforts; and to consummate the whole, they formed alliances and marriage covenants with both Indians and Episcopalians, and then they became a decent and respectable people, in the eyes of those who had long denounced them as disturbers of the peace and sowers of discord among brethren.

      For the last half century they have passed through various fortunes, and, upon the whole, they have become as genteel casts as any in the commonwealth. They have become wealthy by reason of some very prudent matches of some of their children with the more opulent families of the state. Thus has generated pride and contention, and, in some instances, given rise to family feuds and animosities, of such a fierce and inexorable character, that the parties have less intercourse between themselves than with the children of the tyrants, who once put their fathers in irons and drove them from county to county.

      Whoever wishes to divest this narrative of its allegorical complexion, will do well to read Benedict and Semple's histories of the Virginia Baptists, and Ivimey's and Crosby's histories of the English Baptists.

      The maxims of your fathers, brethren of Virginia, you seem to have forgotten and repudiated; while you have adopted and now practise [579] those of the greatest opponents with whom your fathers had to conflict. Shall I have to remind you, that the course you have recently taken in some of your associations, is directly subversive of all the principles for which the Baptist families contended, and through which they obtained so high a renown in former times?

      Your historian and panegyrist, Mr. Benedict, tells you that the following were leading maxims among the Baptists:--"They cannot live in tyrannical states, and free countries are the only places to seek for them; for their whole public religion is impracticable without freedom." "Classical authority and priestly domination they have ever opposed and abhorred; and the equality of Christians, as such, and the absolute independency of churches, they have most scrupulously maintained." "The distinction between their ministers and brethren is less than in almost any other denomination of Christians; whatever abilities their ministers possess, they reduce them to the capacity of mere teachers; and they consider all, not only at liberty, but moreover bound to exercise, under proper regulations, the gifts they may possess for the edification of their brethren."

      Have not all your distinguished men in England and America disallowed of every species of tyranny, and remonstrated against all formularies, creeds, and systems, but the Holy Scriptures? Have not the members of your community, which are held up to the admiration of posterity, been opposed to all human establishments and to proscriptive tenets on pain of excommunication? Hear your own Robinson and Benedict extol the celebrated Andrew Dudith--"Benedict's History of the Baptists," vol. 1, p. 187:--

      "The greatest man, says Robinson, among the Baptists at the reformation, was the celebrated, the amiable, the incomparable Dudith; a man to be held in everlasting remembrance; much for his rank, more for his abilities and virtue, but most of all for his love of liberty;" and so on. Never, says the same writer, was a finer pen than that of Dudith. "You contend," says he to Beza, "that scripture is a perfect rule of faith and practice. But you are all divided about the sense of scripture, and you have not settled who shall be judge. You have broken off your yoke; allow me to break mine. Having freed yourselves from the tyranny of popish prelates, why do you turn ecclesiastical tyrants yourselves, and treat others with barbarity and cruelty for only doing what you set them an example to do? You contend that your lay-hearers, the magistrates, and not you, are to be blamed; for it is they who banish and burn for heresy. I know you make this excuse; but tell me, have not you instilled such principles into their ears? Have they done any thing more than put in practice the doctrine which you have taught them? Have you not told them how glorious it was to defend the faith? Have you not been the constant panegyrists of such princes as have depopulated whole districts for heresy? Do you not daily teach, that they who appeal from your confessions to scripture ought to be punished by the secular power? It is impossible for you to deny this. Does not all the world know, that you are a set of demagogues, or (to speak more mildly) a [580] sort of tribunes, and that the magistrates do nothing but exhibit in public what you teach in private? You try to justify the banishment of Ochin, and the execution of others, and you seem to wish Poland would follow your example. God forbid! When you talk of your Augsburg confession, and your Helvetic creed, and your unanimity, and your fundamental truths, I keep thinking of the sixth commandment--THOU SHALT NOT KILL. Farewell, most learned and respected Beza. Take what I have said in good part, and continue your friendship for me."

      Would not the change of a few words in this spirited appeal, make it apply to your late councils, anathemas, and decrees of excommunication?

      Were not the Separatists, both in England and Virginia, more popular than the Regulars? and had they not the first establishments in both countries? Did not the Regulars seek and court their communion in both countries, though they differed from each other as much as any who now practise immersion in Virginia differ from one another? Was it the love of principle, which induced the Regulars so long to seek, and so ardently to desire a union with the Separate Baptists?¹ And was not this union hailed with acclamation by all the Regulars in Virginia in the year 1787? And were not these Separates first called Reformers; then, New Lights; and afterwards, Separates, before and after they were immersed? Did not Shubael Stearns, a Baptist of Boston, who joined them, believe in the immediate teachings of the Holy Spirit, and that God often gave evident tokens of his will to them that sought him, independent of any revelation from the Apostles and Prophets? Did not the Separates of New England introduce into Virginia a new mode of preaching, warm addresses, accompanied with strong gestures, and a singular tone of voice? Was it not by the magic influence of this species of preaching in the style of George Fox, that raised Sandy Creek Church in a few months from 16 to 606 members? Did not all these preachers move through the whole country as they were impressed by the Holy Spirit, and make these impressions the guide of all their journeys and travels? Did not the strongest and wildest screams, ecstacies, and epilepsies attend their ministrations? And were not the enchantments of voice the chief cause of their success? Were they not as frantic as the wildest enthusiasts which England or America ever produced?

      Notwithstanding all this, the Regular Baptists courted a union with them; and finally obtained it, though not without much difficulty, because of the unwillingness of the Separates. The Sandy Creek Association of Separates, formed in the year 1758, was addressed by the Ketocton Association in 1759, by letter and delegates, praying for a union. The following strong language is found in their letter, an extract of which is still preserved in Benedict's History, vol. 2, p. 51., "If we are all Christians, all Baptists, all New Lights, why are we divided? Must the little appellative names, Regular and Separate, break the golden band of charity, and set the sons and daughters of [581] Zion at variance? Behold how good and how pleasant it is, for brethren to dwell together in unity!" This proposal for union was rejected by a small majority. But the Sandy Creek Association carrying matters so high as to leave no power in particular churches, and pleading that though complete power be in every church, yet every church can transfer it to the Association; finally split into three, one of which (called Rapidann) embraced all the Separates in Virginia. This division took place in the year 1770. One of the articles of this Association was, "It is unanimously agreed, that this Association has no power or authority to impose any thing upon the churches; but that we act as an advisory council." But in 1773 this Association took it into its head to make an Apostle, and actually ordained Samuel Harris by a unanimous vote to the work of an Apostle! With fasting and prayer, and the imposition of the hands of the whole Association, he was sent forth with full power to set in order the things wanting in all the churches in the state. It is not said whether they authorized him to write any new epistles, or to work miracles. But at all events, he went forth as the Apostle of the Rapidann Association!

      In 1775, the division of this Association on the north side of James River, consisted of 31 churches; and that on the south side, 29 churches--the whole number being 60. At its annual meeting in this year the following question was debated: "Is salvation by Christ made possible for every individual of the human race?" The leaders of the debate, on the affirmative, were Samuel Harris the Apostle, Jeremiah Walker, and John Waller: on the negative the principal debaters were William Murphy, John Williams, and Elijah Craig. The negative side obtained a small majority, though it was confessed the weight of talent and influence was on the affirmative side. After the vote the minority withdrew, and after much consultation sent a letter to the majority; to which the majority responded, and cordially agreed to retain in their fellowship those who differed from them on this important question, involving the whole scheme of redemption. This Association, about the commencement of the revolutionary war, consisted of about 74 churches. For eight years their annual meetings were rather political than religious, being, for the most part, deliberative on ways and means to get rid of the civil grievances under which they labored.

      At the Dover meeting house, in Goochland county, A. D. 1787, all the disputes between the Separates and Regulars were amicably adjusted; for then a committee of the Separates of six Associations met delegates from the Regulars of Ketockton, and finally agreed to walk together.

      That the contrast between the master spirits of the Dover Association of 1832, and those of 1787, may be still more evident to all, we shall just sketch the prominent features of the union of 1787:--

      The Regulars of 1787 objected to the Separates, that they were not sufficiently explicit in their principles, having,, never published nor sanctioned any confession of faith, and that they kept within their [582] communion many who were professed Arminians. The Separates replied that a large majority of them believed as much in their confession of faith as they did themselves; but could not approve of the practice of religious societies "binding themselves too strictly by confessions of faith, seeing there was danger of their finally usurping too high a place: that if there were some among them that leaned too much to the Arminian system, they were generally men of exemplary piety and great usefulness in the Redeemer's kingdom; and they conceived it better to bear with some diversity of opinion in doctrines, than to break with men whose christian deportment rendered them amiable in the estimation of all true lovers of genuine godliness, To exclude such from their communion would be like tearing the limbs from the body."²

      Had the same spirit actuated the council chamber of John Kerr, Eli Ball, Andrew Broaddus & Co. would so many ministers of such standing, have been excluded from the Dover Association? Alas! for the degeneracy of the Virginia Baptists!

      But to return to the union: "After considerable debate as to the propriety of having any confession of faith at all, the report of the committee was received with the following explanation:--

      "To prevent the confession of faith from usurping a tyrannical power over the consciences of any, we do not mean that every person is bound to the strict observance of every thing therein contained; yet that it holds forth the essential truths of the gospel, and that the doctrine of salvation by Christ and free and unmerited grace, ought to be believed by every christian, and maintained by every minister of the gospel. Upon these terms we are united, and desire hereafter that the names Regular and Separate be buried in oblivion; and that from henceforth we shall be known by the name of the United Baptist Churches in Virginia."

      Such was the union of 1787; and now within 45 years, these United Baptist Churches of Virginia have separated from their communion a number of ministers for daring to think differently from them on some matters of doctrine and discipline, holding "salvation by Jesus Christ and the free and unmerited grace of God."

      The present generation of Baptists in Virginia, Kentucky, and Tennessee, are generally the descendants of the first Association of Separate Baptists, first known by the name of the Sandy Creek Association. There have been many intermarriages with Episcopalians, Presbyterians, Methodists, and others within the last forty years. But by one side of the house they are the progeny of the union of 1787. But we must here break off in the midst of our address, before we come directly to the proceedings of the late Dover Association.

      In the mean time, be it remembered, that a society of more heterogeneous elements than the Baptists of 1787 cannot be found in the ecclesiastical chart of christendom. Immersion in water seems to have been the only bond' of union, as well as the differential attribute of the body, for two centuries before that period: for amongst the [583] Baptists in England, Wales, and America, may be found every opinion and practice which obtained amongst the Protestant Paidobaptists, of both the Old World and the New. Persecution kept them humble, and their love of immersion covered all sins of opinion and theory in religion; so much so at least, at the period alluded to, that church fellowship was eagerly sought with those now called heterodox by the progenitors of those who have excommunicated men much more resembling the worthiest of their fathers than those who have excluded them.

EDITOR.

Beloved:

      "WE commend not ourselves again to you, but give you occasion to glory on our behalf; that you may have somewhat to answer them which glory in appearance, and not in heart;--not in reality."

      The reformation for which we plead, is the exhibition of the ancient gospel and law of Christ, as preached and inculcated by the Apostles, and expressly recorded in the New Testament.

      Objection. All professions say so.

      Answer. Do they do so? If, they do, we are all agreed; but if not, that is no reason why we should not do so. And if all do what we propose and urge, whence come our divisions. If all that preach and teach spoke the same things, would not our divisions speedily terminate? And can this ever take place and be maintained till all obey the apostolic injunction, "Preach the word,"--and,--"If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God speak?" Pray how can we do this, but by exhibiting the recorded word as delivered by the Apostles? Have we any authority to preach any thing else? Have we any authority to explain the gospel or law of Christ; much less to add to the propositions either of the law or the gospel, by inculcating any thing as matter of faith or obedience, that is not expressly inculcated as such in the New Testament. We do not, however, question the authority of translating, or of the grammatical exposition of words and phrases,--but, merely, of theological explanation, for the purpose of making these expositions, inferences, and opinions, articles of faith, and terms of communion. Thus new-modelling the christian religion by those additions and alterations, which now distinguish one sect from another.

      Objection. But may not inferences and opinions, formed by just reasoning, be as true as the text? and, if so, ought they not to he received as of equal authority?

