should be obeyed, and if no one had joined a church for thirty years, supposing there be one in existence, and I be a fit subject, I am bound to do it, and it is my sin if I do not. You may reply, where religion is at a low ebb, a man may doubt its existence, and then the obligation is as uncertain as the evidence. This is granted; but you remember your remark supposes a man to be a believer, and therefore the objection is without force. Yet let us suppose personal religion and consequently the obligation doubtful; ought a man to be at peace in such a state? Suppose a report from a most respectable source reached you, that you were going to be tried upon a charge of a capital offence: If found guilty, you are to be executed : If acquitted, you are to be advanced to great honour; could you trifle in prospect of such an alternative? I appeal, dear Sir, to your superior understanding, and leave the decision with your heart and your conscience.

You will not deny that we have divine authority for the institution of churches. The conclusion is inevitable; namely, that it is morally binding upon those who are proper subjects to join them, and their sin if they do not.

Man is a social being. His interest, safety, and happiness, are bound up in society. How could a family, a town, a state, a nation exist without some principles of compact expressed, or understood? You are sensible of the necessity of associations in order to carry into effect serious undertakings. Break down the most effective societies into fragments, and you destroy their power. Has it never occurred to you, my dear Sir, that your position is a dangerous one? He who has commanded us to believe, has also enjoined obedience. As God himself has instituted churches,

for us to profess to believe and not join them, is to separate belief and obedience-to confess the awful authority of God, and then to set it at nought. You certainly do not mean so much as this, and yet such is the tendency of your remark.

How can you defend christianity, and yet set yourself against the grand means of supporting it? Let but every believer be of your opinion, and practise upon your sentiment, and it will sweep away all our churches. And yet, if it be right for one to argue as you do, it is right for all. Suppose such a sentiment should prevail, what will become of the institutions of religion? Who is to call forth and ordain ministers? How are the means of grace to be supported? How are missionary undertakings to be carried on? If ever such a sentiment should universally prevail, half a century would annihilate christianity. You will allow me to remind you that upon every true principle of morals, who ever adopts a sentiment, which, if carried into effect, would produce such havoc, is as guilty in the sight of God as if such effects were really produced.

Requesting you to read and reflect upon the 87th Psalm, and especially the 2nd verse,

I remain yours respectfully,
G. K.

the way of entering a Baptist church. 2. Those which are found to exist in such a community.

First, There are difficulties in the way of such people as you mention uniting with the Baptists, and if I be right in my conjectures of what they are, it will not be very easy for that people to remove them.

Their punctual adherence to that divine Institution which has procured them the appellation of Baptists is a difficulty in the way of many who know them to be right. To go down into a river to be publicly baptized, is considered by many, a mean and degrading thing. They will kindly and liberally support the denomination, but they cannot imitate them. Like Jethro, they bear them good will, but they cannot accompany them. It is but just to observe, that the Baptists, as a body, do not lay stress upen going