      To the latter, we answer, No; and that for the following reasons:--First, because it was not the will of Christ to make the knowledge and belief of these propositions a part of his religion; but upon the belief and obedience of what is expressly recorded as such, did confer upon [584] the believing and obedient all the blessings of his kingdom,--viz. righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit. Second, because it is not the will of Christ to make all moral and religious truth, or every thing that might be fairly deduced from scripture promises, a part of his religion; for were this the case "the world itself could not contain the books that should be written;" as John says of the many other things which Jesus did, which are not written--not recorded. Third, because inferences and opinions are the proper and immediate effects of human reasoning and judgment; and are, therefore, but of human authority; whereas divine testimony and law are the proper and immediate effects of a divine authority. Wherefore, in the belief and obedience of the former, we obey man; but in the belief and obedience of the latter, we obey God, having an immediate respect to his express authority, and that alone. Fourth, because were all deducible inferences from the holy scriptures, or even a distinct apprehension of every thing expressly contained in them, made a part of the Christian religion, where is the man that could be justly entitled to the name of Christian, and where should we find a society of such? Fifth, and lastly, for the best of all reasons, that the belief and obedience of what is expressly and explicitly revealed concerning Christ, his laws, and ordinances, will render the believing and obedient subject perfect;--thoroughly furnished for all good works. Thus are we thrown back again upon the gospel and law of Christ, as delivered by the Apostles and expressly recorded in the New Testament, that we may find rest to our souls; the belief and obedience of which constitute the Christian religion and the Christian character.

      But then, "How can two walk together except they be agreed?" True, unless they be agreed to walk together. But can no two agree to walk together in religious fellowship, unless they think alike in all religious matters? And, if not, where shall we find the two that can walk together? But, perhaps, it will be said, the necessary agreement is only to be understood of things of an essential character. Well, be it so; but by what rule is this to be determined. The difficulty of agreement here, appears to be as insuperable as in the former case. Does not every sect think the things that they have agreed upon, for that purpose, to be quite essential; yet no two sects agree what these ought to be. But they always happen to be what the supreme will and authority of the sect pleases to make them, and not what their intrinsic importance would seem to indicate. For instance, the cutting off a bit of skin of a child eight days old, is quite essential to fellowship in one sect; whilst in another, the aspersion of a few drops of water, accompanied with certain words, is deemed of equal importance. In short, as every religion, true and false, consists of faith and obedience, and is confessedly founded on authority; therefore, the belief and obedience of whatever the respective authors saw cause to put into their respective religions, becomes essential; so that he that offends in one point is guilty of all; and therefore stands exposed to the highest penalty that the author of the religion was pleased to annex to the specified disobedience. Thus it was in [585] the Adamic religion, and thus it was in the Jewish religion, death was the highest penalty annexed to disobedience under either; and was inflicted under both for actions, the intrinsic importance of which was apparently of little moment:--under the former, for eating a bit of fruit; under the latter, for gathering a few sticks, and for touching a chest to prevent it from falling. Hence the dangerous absurdity, the impious presumption of making such distinctions in our holy religion. Whatever the Lord has taught and commanded, is essentially incumbent on us to believe and obey: "For he that believeth not God, hath made him a liar;" and "He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar." Thus, again, are we compelled to fall back on original ground, not only for the sake of christian unity and fellowship; but also for the sake of personal comfort and safety--that we may have a good conscience, and abide under the promise of eternal life. "Blessed are all they that do his commandments, that they may have a right to the tree of life, and enter in through the gates into the city."

      Objection. We want personal reformation, practical and experimental religion enforced, instead of so much declamation against sectarianism.

      Answer. Who can enumerate the evils of sectarianism! But is there no personal reformation in a strict conformity to the faith and practice expressly inculcated upon the disciples of Christ in the New Testament. Is there no practical and experimental religion in the belief and obedience of the gospel and law of Christ, as preached and taught by the Apostles? If not, in what does it consist, and where shall we find it? This puts us in mind of the clamorous outcry of the sectarian religionists in our Lord's time, who had made void the word of God, by their traditions; they stigmatized him a Sabbath-breaker, a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners, as one not sufficiently austere, not addicted to fasting, &c. But he was a reformer.

T. W.

FOR THE MILLENNIAL HARBINGER.

Dear Sir,

      SHOULD you have a little unoccupied paper in your next Harbinger, I wish you to insert what follows, in addition to my reply to an Inquirer. It shall be the last I will trouble you with on that subject:--

      The subscriber has no wish to perpetuate a controversy, which every person of common sense, with divine information in his hands, a nay determine for himself in a few hours. The difference, and the only difference which the subscriber can perceive between a person just entering the water, and rising out of it, consists--1st. That in the prior state, he is unimmersed--in the latter, that he is immersed; and 2dly. That anterior to immersion, however real a disciple he might be, he is not an avowed disciple, as he afterwards is. As to the legal, the intellectual, and moral condition of the immersed, the subscriber [586] considers them as entirely unaffected or changed in the least by his immersion, his legal state having been already changed by his previous faith in Christ, his intellectual state by the reception of divine information, and his moral state by the powerful motives addressed to him in sacred writ. As to what constitutes in the subscriber's judgment a real disciple before as well as after immersion, he has enumerated the particulars very fully in his essay on Matheteuo, and need not repeat them here.

      It no doubt frequently happens that disputes are merely verbal; the subscriber, however, does not consider the controversy between him and an Inquirer as belonging to that class. He thinks that between them there exists a real difference of opinion, and one of some importance. The subscriber's belief, whether correct or incorrect, is, that the single act of immersion affects discipleship, real or pretended, no farther than merely to give it publicity. If previously to immersion a real disciple exists, it announces that real discipleship to the world; but if it exist not, all that immersion can door does do, is to proclaim a pretender, a hypocrite, an impostor to be a real disciple of Jesus Christ, as it did Simon Magus. Further, it is the subscriber's belief, that faith in Jesus Christ, or, in other words, the belief of the testimony which God has given concerning his Son, with the inseparable effects of this faith on the believer's mind and external actions, does constitute its subject anteriorly, as well as posteriorly to immersion, a real disciple, as it did Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea, who certainly were real, although not avowed disciples. Moreover, he thinks that a bare intention, determination, or purpose to become either a Teal or avowed disciple, if such a state of mind can really exist by itself, can constitute neither. The reality of discipleship, anteriorly to immersion, for the existence of which he contends, is a very different and a vastly more substantial thing than a mere intention, purpose, or determination unacted on. With the subscriber a real disciple is a disciple in fact, in truth and verity; as opposed to an avowed disciple, or a disciple in name, as Simon was. In short, the subscriber thinks the office of immersion is to proclaim its subject, whether a real disciple, a true believer, or a mere pretender, a nominal disciple in name.

      The above observations have been offered merely to prevent notions being imputed to the subscriber which he does not entertain, and not to perpetuate controversy, or cram his opinions down the throat of any human being. As to the reception or rejection of his sentiments, the reader is perfectly welcome to dispose of them as he pleases, and abide, of course, the consequences.

PHILALETHES.

      WE do not conceive it necessary at this time to investigate the merits of the difference, if there really be any, between An Inquirer and Philalethes, upon the matters at issue between them; our sentiments upon these subjects, having been already expressed in our periodicals, in the possession of the public. However, for the satisfaction of those who may not have seen these, we would take the [587] liberty of stating, in reference to the above, that the apparent difference, whether verbal or real, between the views of the writer and our declared sentiments, solely respect the consequences of immersion in relation to the immersed, and not the qualifications previously necessary to render him, a suitable subject of said ordinance. Conceding all, then, that Philalethes demands in relation to previous qualifications, legal, intellectual, and moral, as he has defined them; yet, we cannot concede, that the only difference between a person just entering the water, and rising out of it; (that is, between one about to be immersed, and one that is actually immersed,) is, that the former is not immersed, and that the latter is; and that the former is not an avowed disciple, and that the latter is: for if these were the only differences, both the persons, in respect of personal privileges, must and would be perfectly equal; and if so, what profit, what utility is there in immersion--in being an avowed disciple? If no real benefit, no substantial privilege depend upon or accompany the avowal, are we not as well without it? But Philalethes asserts there is none at all, except the mere publicity of the thing; for he adds, "The subscriber's belief," (that is, opinion,) "whether correct or incorrect, is, that the single act of immersion affects discipleship, whether real or pretended, no farther than to give it publicity." If so, in vain were all the solitary and private immersions, administered in the apostolic age, and since; such as the Ethiopian nobleman's in the desert by Philip; the Philippian jailor's by Paul at midnight, &c. for these gave no greater publicity to the discipleship of persons immersed, than the confession of their faith did, previous to their immersion. And should it be even alleged that the privilege being purely external consists in the publicity of the act, the immersed being thereby distinguished to the notice and reception of the brethren; even this must have been completely nullified in the cases alleged, and in all cases from that day to this; yet the Ethiopian nobleman, after his immersion, went on his way rejoicing, not knowing if he should ever see a fellow-disciple upon earth. But if words mean anything, the subscriber at last grants all we plead for; for he says, "The reality of discipleship for which he contends is a very different, and a vastly more substantial thing than a mere intention, purpose, or determination unacted on." It is a determination reduced to practice, then, that "with the subscriber constitutes a real disciple, a disciple in fact, in truth and verity." So we believe and teach, and ever have done, since we first addressed the public upon the sacred subject of religion. But, in the mean time, we must confess we can see neither propriety nor consistency in contrasting the real disciple above described with the avowed disciple, or disciple in name; for the real disciple, who has reduced his intention to practice by acting on it, must surely be a disciple in name, an avowed disciple having made the good confession and acted upon it in his voluntary immersion. But by the writer's reference to Simon the sorcerer, he seems to mean a merely nominal disciple; but who ever contended for the privilege of such a discipleship, as was merely nominal? We must conclude, then, from the definitions the subscriber [588] has given us of real discipleship, and of a real disciple, by his "faith in Jesus Christ; or the belief of the testimony which God has given concerning his Son; with the inseparable effects of this faith on his mind and external actions," which he instances in its having brought him to the water for the purpose of immersion; we say, that, from this view of the matter, there appears no real difference between Philalethes and his friend an Inquirer, or between him and us. For where the truth has been so effectual as to produce the required obedience, which it most evidently has upon the character above described, in bringing him to the water, we cannot in justice entertain any more doubt of the genuineness of his faith, or of the reality of his discipleship in so far, than we are justly authorized to do when we see him emerge from beneath the water. And why? Is it not because of his manifest obedience, the evident effect of his faith in the divine testimony--that thus he shall be saved; because it is written, "He that believes and is immersed shall be saved." And thus he manifests himself a believing and obedient disciple. But was this his character before he manifested his obedience in coming to the water? Certainly not in the judgment of Philalethes; for "he thinks that a bare intention, determination, or purpose to become either a real or avowed disciple, can constitute neither." And so think we. Still, however, we are at a loss how to distinguish between a real and an avowed disciple; seeing that according to scripture the former necessarily implies the latter. For he who will not confess Christ before men, he assures us he will not confess him, before his Father and his holy angels. Therefore, he requires baptism as well as faith to constitute a real disciple; and, therefore, our friend, the subscriber of the above, finds his real disciple in the manifest exercise of obedience, in having come to the water: but he afterwards seems to obscure this, by contrasting Joseph and Nicodemus with avowed disciples. But were they not avowed disciples? Did they not pay the same attention to the body of the crucified Saviour with the other avowed disciples, who followed him from Galilee? Again, are they not recorded as his disciples? And how could this have been, if they had not avowed it by some means sufficiently evident for this purpose? though, from what appears, their avowal was not as public as it ought to have been; but was, to a certain degree, restricted through fear.

      Having in so far, done justice, as we hope, to the avowed sentiments of our friends, apparently at issue upon the subject under consideration, as well as to our own views of the matter; we shall close our remarks at this time with the following observations:--1st. That the Christian institution and its effects are purely divine--are all of God; as really as the creation of the world, and its effects are. 2d. That its professed and immediate end, in this world, is, to save a people from their sins; that is, from the guilt and dominion of sin; that so they may become sons and daughters of the Lord Almighty;--heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ. 3d. That the sole principle of enjoyment, all the blessings of this salvation, during this life, is the faith which Paul describes, Heb. i. 11, by which also the Christian [589] lives, Heb. x. 3b. 3d. That all the means of divine appointment for putting us into the actual possession of this salvation, and keeping us in it, are means of enjoyment:--the salvation itself, in all its benign and blissful effects, being the free gift of God.

      These four propositions, duly considered, would not only obviate the mistakes and difficulties respecting the design of immersion, but also of the whole system of means divinely appointed for the present enjoyment of salvation. For while some consider the use of these means as entitling them to the enjoyment of the proposed and promised blessings; and others speak of them merely as duties expressive of obedience to the divine authority, the performance of which affords only the answer of (what they call) a good conscience; that is, a consciousness of having done their duty; which, in so far, exculpates them from guilt; a third class, and which, we fear, is by far the smallest, viewing the grand subject of salvation according to the above propositions, consider the use of means as neither more nor less than the rational and divinely appointed way for enjoying the salvation of God. Now, if our friend Philalethes' real disciple be of our third class, we could and would assure him, that he possessed a privilege after his immersion, which he did not, and in fact could not possess before, infinitely greater than either of the two he has placed to his account; namely, that in consequence of his immersion, he now belongs to a class or description to which the Lord has expressly and explicitly promised salvation, to which he did not belong before, not then being of the number of immersed believers. Consequently, having now a promise of salvation which he had not before, he can now realize what he could not before, merely for want of testimony. Nevertheless, understanding the great subject of salvation according to the above propositions, he lays no undue, no unreasonable, nor unscriptural stress, either upon his faith, or upon the act of it performed in his immersion; as if his belief and immersion had any procuring or entitling virtue, more than the act of receiving a gift or believing a promise has, when freely exhibited to every one that will receive it; that is, of being merely and simply the means of enjoyment of the good thing freely proposed. Not so, however, the two preceding classes above described. These constitute the two extremes between which the truth lies untouched, whole and entire. The former, using the means for the purpose of entitling them to the proposed or premised favor: the latter, merely for the sake of performing a duty to keep things straight between them and their God,--merely to avoid the painful reflections and fearful apprehensions of a guilty conscience. Having made these observations not so much, if at all, for the sake of our much esteemed correspondents, Philalethes and an Inquirer, of whose intelligence in relation to the contents of the above propositions, and the subjoined description of professing characters, we entertain no doubt: but more especially for the sake of many, whose attention may not have been called to these things; wishing truth, peace, and love to become universally prevalent, we take our leave of the subject. [590]

      ADMIT, says an objector, that your first argument is sound; yet may it not still be true, that faith is of different sorts, or possessed of different natures?

      If, then, there be human and divine faith, as respects subject, object, and author, there is human and divine hope and love as respects subject, object, and author. As respects the person, or subject of faith, if he be human, his faith, hope, love, must be human, or they cannot benefit him; unless man can be advantaged by angelic faith, hope, and love. A faith that is not human, as respects its subject, can save no man.

      But if human apply to the object, or thing believed, or to the author or person who produces it, then such a human faith pertains to human affairs, and must be confined to the present state. And if divine apply to the object or thing believed, or to the author or person who produces it; then such a divine faith leads to divine things, and produces divine effects upon the subject of it.

      If faith mean more or less than the belief of testimony, then hope and love must mean more or less than hope and love; and who but the Pope can tell, how much more or less than the common acceptation is implied in the faith, hope, and love of the New Testament!

      Thus you will send the patrons of mystic faith to the Pope for their illumination, and oblige them to sit at his feet for their edification in the Christian faith.

      "Now," says Paul, "abide faith, hope, love; these three." They are not one, but three. And as they yet abide with us, we must treat them with equal courtesy and respect. If we mystify faith, we must mystify her two sisters: and if we give one of them two or seven natures, we must be as liberal to the other two, for they are all of one family. We regard them all as spiritual, holy, heavenly, and divine, when they have spiritual, holy, heavenly, and divine objects in contemplation; but we regard them as a natural, common, and carnal sisterhood, when they have natural, common, and carnal objects in admiration.

      Your second argument with the mystics, then, is this: Gentlemen, if you mystify one term or principle, you must mystify every other principle and term in the Apostle's doctrine: and who can tell where and when this mystification shall cease--The Pope? Then protest no more.

      "Hope that is seen is not hope; for what a man sees why does he yet hope for."--Paul. This affirms hope to be of the same meaning in Paul's vocabulary as it was in the common dictionaries of that age. So we contend that if any word in the New Testament is to be inquired after, it must be sought for in the dictionary. Common usage deposes as follows:--He that desires and he that expects, and he that hopes, are not always the same person. A [591] desires what he cannot always expect. B expects what he does not always desire. But C desires what he expects, and expects what he desires; and therefore C is said to hope: for when we hope for that which we expect, but see not, then we do with patience wait for it. This is hope, and neither faith nor love.

      Love can be better felt than expressed. There is no controversy about the meaning of this word. We have, however, burthened it with epithets. We have natural lore and spiritual love, or we have carnal love and Christian love. But love is affection mingled with admiration. We have admiration without affection; but we cannot have affection without some degree of admiration. The object characterizes the affection. If a father love a child it is parental love; if a child love a father, it is filial affection; if a husband love his wife, it is conjugal love; and if a Christian love a Christian, it is Christian love.

      Love for Jesus is not the love of an idea, but the love of a person whom we admire with all affection and delight. It is best defined by keeping his commandments. How anyone can love Jesus Christ and not keep his commandments, is too difficult for us to imagine. He himself makes the keeping of his commandments the only correct definition of love to him. Of faith, hope, and love, these are rather the definitions than illustrations. But when any one says to you, that the term faith represents a mystic idea, then tell him that he must also affirm that the terms hope and love, and every other term, represents a mystic idea; and that thus we have no revelation from God at all.

EDITOR.

      WHEN any one says that baptisma means sprinkling or pouring; you, being ignorant of Greek, tell him that, as you cannot decide when and where Doctors disagree, you choose to follow common sense in all doubtful matters. If you are asked how can common sense decide a matter of Greek criticism? your reply will be as follows:--

      Sir, do not all grammarians, linguists, logicians, and lexicographers agree in this point--that if a word be correctly explained or defined, the whole meaning of the word is in the definition; and that it will always make good sense; common sense, and rational sense, (if you please,) to substitute the definition for the word defined? All will acknowledge this who have common sense. But if any one, not having common sense, should hesitate, ask him to explain any word; and then substitute his definition for the term in the places where it occurs, until you have convinced him that every definition will make good sense in the place of the word defined.

      Your antagonist being convinced of this, then you will proceed to apply this supreme and universal law to the definition of baptism. Baptism, says he, is a Greek word, and means to sprinkle or pour. [592] Well, now, we shall try if this makes good sense. Let us begin with Matthew, where the word first occurs: "All Judea and Jerusalem went out to John, and were baptized by him in Jordan;" that is, according to the definition, were sprinkled by him in Jordan, or were poured by him in Jordan. This required a power which John did not possess. To sprinkle water upon a person is easy; but to sprinkle a person in water requires more physical strength than the first Baptist possessed. Mark, it does not say that John baptized Jordan, but baptized the people. To sprinkle or pour Jordan would have been hard indeed--not much more easy than to pour or sprinkle men in it. It is, then, utterly inconceivable how baptism could import sprinkling or pouring, because it was wholly impossible either to pour or sprinkle men in or with Jordan. This will do for a beginning; and if your antagonist is yet unwilling to yield, go through the book to the end of it, and you will find that immersion will make good sense if substituted in all the places where baptisma is found in the Greek; and that neither sprinkle nor pour will make common sense any where.

EDITOR.

      OFTEN were the Baptists called Anabaptists, by their jealous rivals. But they successfully rebutted the calumny, by showing that they never rebaptized any person whom they considered as having been once baptized. Not regarding a sprinkled infant, or adult, as baptized at all, they could not be charged with double baptism, for baptizing such, who afterwards confessed the Lord, and wished to be baptized. Their opponents were, at length, put to shame; they blushed, and called them Anabaptists no longer. Hence, all societies now call those who immerse on confession of the faith, simply, Baptists.

      But in fact, and in the full import of the term, some reforming Methodists have become Anabaptists; and where it may stop, we cannot predict. Some persons have lately been rebaptised by the Radicals of our vicinity. The Methodists do positively teach, that a sprinkled infant is, scripturally baptized and hence, John Wesley had the good sense to say, that no Methodist preacher should immerse, on any account, one who had been sprinkled in infancy by either the Church of England, or the Methodist Episcopal Church. But, in defiance of John Wesley, and of the Apostle Paul, who taught but one baptism, the Radicals are turning Anabaptists: for we have it on testimony that would be credited any where, that one of their preachers is now baptizing, and has baptized, (that is, immersed,) those who were, by the Methodists themselves, once sprinkled "in the name of the Trinity;" and that, too, with the consent of his brethren. Thus, in the rage of proselytism, these new Anabaptists have seceded from John Wesley, and from all other religious communities in Christendom: for, no other community, of which we have read or heard, will baptize a second time those whom they regard as having been once baptized. [593]

      A preacher, the other day, I am told, had one of his own infants sprinkled, who is in the custom of immersing those once sprinkled by his brethren!! But this was done to save his sheep from straying into another fold. What an easy and accommodating system has Methodism, when reformed, recently become! Sir, says the preacher, if you want to be converted, come up to the altar, and I will pray for you. And if you will get religion, I will sprinkle, pour, or immerse you; once, or twice, as you please; if you will only put your name down on the list of Methodism, or keep it there, I will accommodate your taste: for, as for myself, I have no conscience about it. In this age, when "Cheap Goods" are in every advertisement, and almost on every sign, it would be well to advertise for proselytes; and to have a few handbills posted in all the public places,--such as the following:

      'You may get religion, now, cheaper than ever. If you will call at such a church, come up to the altar, be prayed for, and enrolled, you may have all the rest on your own terms--sprinkling, pouring, dipping; once, or even twice, for nothing: and according to your faith, not mine, shall it be.'

      This is in accordance with the facts, at all events; and if it appears rather irreverent, thus to state the matter, let the objector remember, that it is more irreverent to afford an occasion for it: and, that we are warranted in thus sounding the alarm, none, acquainted with the facts before us, will have the temerity to call in question.

EDITOR.

      THREE churches, sending EIGHT delegates, who met to form a new chair for a new Vicar, have had the candor and honesty to publish their proceedings under the following pompous title:--

      "Minutes of the Baptist Convention, held at the Baptist Church in the Forks of Yough: May 25-26, A. D. 1832."

      Such is the title to this affair. Then come the details:--

      "1. In accordance with a resolution, passed by the Redstone Association, at its last annual meeting, and agreeably to previous arrangement among themselves, a number of churches met together for the purpose of preparing a Constitution for a new Association, to be formed of churches located on the north side of the United States' turnpike road, now in connexion with the Redstone Association. And after the delivery of a sermon by Dr. James Estep, the meeting was organized by electing brother John Rush, Moderator, and brother William Shadrach, (previously invited to aid in the council,) Clerk.

      2. The object of the meeting being stated, the delegates present were called upon to present their commissions; when the following churches were represented:--

      Church at Forks of Yough--Represented by James Estep, John Sutton, John Storer, and Nathan Estep.

      Loyalhannah Church--George Hunt and Joseph Johnstone.

      Turkeyfoot Church--John Rush and Abraham Coleburn. [594]

      3. Brethren Estep, Shadrach, and Coleburn, were appointed a committee to draft a Constitution, to be submitted to the Convention to-morrow morning."

      This "brother Shadrach" was no delegate, it seems; but was invited to aid the council, by whom not reported; and thus his name added made "the Baptist Convention" equal to three times three. To these were afterwards added, by special invitation, three spectators; and so it finally amounted to the number of the twelve Apostles.

      The new Constitution, framed by this Convention, as published to the world, is styled, "Constitution of the Monongahela Baptist Association;" the Bill of Rights prefixed to which is the following:--

      "We declare, That all churches are equally free and independent, and have certain indefeasible rights; which are,--receiving, dismissing, censuring, or expelling their own members; tolerating to improve, or licensing to preach, such of their members as appear in their judgment to have gifts and are divinely called to the work of the ministry; and silencing such of their members as may have been tolerated or licensed to preach, if the case may require. And all and every other power and privilege essentially necessary to the free and regular exercise of gospel discipline, and the well being and happiness of the churches respectively; together with every power, and right, and privilege not hereafter mentioned in this Constitution, shall be and remain entire to the churches forever."

      The council of twelve have very generously declared that "the churches are equally free and independent." They had, then, we say, better keep themselves so; for if they adopt this constitution, then have sold their birthright for a mess of pottage. They have also certain "indefeasible rights," amongst which is that of "tolerating to improve, or licensing to preach, such of their members as appear to have gifts, and are divinely called to the work of the ministry." But how any can appear to be "divinely called," or "to have gifts," unless all are "tolerated" to exhibit what they have, is to me a mystery like that of transubstantiation. Again, who gave the churches the "indefeasible right" to "tolerate those divinely called" and sent, is one of the deep things of the Regular Baptist Confession, the bottom of which our vision cannot reach. The "man of sin," we are told by one Paul, exalted himself above God in presuming to "tolerate" those whom God called. Great toleration, indeed! If, those only whom God calls and sends to the work of the ministry are to be "tolerated to improve," the churches now free and independent had better take heed lest they have to "tolerate" something which professes only to "tolerate those divinely called to the work of the ministry," to improve their gifts!!!

      They have another inalienable right declared, which they had better see how they dispose of; that is, the "licensing to preach" those whom God has called to preach. This is surely an important right; for unless they rightly use this right, those whom God has sent will not be permitted to go! and thus they will withstand God! I do not know that ever the Vicar of Christ pretended to more than this; namely, to examine and license those whom God had called and sent to preach his gospel. The Lord sends so many who are not fit, or affords such dubious testimonials, that the churches are bound to take heed lest the work should not be well done! [595]

      Next come the sections of the Constitution of the whole Convention. The two first are chiefly worthy of admiration:--

      "Sect. 1. This Association shall be known by the name of "The Monongahela Baptist Association," and shall always consist of the representatives of the several churches in union with this body, by them duly chosen.

      Sect. 2. This Association hereby receive the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, as the divine and revealed word of God, and as the only infallible rule of faith and practice; and the Regular Baptist Confession of Faith, adopted by the Philadelphia Regular Baptist Association, September 25, A. D. 1742, as generally expressive of the meaning of these Holy Scriptures."

      The Association hereby receives the scriptures. It is better now, than never: though we had hoped, that before this time, they had received the scriptures. But is it hereby only, that is, by this Constitution, that they receive them? Well, it was necessary for them to get some, hand, or instrument, to receive the holy scriptures! By faith, was the old-fashioned way of receiving the scriptures; but, in this age of invention, a Convention and a Constitution are the better means of receiving the scriptures!! They regard them, however, as the only infallible rule; but, they wish to have along with them a fallible rule, also, which is only "generally" expressive of the meaning of the scriptures. This is one of the rights of, the churches, it seems, to have two rules of faith and practice--a fallible, and an infallible rule! But they have mentioned the fallible rule no less than three times, in the seventeen sections of their Constitution, and the infallible rule only once.

      Sections five and eight, fully prove how much more serviceable they intend to make the fallible, than the infallible rule of faith and practice:--

      "Sect. 5. If any church be suspected of departing from the doctrines or discipline; of this Association, as set forth in the Confession of Faith and Book of Discipline adopted by this Association, it shall be competent for any church in the fellowship of this Association to make a representation of such departure to the Association, stating the same in writing, and requesting an investigation. Upon which the Association shall proceed to consider the complaint; and if it shall appear to be well founded, shall make out a copy thereof, and cause it to be delivered, as early as possible, to the church complained of, and appoint the next meeting of the Association for the hearing of the parties."

      "Sect. 8. Churches applying for admission into this Association, shall have their petition signed by their Clerk; their faith and practice as a church, agreeing with the Regular Baptist Confession of Faith aforesaid, they shall be received by the Moderator giving their first mentioned representative the right hand of fellowship."

      Thus the Baptist Convention of eight, becomes twelve; and thus the twelve become Apostles of the Regular Baptist Confession of Faith, by which churches are to be tolerated, received, and excommunicated!!

      And yet, I am told, most of these churches are opposed to the Regular Baptist Confession of Faith: and I do know, that some of this very council are, or were, not long since, opposed to such terms of communion; but that, as they could not get letters of dismission from the Redstone Association without bowing, hat in hand, to the Regular Baptist Confession, they concluded to publish this Constitution, as a [596] lure, to allure the Redstone Regulars to give them honorable letters of dismission; having it in purpose, as soon as they got said honorable dismission, to make a new Constitution, established upon better premises. For our own part, when such compromises are made, and such expedients adopted, to carry a favorite point, by men professing godly sincerity, it so much weakens our confidence in them, that we hesitate in regarding them as sincere in other professions; for, in spite of our charity, we reason thus: If these conscientious Baptists could deliberately publish such professions of attachment to one order of things, for the paltry consideration of the recommendation of William Brownfield & Co. what would they not do for some more popular consideration? It is too small a reward, gentlemen; or rather, you pay too much for letters of dismission. Where is that sterling, unbending integrity, which you preach as the ornament of christian character? Where that attachment to principle which adorned the first preachers of the gospel, and led them like sheep to the slaughter, rather than compromise an article of their belief, or sacrifice a single principle which bound them to the authority of the great Lawgiver?

      But you plead that Paul said, being crafty he "caught the people with guile;" and thus, by guile, you would catch the Redstone Association. Sound interpreters of the Apostle's words! You put into Paul's lips, the words of his enemies! Paul admits not the charge. He asks them: Did he, or Titus, or any one he sent them, take them by guile, or make a gain of them? You dishonor Paul, by attributing to him what his warmest opponents ascribed to him. Paul not being here to speak for himself, I feel myself bound to say, for him, that he never admitted, himself, or any of his associates, to act from such principles. If you are about to be crafty, and catch William Brownfield by guile, you may do so, if you can; but, I pray you, bring not Paul into the plot, for he has no hand in it. You may expect that notice will be taken of your course by your very candid friend, the

EDITOR.

      IT is the wish of many of the disciples and friends of the Reformation, in Virginia, that brother Ainslie be kept, during the ensuing year, constantly in the field, doing the work of an Evangelist; and that he have liberty to devote his time, according to his own views of expediency, in such sections of the country as may most need his labors. The present crisis in Virginia requires some man, mighty in the scriptures, to visit the brethren, and to address the public; especially, as there are so many false representations of the views and designs of the brethren who are devoted to the primitive institutions of christianity. We do hope, that the brethren will not forget, as indeed they do not generally, to be fellow-helpers to the truth, by their contributions to the wants of those who labor all the [597] time in the, word and teaching. The churches around Richmond, who are expected to concur in these measures, may find some brother in Richmond to whom they can forward their contributions, who will have an opportunity of communicating to brother Ainslie at proper intervals. Brother William Bootwright is, it is believed, every way competent to attend on this business; and his devotedness to the cause of truth is such as to warrant the hope of his acceptance of this office, and attention to the duties which the brethren may require him to discharge for them. Will you, brother Campbell, as we have no medium of public communication in Eastern Virginia, lay this matter before the brethren, and request their attention to it, and thus oblige the disciples who wish to co-operate in the good work of the Lord?

STEPHEN.

      The suggestion appears to us every way reasonable, just, and expedient, in the present crisis. If brother Ainslie can be induced to leave his family and devote his whole time to the work of the Lord, the brethren, no doubt, will cheerfully contribute and co-operate, through an agent in Richmond, for his support in the work; and there is none more fitting than William Bootwright, and I think none will more cheerfully attend to it. Brother Ainslie's well-tried faithfulness, experience, and profound knowledge of the oracles of God, together with his extensive acquaintance, eminently qualify him for rendering to the cause of reformation very essential services. For the wise, a single word is enough.

EDITOR.

      I SOMETIMES look over a number of your Harbinger, if it falls in my way; not, I must admit, in the expectation of receiving much light from it, for I am growing old, and the time past must suffice with me for profitless controversy; nor for the purpose of seeing with how much skill or severity you can manage your opponents, or how much confidence you can manifest in your own cause; but as a matter of curiosity, and to learn, if I can, what are the "human opinions" which are made a bond of union or terms of communion, between yourself and those who adopt (or symbolize with you in) your "opinions" You see I am candid. Professing yourself to be a lover of truth, you, of course, will not like me the less, or refuse to listen to me, on that account.

      I wish now to call your attention to something which arrested mine, on page 344 of your Extras, Nos. 4 and 5, dated in August last.

      "Q. 39. What is an authoritative creed?

      "A. An abstract of human opinions concerning the supposed cardinal articles of Christian faith, which summary is made a bond of union, or term of communion.

      "Q. 40. Who has made these creeds? [598]

      "A. Presbyteries, Conferences, Synods, or some individual leader.

      "Q. 41. Which is the oldest creed of human contrivance?

      "A. Perhaps that irreverently and falsely called "the Apostles' Creed."

      "Q. 42. Can you repeat it as received by the Catholic Church?

      "A. I can."--

      And you then give, instead of the creed known as the Apostles, that known as the Nicene! And any one, as unscrupulous in the use of terms, as, with all due respect for your talents and standing, I must say I think you are, might easily retort on you, and say that this is an irreverent and false representation. Most certainly, it is not a true one, and will deceive many, probably, who read your publication, as to a matter of fact, which should never be represented otherwise than as it is. You will, doubtless, see the moral necessity of correcting this statement, and telling the whole truth.

      But garrulity is the privilege of an old man, and as I have began a letter to you, and have yet some room to spare on my paper; I will trouble you a little farther. There are, as you doubtless know, several able works, historical, expository, &c. on what is called, you say, irreverently and falsely the Apostles' Creed. I have some knowledge of some of these works, and really think them worth an attentive perusal. I would especially point out "Pearson on the Creed," as a book from which every lover of the gospel may derive interest and advantage. Pearson, however, was a Bishop of the Church of England; and as truth now-a-days is not truth in the abstract, but truth or falsehood, according to the mouth by which it is spoken, my reference to him and his book must he taken with some grains of allowance. But as I happen to have before me a scarce work, by the famous Lord King, written while he was a Dissenter, and somewhat of (what was then called) a Free-Thinker, I wish to furnish you, and under favor, (if you will print this piece,) your readers, with a few extracts from it. It is titled "The History of the Apostles' Creed;" and in his preface he says that he "hath not contented himself with reading of modern books, or collections made by later writers, but hath himself had immediate recourse to the remaining monuments of the primitive ages of the church, from whence only all learning of this kind can be fetched and derived." My extracts will begin on the 23d page, and as they will extend over several pages, must, of necessity, be somewhat elliptically given. If you have a copy of the work, you can easily verify them. They shall he fairly and truly made:--

      "The authors and composers have, for many ages successively, been esteemed to be the Apostles themselves; from whence it is called the Apostles' Creed. Now, that from the days of the Apostles there hath been used in the church a certain rule or form of faith, not much unlike our present creed, I am so far from denying, that I shall endeavor to prove it in the ensuing discourse, from Tertullian, and others of the most primitive writers: but that the Apostles themselves should be the immediate authors of the creed, in the present form that now it is, and that, from their days it hath, without any variation, been [599] inviolably transmitted down to us by tradition: this is justly questionable, and I doubt not but to evince the contrary," He then mentions some ancient writers who have held this opinion, which he thinks questionable, and then alleges some plain arguments to show that it could not have been prepared by the Apostles, as in that case it would have been alluded to by Luke in his history of their acts, and it would also have been referred to in some of the "innumerable councils and synods amongst the primitive Christians; whereas, no such thing appears, but the contrary thereunto;" and that "if the Apostles had really framed and delivered to their successors this creed, every church would have agreed therein, and there would not have been so many and diverse creeds as we find there were." He then goes on to say, "But though this creed be not of the Apostles' immediate framing, yet it may be truly styled apostolical, not only because it contains the sum of the Apostles' doctrine, but also because the age thereof is so great, that its birth must be fetched from the very apostolic times. It is true, the exact form of the present creed cannot pretend to be so ancient by 400 years, but a form not much different from it was used not long before. Ireneus, the scholar of Polycarp, the disciple of John, repeats a creed not much unlike ours, and assures us that the church dispersed throughout the whole world had received this faith from the Apostles and their disciples; [lib. i. c. 2.] which is also affirmed by Tertullian of one of his creeds, that that rule of faith had been current in the church from the beginning of the gospel: [Advers Praxean, p. 316.] And, which is very observable, although there was so great a diversity of creeds, as that scarce two churches did exactly agree therein, yet the form and substance of every creed was in a great measure the same; so that except there had been from the very plantation of Christianity a form of sound words, or a system of faith delivered by the first planters thereof, it is not easy to conceive how all churches should harmonize, not only in the articles themselves, into which they were baptized; but in a great measure also, in the method and order of them. As for the authors thereof, it cannot be denied but that there were several and many; the creed was neither the work of one man, nor of one day, but during a long tract of time, passed successively through several hands, ere it arrived at its present perfection; the composure of it was gradual, and not instantaneous; the manner whereof I apprehend to have been these two ways: 1. Some of the articles therein were derived from the very days of the Apostles. 2. The others were afterwards added by the primitive Doctors and Bishops, in opposition to gross heresies and errors that sprung up in the church."

      This is as far as I can quote, at present; but, if you have the work, please insert the whole of chap. i. from which these extracts are taken. I have produced enough to show that the creed referred to may, with propriety, and not "irreverently," or "falsely" be called the Apostles', by the testimony of a competent witness, and one inclined to moderate opinions. He expressly says, it may be truly styled apostolical, because it contains the sum of the Apostles' doctrine, and because its birth must be brought from the very apostolic times. [600]

      Let me now make a few brief references to holy scripture, to show that the Apostles' Creed, if not directly drawn from the word of God, yet may be fully sustained by it; and, therefore, cannot, consistently with truth, he called "an abstract of human opinions":

      "I believe in God," Ps. c. 3; Heb. xi. 6--"the Father," Eph. iv. 6; 2 Cor. i. 3--"Almighty," Rev. iv. 8; xi. 17--"Maker of heaven and earth;" Eph. iii. 9--"and in Jesus Christ," John xiv. 1; iv. 26--"his only Son," John iii. 16; Mark xiv. 62--"our Lord:" John xiii. 13; 2 Pet. i. 11--"who was conceived by the Holy Ghost," Matth. i. 20--"born of the Virgin Mary," Luke i. 27; ii. 7, 21--"suffered under Pontius Pilate," Mark xv. 15--"was crucified," Luke xxiii. 33--"Dead and buried:" Mark xv. 37; Luke xxiii. 55--"he descended into hell;" Acts it. 31--"the third day he rose from the dead," Acts x. 40--"he ascended into heaven," Luke xxiv. 51--"and sitteth at the right hand of God, the Father, Almighty:" Mark xvi. 19--"from thence he shall come to judge the quick and dead." Philip iii. 20; Acts x. 42--"I believe in the Holy Ghost," Matth. xxviii. 19--"the holy catholic [universal] church," Eph. v. 25, 27--"the resurrection of saints." Eph. ii. 19; 1 John i. 3--"the forgiveness of sins," Col. i. 14--"the resurrection of the body," I Cor. xv. 42, 44; Philip iii. 21--"and the life everlasting." John xvi. 40.

      You must excuse me, therefore, if I cannot subscribe to, or adopt, your definition of creeds, as including the Apostles', to be an abstract of "human opinions;" nor as being a human contrivance, any farther than the merely bringing together and arranging, for the sake of compression, in a few brief sentences, doctrines plainly declared on the pages of scripture; and nearly, if not wholly, in the very language of scripture itself. I must, moreover, be allowed to think, that you have indulged yourself, in the above quoted questions and answers, in a tone altogether too authoritative and contemptuous, and not savoring enough of that humility and brotherly kindness which are, indeed, scriptural characteristics of the christian. There is far too much, also in your writings generally, of an ex cathedra style. You deal your censures much too indiscriminately; and, as if it was a well understood and settled point, that you, of all men living, have just views, a clear head, and an understanding heart; in short, as if you were, like the Roman Pope, infallible: which, you certainly are not, and are not like to be. You dwell too much in a bustle. Commune more with your own heart; learn to bear with other men's opinions, and to believe that they actually have power's of mind, and of heart; are capable of as pure motives, and are quite as likely to be actuated by them, as yourself.

      Now, friend C. if you like plain dealing as well as you profess to, and are as ready to listen as to lecture, to be advised as to censure and condemn, you will publish this letter in your Harbinger. Accordingly, I shall look for it in your next number, I rather fear, however, that I shall not be allowed to see it in print. My estimate of your true character will be made up by the result; and you may then, possibly, hear from me again.

BARNABAS. [601]

MY GOOD SIR:--

      OLD MEN, to which class you profess to belong, are sometimes in a captious mood; and in that mood are apt to say and do that, which in their better frames of mind and feelings, often gives them pain. It is not for me to explain to you the feelings which prompted the preceding address, which you see I have had the moral courage to lay before my readers. But, in the fulness of your devotion to ancient creeds, especially that called the Apostles', you have done me some injustice, without, perhaps, intending it. I am not guilty of the charge you so unceremoniously impute to me, of ascribing to the Apostles the Nicene Creed. This I have not done. It is true, l have given the Nicene Creed; but do not give it as the Apostles' Creed.

      A little more attention to the 42d question, would have prevented this imputation. The question is:--

      "Can you repeat it, as received by the Catholic church?"

      In answering this question, the Nicene Creed is given. But then, the question is, Does not the Catholic church consider the Nicene Creed as much the Apostles' Creed, as you consider the Apostles' Creed to be the work of the twelve Apostles? You presume not to say that the Apostles so formed and arranged it, but that the doctrine which they taught justifies every word of it. So think the Catholics that the Nicene Creed is only an enlarged edition of the Apostles' Creed, and that every sentiment in it is contained in the Apostles' Creed.

      Had I called that creed the Apostles' Creed, and not the Apostles' Creed as received by the Catholic church, I should have been guilty of a in is representation, and, you might have had some ground of censure. The Apostles' Creed, as received by the Catholics, was presented in the form you find it in said Extra, for the purpose of more clearly exposing its unfounded pretensions to be the work of the Apostles.

      But, as you define the word Apostles, I have no objection to say, that the facts stated in said creed, are all sustained by the Apostles. It reads thus, as received by the church of England:--

      I believe in God, the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven and Earth. And in Jesus Christ, his only Son, our Lord: who was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried; he descended into hell; the third day he rose from the dead; be ascended into heaven, and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty: from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead. I believe in the Holy Ghost; the holy catholic church; the communion of saints; the forgiveness of sins; the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. Amen.

      If this he a correct version of it, taken from the common prayer book published in Hartford, 1826, I can say, ex animo, that I believe every word of it. Because it is not, like all modern creeds, a synopsis of opinions, but a brief narrative of facts, and of all the great gospel facts. [602]

      That it is of great antiquity, I never doubted. Its simplicity, and freedom from abstraction, are internal evidences that it is ancient, beyond all other human creeds; and it is proof positive that the word belief, or the word faith, was understood, at the time of its formation, as I have labored to make all my readers understand it. Then, the belief of facts well attested, constituted faith. I have no evidence that ever the Apostles drafted a summary, and therefore no faith in any creed, as that of the Apostles; but, that the Apostles' doctrine authorizes every proposition, or statement of fact, in this creed, I am fully persuaded. I am, indeed, glad that you have called my attention to it again, because it so well sustains all that I have written on the subject of faith, and the simplicity of the views of the earliest christians.

      I trust it will be deemed superfluous for me to evince to you how far we moderns have apostatized from ancient simplicity, when you see of how little account the creed which, in one sense, you call the Apostles', is in the estimation of all sects. Not one of them thinks it sufficient as a term of communion, for it scarcely makes a hundredth part of the volume which exhibits the bonds of union and communion among even the Episcopalians, who so often repeat it.

      As to the lecture which you have the goodness to tender me, it is such as every honest man will present to himself. Whatever the motives may have been which prompted you to give it, so far as it is apposite, it is worthy of attention. Our readers will judge how far you have reason to represent me as needing such an exhortation. If, however, I have been too authoritative in my style, or too censorious of others, it is not because I think other men have not heads, nor hearts, but it is because many of them seem to give neither of them fair play; apparently allowing other considerations than the arguments of the Saviour and his Apostles, to influence their decision.

      There never was a reformer, or one who simply preached reformation to sinners, that might not have been exhorted by any sinner whom he addressed, as you exhort me. Many an irreclaimable sinner has counselled his exhorter to take more heed' to himself, and to allow that other people had virtues mingled with their foibles, which made them as acceptable as himself. Far be it, however, from me, to insinuate that you are of that class. But, sir, I regard it as neither incompatible with humility, benevolence, nor christian love, to speak with confidence, when we feel it; for speaking in the subjunctive, or conditional mood, is wholly incompatible with the pretensions of any man who, like you or me, assumes to be a teacher of others.

      It is not human opinions which we propose as the bond of union, unless you say that facts, and testimony, and faith, are all mere opinions. I have, however, long since, decided never to argue with the man who tells me that the sun, and moon, and stars, have no existence, save in the opinions of men; or, that the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus, are opinions, as much as the doctrine of "original sin," and "total depravity," in the Calvinian or Arminian acceptation of these phrases. [603]

      Now, my good sir, give me the same proof of your sincerity, that I have attempted to give you of mine.

	Yours,
EDITOR

      THE Pope and his angels preached from this text half a century while Luther, Zuingle, Melancthon, &c. were exposing the filthiness of the Mother of Harlots. As Luther gave the Pope no quarters, he wreaked his vengeance on the Reformers, denouncing them as heretics, schismatics, sowers of discord among brethren, haughty, self-willed, and contumacious dignitaries.

      He learned that lesson from his predecessors, who denounced the Messiah and his Apostles by similar arguments. Jesus was not a good man, for he made divisions among the people; and the Apostles were heresiarchs, for they turned the world upside down.

      Elijah, too, was a disturber of the peace of Israel; and Daniel greatly marred the harmony of the devout fraternity who paid court to Nebuchadnezzar. In short, from the time that Moses caused divisions in the kingdom of Pharaoh, down to the last Dover Association, this text, "Mark and avoid them that cause divisions," has never been unseasonable amongst the opponents of reform and of change; for as there can be no reformation without change--and as all who preach reformation preach a change, the consequence must be, that those who will not change, must, to justify themselves, denounce the reformers; and no text does better than this--"Mark them who cause divisions, and avoid them."

EDITOR.

FOR THE MILLENNIAL HARBINGER.

      "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit."

Common translation of John iii. 8.

      THE popular exposition of this passage of scripture, so far as we have been able to learn it, is, that the comparison here is between the wind in its effects, and the Holy Spirit in its effects, on the regenerated. As the wind blows where it pleases, so does the Holy Spirit. How is this made out? By the insertion of two supplements, it and with--"So it is with every one that is born of the Spirit." As we cannot tell whence the wind comes, and whither it goes; so neither can the subjects of it tell whence the Holy Spirit comes, how it operates, and whither it goes. It operates alike sovereignly and mysteriously. How lame and blind all this!

      In order to come at the TRUTH, let it be premised--

      1. We have but one word in the Greek language for wind and spirit, viz. pneuma. [604]

      2. An important rule of interpretation is, that "when any word or expression is ambiguous, and may, consistently with common use, be taken in different senses, it must be taken in that sense, which is agreeable to the subject of which the writer was treating;" consequently, the meaning of pneuma, and its proper translation into English, must always be determined by the connexion in which it stands.

      3. The subject of discourse between the Saviour and Nicodemus was not wind, but spirit. PNEUMA is four times rendered in this connexion spirit. It is so rendered in the predicate of the passage under consideration: but only in the subject rendered wind.

      Therefore, if to be born again, is to be born, not of wind, but of Spirit--if that which is, born of the Spirit is Spirit, and not wind; then must the Saviour's words, verse 8. (John iii.) be rendered--

      The Spirit breathes where it pleases, and you hear the report of it; but know not whence it comes and whither it goes: so is every person who is born of the Spirit.

      Now for the meaning of this:--

      The comparison is continued from the 6th verse between the begetter and the begotten--between the Holy Spirit and the person begotten or born of it. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." An identity of nature being here declared; an identity in the aspect and effect of their influences is declared in the sentence under consideration. "You hear the report of it"--the sound or rumor of its operations. (That the Spirit operates, and so operates as to effect an important change in all who "enter into the kingdom of God," being born of Spirit, had been asserted just before--"Except a man be born again, he cannot see (discern) the kingdom (or reign) of God.") "So is every one who is born of the Spirit"--So is he to you, Nicodemus, and to all like you, out of the kingdom, who have not submitted to the government of Messiah the Prince of Peace. As you know not whence the Spirit of God comes, and whither it goes; alike ignorant are you of the subject of divine influence. You discern him not. An entire stranger are you to the new principles, views, and feelings, by which he is actuated.

PHILOLOGUS.

      THE following is the annunciation of a new sect of reformers in the medical world. We sympathize with all reformers, and wish them all prosperity, so far as they are reformers. The things that can be shaken seem destined to be overthrown, that the things which cannot be shaken may remain.

      The paper (of which this is No. 1.) is published by John Stapleton. Cincinnati, O. on a half sheet, twice-a-month, at $1,25 per annum.

      THIS is a reforming age, and the question of reform has agitated both the Old and the New Worlds, from pole to pole. In England, France, and Ireland--in Germany, and in the north--and even among the disciples of Mahomet, in Africa, and Asia--and lastly, in the Americas the spirit of regeneration has [605] pervaded all these communities in their several political, civil, and ecclesiastical relations.

      "We'll try conclusions with these Janizaries;" and the reforming Mahmoud, with the most conclusive of all arguments, convinced them of corruption by blowing them from earth to ------ with powder and ball. "Convene the Belgians" was the conventional degree, and let them decide upon the question of Belgium, a department of France, or an independent republic; "the ayes have it--the noes lose it." The people divide--few were for it, but numbers for independence. The troops were in attendance to maintain the freedom of election! Conviction flashed on the minds of the few, the enlightened few; but the eloquence of the orators in the interest of the French had failed to influence the votes of the independents. "Let the Ayes go to the right, and the Noes to the left. Soldiers, do your duty; we'll try conclusions with these rebels!" A platoon of musketry advanced the most convincing of all arguments--namely, a knock-down one, and the meeting at Mons became a beacon to future assemblies, in which the original question was afterwards carried nemine contradicente.

      Such are the argumenta ad homines of despots; but such are not the principles upon which we would act. This is an age in which mind only can rule the world, and when the impudent pretensions of ignorance are sure to be unmasked. The Ohio Medical Reformer will claim support on no other grounds than those of the talent it may embody, and the spirit of vigor, enterprize, candor, and independence with which it may be conducted. It will endeavor to disseminate sound and useful knowledge; it will endeavor to give its readers credit for good understandings and correct taste; and not fill up its pages, as is too often the case, with mere chit-chat and common-place extracts from ephemeral publications. Partyism we disclaim; our eye will he single; justice shall be as evenly balanced between all as the frailty of poor human nature will permit; and we shall pursue our course unfettered and unshackled by preconceived notions, prejudices, or opinions.

      There is much to be done. It is confessed by the most enlightened physicians of our day, both in Ohio and other states, that the profession is far behind the age. Society demands the advance of medical science, and that practitioners should be qualified for its skilful and efficient application. The practice of medicine is notoriously and confessedly empirical in a majority of instances--nostrums for symptoms are sought for, rather than remedial measures founded on a knowledge of physiological and pathological phenomena. In this respect reform is loudly demanded by the nature of things. We are anxious to see the profession raised to its proper rank among the social institutions of the country. We believe, therefore, that a temperate and firm support of the cause of reform will eventually effect the desired revolution; which will have for its consequences, a better understanding among the members of the profession generally--an elevation of their character in rank and consideration--an improved state of medical science, which will become of increased value to society, and no longer open to the pertinent suspicion of being only of questionable utility--after all deductions are made for the results of the present acknowledged imperfect system of medical education, and the till very recently imperfect administration of those institutions founded for the advantage of true science and the relief of mankind.

      Here ends our belief, consisting, we believe, of nothing but self-evident propositions. Now for a more particular description of our plan:

      When Æsop, with other slaves, was exposed for sale, Xanthus, their purchaser, inquired their respective capabilities, and received such satisfactory responses from the companions in captivity of the fabulist, that when the deformed philosopher was bidden to state what he was equal to, he answered, "Nothing: for my comrades, being, as they say, able to do every thing, have left me nothing to do." Do our readers perceive the parallel between us and the Phrygian? Has not the prospectus of every medical journal left us in a similar situation? Whether any employment does remain for us must be inferred [606] from our attempt; and from our appearance, whether we are able to do it. If we succeed, (and wherefore should we not?) it shall not be owing to the indulgence of the public, but to our own deserts.

      We have no aversion to any creed or country; and it will be our uniform endeavor to maintain and distribute universal justice, irrespective of names or odious appellatives, which are, for the most part, nothing more than bugbears with which to scare the ignorant. We have ourselves learned to love truth; and if, in diabolism, there were an atom of it to be found, we would extract it, as the industrious bee does the mellifluous juice from the most unlikely flowers. We shall be well understood when we describe ourselves as strongly resembling that traveller, who, upon being asked which party he was for--"black mutton or white mutton?" replied, "he did not care which so long as it was tender!" We disavow that moderation, which, under the guise of candor and liberality, conceals the grossest partiality, and the silliest insipidity. The strictures of the Ohio Medical Reformer will be severe should occasion require; this severity, however, will be always tempered with the most perfect good humor, and if the cap fit rather tightly, let the wearer remember that the only way to ease it will be to remove the cause. Commendation will then succeed condemnation; and although no further reparation will be made, the repentant prodigal will be applauded for the ingenuousness of his repentance. Our motto in these cases will be that of Ben Johnson in his comedy of Volpone:

All gall and copper as from his ink he draineth, Only a little salt remaineth.

      Our pages will be open to the communications of all; but, while we say this, be it remembered, that we hold ourselves responsible for the contents of none but our own. The leading article is the Editor's, and whatever is therein advanced he pledges himself to maintain. Any disparity of opinions between communicants and ourselves will be no ground of exclusion. Our readers will see that the sentiments of correspondents are not expected to (indeed they cannot at all times) be squared precisely with our own. One of our principles is, audi alteram partem; and if any feel themselves aggrieved, we will give as ready an insertion to their replies as shall have been afforded to the parties of whom they may think they have cause to complain. Another of our principles is, Let truth, justice, and common sense prevail--and by this arbitration alone all disputes ought to be decided.

      Lastly, although we freely invite the communications of the practical, literary, and scientific part of the public, let it never be forgotten that the only passport to the columns of the Ohio Medical Reformer is usefulness and ability in the article, and integrity in the writer.

      "A man of a good soul is a free speaker, and a speaker of truth."--Aristotle.

      WE can only, in the present number, give a few very brief extracts:--

      I have just returned from a four day meeting of the disciples at Liberty Meeting, Smith county, where we had very comfortable times. The brethren appeared to enjoy themselves as much as on any occasion that I have seen for a long time. We immersed 13, and two others were prevented only by the want of a change of raiment.

      A Methodist teacher, after hearing us, stated to one of our preachers, that he designed, in future, to immerse all who joined his church, "if he could prevail on them to do so." ( Why make his obedience depend on the will of men? And why not give the people a proof of the sincerity of his profession, by being buried with' Christ in immersion?) In our town we have got 950 dollars subscribed for a meeting house. Though much opposed by our sectarian neighbors, and weak, we are still growing in strength.--Thomas Rucker, jun. Murfreesborough, Ten. [607]

      We have had two four day meetings, at which there were 20 added to the Lord. We are much persecuted by the sects. [It is very good for you, if you bear it and use it like christians.] I lately had a meeting in Athens, McMinn county, Tennessee. The Rev. Mr. Pope, a Presbyterian preacher, attended. He asked leave to preach first. I gave place to him. He denounced me and all with whom I fellowshipped, as Arians and heretics of the deepest shade; and, when he had finished his discourse, he dismissed the congregation, charging his hearers not to bear me. He walked out, followed by all his partizans except two. The most respectable part of the congregation kept their seats, while I addressed them, apparently much to their satisfaction. This outrage on moral feeling has caused much excitement here.--C. W. K. Welsh.

      Our three day meeting in this neighborhood, at Salem meeting house, closed yesterday evening. We had truly a refreshing season. There were, I think, between 150 and 200 communicants. There was much love and zeal manifested by the brethren. Eight obeyed the gospel, and there was much interest manifested generally. We had with us, from Tennessee, a number of the brethren; among whom were Craig, Norvel, and A. G. Ewing.--J. B. Radford, Christian county, Ky.

      The Lord has visited us, within a few weeks, in mercy, instead of displeasure. We expected the pestilence that walks in darkness, and that has entered many of the towns along the river, and through the country; but the Lord has spared us. And not only spared our lives, but, within fifteen days, 17 willing converts have made a public profession of their attachment to the Lord Jesus, by being buried with him in baptism; and, we believe, they have arisen to a newness of life. May our dear Lord and Master still carry on his work amongst us. The word of God is making rapid progress in this part of the country; and all sects and denominations are beginning to believe that it means what it says, and says what it means. The plain, simple exhibition of the word, seems to have more force on the minds of the people, than all the sermons that can be preached. There is one thing that should be well attended to by those that profess to be on the side of Reform--not only to talk about it, and to preach it, but, to live it.--Seth Woodruff, Jefferson county, Indiana.

      The cause of Reformation is progressing rapidly in our little village. Our church consisted of about 30: we now number 66. We are under the ministry of brother P. S. Fall; but we have occasional visits from brethren Morton, Creath, and Smith.--G. W. Nuckols, Shelbyville, Ky.

      I expect you have heard that the Long Run Association, at its last annual meeting, which was held on the first Friday in September last; counted five of her churches unworthy of her fellowship--because they would not agree to support the Philadelphia Confession of Faith. These churches ate known by the names of Bear Grass, Chinoweth's Run, Herod's Creek, Floyd's Fork, and South Long Run. In each of these churches there were parts or small fractions that were received by the Association as loyal subjects of the Creed. I once intended to have given you a full account of the proceedings of that body for two or three years past; but it is so much of the same complexion with those you have so often noticed, that I now think it useless. Brother Z. Carpenter, who is of good report as an intelligent godly man, and a member of the Association for upwards of twenty years, has suffered much in feeling and character by their ungodly course. He has determined to publish a history of their proceedings. We have had several union meetings, at which much love and christian feeling were manifested. The Herods creek church, of which I am a member, had a few of those old Baptists, (as they are called,) who kept the church in confusion for near two years; but, a separation having taken place in August last, (of about 17 members out of 200,) we are beginning now to exhibit our true character, and to progress in the Reformation. We have immersed for the remission of sins, in the bounds of my labors, within [608] two months past, about 80. I have, in four weeks, baptized 61. A visit from brother William Morton, in the last month, has much refreshed and strengthened the disciples, and been the means of bringing many into the kingdom. Among those who have been immersed, there are many of our most respectable citizens, male and female, from the age of thirteen to sixty; and also some from the different sects in our vicinity. I have had the unspeakable pleasure to immerse my oldest son, now in his twentieth year, and little daughter, thirteen years old. The elder brethren express much concern for the young disciples, that they may go on to know the Lord, and abound in every good work.--B. Allen, Jefferson county Ky.

      To these conversions, for which we thank the Lord, we shall add a specimen of a different sort. The Dover spirit has fallen in a double portion upon the thirteen Calvinists in Fredericksburg:--

      Calvinism runs high here. We had a few members in the church who say they are Calvinists, and opposed to Campbellism, and have been trying to establish that ism on myself and some others for upwards of six months. Not being able to effect their wishes, on Saturday night last they separated themselves from us, being 13 in number; and they say they are the church, and charge the others of departing from the faith; and proceeded to excommunicate us without informing us that we were to be tried, or without our knowledge in any respect, they having previously clandestinely got the key from the sexton and book from the clerk. I hope some of the brethren will give a full statement of all the facts; and certainly no one will any longer oppose reformation, at least where they have Calvinism.

      Daniel Davis on Sunday morning took possession of the pulpit, and refused to let brother Adams come into it. We got a warrant and took him before the Mayor for taking possession of the pulpit to the disturbance of the congregation. The Mayor excused him upon the ground that he thought he had a right to the pulpit; and Davis has sued me for trespass in the case. Where the scene is to end I cannot tell.

      I think you ought to have published so much of my last letter to you, at least, as went to correct the misrepresentations of the Editor of the Religious Herald, respecting myself, in the paper, if I mistake not, under date of the 25th of May last, as I have lately understood it done me much injury among my friends.

	Yours in the gospel,
ABNER LEITCH

      The ancient gospel, without the ancient order of things; or, the ancient order of things, without the ancient gospel, cannot prosper. They constitute one divine system of remission, holiness, and happiness. What God has joined together, let all Christians keep together.--Ed.

      Notices of the progress of Reform are pouring in from all quarters. The following are from the Christian Messenger of last month:--

      A brother from Ohio complains that the public teachers in his section baptize many whom they neglect to build up in the order and faith of the gospel. This is truly a neglect, and needs a speedy reform.--The Redeemer's kingdom in this section of country is prosperous, and increasing in numbers, in the midst of opposition, and stands fast in the faith and hope of the gospel.--O. E. Bryant, Dover N. J.--In the southwest corner of Darke county, within the last three months 50 have professed the faith. At a four day meeting near Greenville, third Lord's day of September, 41 were immersed, and many more are expected shortly to obey. On the second Lord's day of September, 12 more, at New Meeting House, northeast of Preble county. At the same time, five or six in Union, Indiana. On the fourth Lord's day, at [609] Ludlow's creek, 15. The prospects are very good.--Elder Levi Purviance, New Paris O.--The ancient gospel is gaining ground in Canada. The people begin to inquire for truth. I have recently baptized 13, for the remission of sins. I meet with great opposition from the different sects.--Elder D. Wiers, Canada.--At the mouth of Flower creek, Pendleton county, Ky. on the 15th and 16th of October, 22 were immersed, and 29 added to the church.--I have lately returned from a tour of three weeks' preaching, with brethren Read and Davis. We baptized 22. The congregations are doing well: there is great inquiry after truth.--Elder J. G. Mitchell, Rutland O.--Brother S. A. Baker, of Williamsport Tenn. writes that at a meeting there about the 10th of August, 28 were immersed.--Brother William B. Douglas, of Callaway county, Mo. writes that five were immersed, on the last Lord's day of August, in that section.--Brother John Powel, of Clermont county, O. October 24th, writes that at Salem, third Lord's day of September, 11 confessed the Lord, and 7 were immersed. At Five-mile, first Lord's day of October, at a four day meeting, 53 confessed the Lord, and 47 were immersed. Never before did we witness such solemnity and general engagedness among the people.--Brother J. G. Ellis has just informed us, that in a very short time he has baptized 20, at, and near Daniel's Turnpike gate; and three Baptists were also united to the church.--Brother J. Challen, of Cincinnati, has very lately immersed about 15.--Brother J. Smith, the Evangelist, has baptized a considerable number, in a week or two past, south of Kentucky river, and at Versailles.--The senior Editor has just returned from a tour of six weeks through the west. He can safely say, that the ancient gospel is prevailing beyond the most sanguine anticipation. The ears of thousands are open to hear; and, like the Corinthians, many, by hearing, believe and are baptized. We had very interesting meetings in Lawrenceville, Jacksonville, Carrolton, Rushville, Springfield, &c. of Illinois. In Jacksonville we witnessed a happy union of the two societies, Christians and Reformers, in one body, or church. This church consists of 80 members. There are many more, who were not present. In Jersey prairie, about 50, of these two societies, would unite on the same foundation the next Lord's day following. In Carrolton the same union was to take place, at the same time. We expect to hear good tidings of Carrolton, in a few days, from brother Josephus Hewitt. We have since heard that he has baptized 30 persons there at one meeting. While we were in that country, brothers Hewitt, Osborn, Hughs, and myself, immersed about 20. We think a glorious ingathering of souls into the kingdom has commenced in that country. "The harvest is great, but the laborers are few." A few faithful, spiritual evangelists, who understand the gospel, and who are able to teach it, would be a great blessing to that country. There is a mighty struggle, among the sectarians, to possess themselves of the vale of the Mississippi. The means used are great, but as yet inefficient. Thousands have their eyes open to the struggle, and smile contempt upon it. Let us trust in the Lord, and do our duty; and we indulge in the pleasing hope, that our king will possess himself of the pleasant vale of the Mississippi, with all its multitudes of the human family.--B. W. Stone, Editor.--I have just returned from Newcastle, Shelbyville, and several places in Franklin county; in all of which the cause of apostolic faith and practice seems to be gaining ground, beyond the expectation of its friends. I was accompanied by brethren William Morton, and Jacob Creath, sen. to Newcastle, where we had a four day meeting, during which 18 were added to the congregation there, most of whom professed faith at the meeting. From thence brother Morton and myself went to Shelbyville, where we remained two days: seven were added to the society; nearly all by profession of faith and baptism. On the evening of the second day, I left brother Morton, and came alone to South-benson, where I immersed two upon profession of faith, and one was added to the church who had belonged to some other society. From this place I came to the Fork Meeting House: preached three days in succession. On Lord's day, brother Fall was with me; five were added to the congregation-- [610] one I immersed on Lord's day morning. Thus, you see, 33 were added to the disciples during the journey. May the good cause continue to prosper.--Thomas Smith, Lexington Ky.

      THE following plain language was some time since addressed to the Pope, by the four Italian Legations of the Papal territory. When the subjects of the Pope can treat him with so little ceremony, how altered must the times be from those days in which kings held their stirrups and prostrated themselves on their knees before him! The proclamation of the four Legations of the Papal kingdom, here presented to the reader, is copied from the London Morning Herald, and thus speaks to "His Holiness the Pope:"

[Reformer.]

      "You have promised to the people of these provinces just laws. You have published several; but, far from tending to public utility, they have all been in favor of your absolutism. Show therefore now, if, possible, the same good faith as the people themselves--leave off your intrigues--cease to foment civil war--annul the barbarous instructions given to the Bishops and Curates; they ill accord with the Gospel--listen to the Deputies who will soon make their appearance before you--grant them all they will ask of you, for your people wish for nothing but just laws, which they have a right to obtain; but if you dare to attempt a coup-de-main against them, while they are imploring you as supplicants, they swear in their despair to face every danger with arms in their hands, rather than submit to be the slaves and victims of your frightful despotism. In the fatal position in which you have placed them, the whole world will be convinced that you refuse to listen to the prayers of faithful subjects, who ask only just laws. May God protect the people!"

      THE bodies of men, next to their souls, interest the philanthropist. There are various systems of physics, as of metaphysics. The cholera has excited much attention and feeling through the world, and many are the theories and the modes of cures. We are no adepts in such matters; but we must hear both sides of every question. The following is from a brother in Guilford, Connecticut. It may save life to make it known:--

      I received a letter a short time since, from brother F. W. Emmons, and have thought best to answer his inquiries respecting the best mode of treatment in the Cholera, to you; having had a touch of the complaint myself, and seen many others, and having knowledge of a mode of treatment which has in no case failed, when seasonably applied; but has proved efficacious in more than one hundred cases, in a circumference of 14 miles in this vicinity. But five deaths occurred in the whole, and three of those had no medical application; and the others applied too late. The following is the prescription, to which is annexed the mode of treatment:-- [611]

      Prescription--The Anti-Cholera Pill Made as follows:--

      Take finely powdered Rhubarb, half an ounce; crude Quicksilver, one ounce; add water sufficient to make the Rhubarb into a paste; then rub in an iron or marble mortar until the globules disappear, or say, at least one hour; then add half an ounce of honey, and as much flour as will make the mass of suitable consistency for pills.

      Dose--Common sized pill once in four hours, with a small pill of opium at the same time. Continue till the relax, or diarrhoea, subsides; then once in 6 hours for two or three days after. If the bowels become confined, let them remain four or five days; then move them with the following injection:--Warm water, one pint; milk, two spoonfuls; tincture camphor, one table spoonful. If this does not move in twelve hours, add to it one spoonful castor oil, and repeat.

      The patient must take his bed, and keep there from the time he is taken till the disorder is removed, and on no consideration walk about or work.

      Apply mustard paste, wet with brandy, to stomach and bowels. Use very little drink. If the stomach is sick, take a tea spoonful of brandy, or use a little soda water, (the effervescing mixture.) Use carbon-ammonia, camphor, essence of peppermint, pennyroyal tea, &c. in small quantities.

      Nourishment--Bread water, milk porridge, chocolate, rice, toasted bread, &c.

      The above mode of treatment and medicine has proved more beneficial than any other in this country which has come to my knowledge, and I have been diligent in my inquiries; in fact, I think I run no risk in saying that the most perfect reliance may be placed on this mode of treatment, as far as cause and effect are dependent on each other: it is as certain as water runs down bill, or smoke ascends. The wind may carry water to the clouds, or smoke to the ground; but I think this disorder more under the control of medicine, in temperate habits, than almost any other complaint. You may think me sanguine: but try it and see.

A. B. GOLDSMITH.

Dear Sir,

      AVAILING myself of your candid indulgence, I proceed to notice some other things, which, in the course of your reforming strictures, you seem to have carried too far--to have transgressed the bounds of just discrimination. You have levelled pretty unsparingly at a hireling ministry, and at what are called the benevolent institutions of the day; such as Bible Societies, Missionary Societies, Sunday Schools, Tract Societies, Temperance Societies, &c. and the various money-gathering institutions that have originated in support of said societies. Now, sir, although you may think, from certain exceptions, concessions you have sometimes made, when speaking of these things, that you cannot be fairly understood to object to them all, or, indeed, to any of them, without exception; yet, I can assure you, that you are almost universally understood so to do. I cannot say, for my part, that I have so understood you; still, however, if all that you have said of these matters in your periodicals, since the commencement of the Christian Baptist up to the close of the present vol. of your Millennial Harbinger, were extracted, and placed per contra to the exceptions you have made in their favor, the balance on the debtor side would so preponderate, that the weight of the favorable exceptions, would scarce be noticeable. I have sometimes endeavored to avail myself of your concessions and exceptions, for the purpose of [612] excusing you, when in endeavoring to defend the good cause for which you plead, against the reproaches of enemies, and the misconceptions of mistaking friends; but, as I felt, with too little effect in either case; the former considering your concessions as a mere subterfuge, and the latter as meaning something so very different from the men and measures you were denouncing, that they could in no wise apply to them. I think, therefore, that something should be done to set these matters in so clear a light as to obviate these mistakes and offences.

      When I contemplate the professing world, I cannot but greatly pity the case of the clergy. They find themselves in circumstances, in which, for the most part, chance, rather than choice, has placed them; and, be this as it may, we are bound by that charity which surmises no evil, to grant them the credit of sincerity, of honesty, except in so far as they manifest the contrary. Consequently, that although they all receive hire for their services, (and "the laborer is worthy of his hire;") yet, it by no means follows, that they are all hirelings in the vicious and condemnatory sense of that opprobrious epithet. It must also be granted, upon the same principle, that the great majority of them are conscientiously wrong; I say, conscientiously wrong; for right the majority cannot be; for if there were but twenty sects, nineteen twentieths of them must be in error, since one of them only can be right. But what then? They may, nevertheless, be good men; for good men may be in error: and surely all error is not damnable. Ought you not, then, to give credit to all men for what they may be, and profess to be, till they, by overt acts, convince you of the contrary? Nor should you always consider their opposition to the reformation for which you plead, as an overt act evincive of the contrary; for while they think themselves right, and you wrong, they must, in honesty, oppose you. Ought you not rather, therefore, treat them as honest conscientious men, whilst they honestly and honorably oppose you; that is, without taking any of those foul, false, high-handed, oppressive measures, which you justly resent, and which, in many instances, you have but too just grounds to complain of? As for the means and measures which the religious public, instigated by their teachers, have adopted for the promotion of a religious reformation, both at home and abroad, they surely deserve credit for their zealous activity and good intention; although neither the means nor managements may, in all respects, be what they ought to be.

      In conversing with the intelligent friends and advocates of the reformation, upon these subjects, I must do them the justice to say, that I never found any of them that objected to the benevolent exertions of the day for promoting a religious reformation; but merely to the abuses and mismanagements of them: nor, indeed, have I found any of them that so understood your writings as inculcating such a thing; nevertheless, you and they being generally charged with holding and maintaining such sentiments, (very much, indeed, to the disadvantage of the good cause in which you are laboring,) I think it my duty, with [613] your permission, to call your attention to these things; being persuaded that it is still in your power, in perfect consistency with all you have published, to obviate these unfavorable objections.

	I remain, sir, yours, &c.
EPAPHRAS.

Dear Sir,

      TO the jaundiced eye every thing is yellow. To him who is predisposed to censure, there is no apology acceptable. There is no reason in any argument which justifies those foreordained to condemnation. We have spoken freely, candidly, and without disguise on some points, which policy without philanthropy, would, at least, have kept out of view. But in this selfish, vainglorious, and boasting age--in this day of apostacy and general delinquency of morals, he that would be valiant for the truth must expect to fail of the grace of general approbation. His prejudiced hearer, or his dogmatic reader, will not see, and necessarily will fail to credit the distinctions and discriminations which he may make; hence the dissenter, or the reformer, has no redeeming attribute, and must be wholly subjected to the undefined anathema of those affected, even remotely, by his course.

      The conversion of the world, as well as the reformation of Christian manners, you have the discrimination to perceive, has been the most ostensible theme in all our writings. If, then, Missionary, Bible, Education, Sunday School, Tract, or Temperance Societies came in our path, and if we spoke of them as parts of one great system of religious finance, for the consolidation and aggrandizement of a mercenary priesthood, it was because the operation and tendency of these "benevolent schemes" looked that way, in our judgment, more than to the spiritual amelioration of the ignorant and degraded members of the human family.

      It was not any hostility to benevolent enterprize--nor to missionary labor--nor to the diffusion of the Bible--nor to the education of poor children in schools held on Sundays--nor to temperance in all things--nor to the diffusion of religious publications in the form of tracts, which sharpened our pen against these gigantic combinations. It was the alliance sought and courted between the visible subjects of the kingdom of Satan and the professed followers of him whose kingdom is not of this world, by the patrons and managers of these proselyting institutions;--it was the uniting of the visible subjects of two kingdoms in building up one--it was the eternal echo of the word Money, and the profusion of it on the agents and apostles of these schemes of benevolence, which called forth our strictures upon them. Add to this a weightier consideration, which has not occupied so conspicuous a space in our former addresses on these topics as it ought, but which was always foremost in our minds--viz. that we did then, regard, and do still regard these as great projects of Satan, to hide from the eyes of the many the actual condition of christendom, now [614] ripening every hour for the vials of the severest wrath of God. When I call them projects of Satan to hide the shame of professors, I attribute nothing dishonorable to the benevolent minds who set some of them on foot. If Satan had never robed himself in the attire of an angel of light--if he had never assumed the character of a saint, then might we be thought uncharitable. But originate from what motives and by what agency they might, it is most obvious that Satan has so temporized in this matter, as to make them a veil to hide sinners from themselves and from one another.

      I have only to array the manners of the most enthusiastic patrons of these institutions, the sad defection from the letter and spirit of christianity in the most liberal contributors to some of them--I have only to exhibit the ignorance, superstition, and errors as respects the religion of Jesus, which appear in the members of these great confederations for reforming the world, to furnish proof for this jealousy of them.

      To see men whose hearts are full of rebellion against the Prince of Peace, uniting with head and purse to build up his kingdom, at home and abroad, is an alarming symptom of the times. The people seem to think, that the thousands contributed for these purposes by them is an evidence of their evangelical attainments, and a positive index of the gradual improvement of the age. Thus millions are blinded as to the necessity of reform, and the true character of this age.

      In looking over a thousand articles from a thousand pens in commendation of this age of benevolent enterprize, there is nothing more manifest to me than the power of this delusion. The people are taught by the patrons of these benevolent schemes, that the Millennium (as the young eagle from the egg) is about to burst upon the world out of these projects of "Christian enterprize" The landmarks between the kingdom of Satan and the kingdom of God are wholly defaced, and every citizen of the United States may, under the constitutions of these societies, be a worthy member of every one of them. They are so liberally framed as to embrace in schemes of Christian enterprize every child of the wicked one on the face of this continent. It is, indeed, Satan casting out Satan, by a new and brilliant scheme; which, in this age of superlative invention, has brought in an immense revenue of glory to the honor of the genius of this age. Yes, Satan and all his angels, (if he have any kingdom in America,) are permitted and invited, by the very constitution of these Christian schemes, to join in a holy crusade against Satan. The hope of these schemes is, that Satan will cast out Satan; and if this proves an abortion, the magnificent project comes to nothing.

      Again, what sort of a Millennium would spring from these cooperations? What sort of a triumphant church on earth would the amalgamated results of all these co-operations usher in? If the high church, low church, and no church co-operators were to form a new moral chemical compound, would it not be a nondescript?

      My dear sir, when I cast my eyes abroad upon the face of the moral map of these schemers and schemes--when I look at the men and [615] measures, I cannot flatter myself that the King of heaven and earth is at the head of the project; else he has departed from the principles which characterized the introduction of the gospel age. He has taxed Satan, and levied upon the dominions of the prince of darkness, in a way wholly novel in the history of six thousand years. Joseph's coat, particolored as it was, would be, an imperfect symbol of such a compound, as would answer the prayers and expectations of all the leaders, to say nothing of the members, of these hundred combinations.

      I must, then, think that it is a delusion by which Satan keeps the actual condition of the "Christian world" out of sight; and while the world is actually precipitating to the brink of the yawning gulph, in which is to be entombed the pride, avarice, hypocrisy, formality, apathy, sectarianism, scepticism, and practical atheism of the age, with all their wicked progeny--the people vainly imagine that the Millennium is to burst forth in all its glory as the natural offspring of these benevolent schemes.

      I am no doubt uttering very unpopular views; but I would be guilty of moral treason did I conceal my sentiments when called upon on a subject of such importance. I am persuaded the world is intoxicated with the notion of the high moral advances of this generation. But, sir, let us look at home; let us look at the signs of the times, and judge of other nations by our own. If we are not the head, assuredly we are not the tail, of christendom. And is there not found in this community, engaged in all these projects, every species of iniquity which darkens the moral horizon of Christian expectation, and distinguishes the apostacy portrayed in the apocalyptic symbols, or plainly written out in the apostolic letters?

      I must, for myself, keep my garments pure, and lift the unwelcome voice of remonstrance against these unauthorized amalgamations. It is true, ungodly men may cover themselves, and creep into the bosom of any Christian community; but this is quite a different thing from systems whose ostensible object it is to draw all sorts of men for the sake of their pecuniary or political aid, to build up the church of God.

      We have given, we think, sufficient evidence, in fact, and not merely in speech, that we are friendly to all co-operations of Christians for the promulgation of the gospel, and the advancement of human happiness by all lawful means; and 1 have no hesitation in saying, that if all was done at home which our means could effect, we would unite with the whole church of God in any evangelical mission to lands and tribes where the name of the Lord has not been named. Many of our brethren contribute to Missionary and Bible Societies, and Sunday Schools, with all their imperfections. Let every man, we say, be fully persuaded in his own mind, and act consistently.

      These are some of the reasons why we must bear the reproach of being opposed to the Christian schemes and benevolent enterprizes of the day. If these will not apologize for our course, and evince that we are not opposed to the co-operation of Christians, and to all sorts of Christian enterprize, I should fear to make myself better understood if [616] I should longer detain you with farther explanations. I shall conclude with an anecdote in point; illustrative of the unsanctified character of co-operation with those under professed allegiance to the spirit that works in the hearts of the children of disobedience:--A certain slaveholder, who owns some two or three hundred slaves, and who, after living luxuriantly upon all the spoils of their labor, and upon the annual sales of a part of the increase, contributes one hundred dollars per annum to the Colonization Society. In this way he consecrates his annual incomes, and shows how much he feels for the oppressed Africans! Thus many contribute to convert the heathen from the sins in which they themselves riot night and day, and thus flatter themselves that they are helpers in the good work of converting the world.

	Yours, &c.
EDITOR

      CAN any be engrafted into Christ without faith?

      Can any have faith without testimony?

      Can testimony be given without witnesses?

      Can witnesses give testimony without words?

      Can words be believed without understanding?

      Can any understand words without learning them?

      Can any learn without intellect?

      The answers to the above interrogatories being negatived, what then?

      Why to make Christians of Heathens, the testimony must be delivered in their own languages; or they must be taught to understand the languages into which the testimony has been translated.

      Then, to qualify a missionary to convert the heathen, he must first learn the testimony that God has given of his Son; then he must learn the languages of the nations or tribes he would teach; then h e must deliver the testimony, and show how it was confirmed, &c. then engraft them into Christ.

      To make children Christians, first develope their intellectual faculties, so as to enable them to comprehend testimony; then lay the testimony carefully before them, and show them their interest in it; then, when they have comprehended and believed it, and have determined to be guided by it; then engraft them according to the directions given, and direct them to draw sustenance from the sincere milk of the word, that they may grow thereby to be men and women in the knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ, &c.

M. W.

      OUR readers know that it is a practice of the religious meetings of some sects, for persons, after listening for a time to the remarks of a preacher or an exhorter, to rise and bear witness to the truth of what had been said. We have an anecdote on this subject which, will go to show the sincerity of some of the humiliating confessions which are sometimes made in such meetings by the brethren. In one of our eastern towns resides Deacon E, who has had a serious falling out with his neighbor S. The latter makes no pretensions to religion, though he subscribes, in the main, so far as theory is concerned, to the creed of the Deacon. [617]

      On the whole, he is a person of doubtful morals, being profane and otherwise rude and disagreeable. But conceiving that Deacon E has maliciously wronged and injured him (which may be true,) he has no bowels of mercy for him; but entertains towards him a grudge, which is likely to continue for a long time.

      One evening last summer, during the revival in the neighborhood in which the Deacon took a great interest, Mr. S appeared in meeting and looked unusually serious and devout--so much so, that some of the congregation began to suspect that he, too, might be under conviction. The exercise went on as usual. Before the meeting broke up the Deacon arose, for the hundred and first time, to relate his experience, and exhort the sinners present. He protested that he had been born of God, and that he yet realized his own unworthiness. "I feel, my friends," said he, "that I am a miserable, unworthy creature. I have done every thing that I ought not to have done, and have left undone every thing which I ought to have performed. I can say with Paul, I am the chief of sinners, and deserve nothing but the wrath and curse of God."

      Having resumed his seat, it was with astonishment, and not without hope, that the brethren noticed Mr. S rise in his place to speak. All eyes were turned. "I feel it my duty," protested Mr. S, "to rise and bear witness to the truth of what Deacon E has said. He has acknowledged himself, before you and his God, to be a scoundrel. I know him to be such--I can bear witness to his dishonesty." The Deacon fell into a rage, exclaimed vehemently, "You lie! You lie!" and in a spirit none too becoming the congregation broke up and dispersed.

      Now the truth is, (for we have received the story as a literal fact,) the Deacon neither expected nor wished to be believed in his confessions. They were made as the most effectual mode of illustrating his spiritual pride, and of obtaining the reputation of being religious par excellence. When taken at his word, he evinced his hypocrisy and insincerity. Too many, we fear, of such confessions are made rather from the spirit of pride than humility, and ought, therefore, to secure but a mean credit for the narrator.--Baltimore Chronicle.

      WE wished to have finished our strictures on Jennings' Debate, to have farther animadverted on Dr. Cleland's Essays, and to have published a Narrative of matters and things concerning the actors in the late Virginia proscriptions, in the present number: but we had begun an Address to the Virginia Baptists, before receiving the latter, and could not occupy more room on that subject in one number than we had already appropriated; and our Index to the volume was not thought of till we had progressed so far in other articles as to exclude the former from the present number.

      A very well-written critique on the theology, logic, grammar, egotism, &c. of Mr. Jennings' Book, has been received: but the "Debate" is not worth the critique; and, as, the book has already died in society, we do not know whether it is magnanimous farther "to draw its frailties from their dread abode," and will therefore leave that question, sub judice, for another moon.

EDITOR.

      GLAD would I be, could I retire from the arduous toils of an Editor, and lay down my pen in the full persuasion that my labors are no longer necessary. To me, indeed, the simple duties of an Editor of a monthly magazine, would not be oppressive; but constituting, as they now do, and as they ever have done, merely a fractional part of [618] my relative duties, superadded to these, they are laborious and oppressive. The portion of my time allotted to the discharge of these duties, is by far too small; and yet I could not conscientiously, in reference to other duties, devote a larger share of it to them. My correspondents have been neglected, much to my mortification; my personal labors in the field have been curtailed; my own immediate domestic concerns have been slighted; every concern has been laid under tribute to my biblical readings, examinations, and preparations for the forthcoming editions of the Family and Pocket Testaments. These labors will, however, terminate with the present year.

      The times yet demand another volume; and were we not taught in the school of experience how easy it is to will and how hard to perform, we would promise a volume of more interest than any one preceding. We contemplate some changes which we would call improvements, and we are promised some more aids on Millenniary matters, and we have a good stock of biblical criticism on the shelf; but, we dare not promise, seeing that our experience corroborates the affirmation of the poet--

We shall, then, only say that we will always do as we have done;--that is, the best our circumstances will allow.

      Much ground embraced in our proposals, has not yet been cultivated. The trees are only girdled; the lying timber, with the spoils of the forest, have not even been removed from the premises. But other laborers are at work, and some parts of the great farm are well cultivated. The theory of the Ancient Gospel is well elaborated by "The Evangelist." The Philistines have been well watched, and many strong holds taken from the kingdom of the Clergy by "The Christian Messenger;" and the Army of Reform is marching forward under better discipline, better supplied with the arms and munitions of war than formerly. Many able and experienced Captains are carrying the war into Carthage, and putting to flight armies of the aliens.--Upon the whole, we thank God, and all the brethren, for what we have seen and heard. We take courage, and, with all our energies, such as they are, we will gird on our sword and prepare for another campaign.

      We again tender our grateful acknowledgments to the Father of Mercies, who has graciously covered our heads in the day of battle--who has helped us forward on our journey, and made it so far prosperous; and to many of the disciples, for the aids and facilities they have afforded us in pleading the cause of reformation; for to their patronage, and untiring exertions, the principles of the Ancient Gospel and the Ancient Order of Things have been borne on every wind to the extremes of this Union, and even to the dominions of the Princes of the English tongue. May they never become weary in doing good, knowing they shall in due time reap, if they faint not! May favor, mercy, and peace be with all the family of God!

EDITOR.

      Page 571, line 31 from bottom, for "James Mitchel," Read Nathan Mitchell.

      Page 585, line 10 from bottom, for "years" read days.

      Page 584, line 3 from bottom, supply not before "the will." [624]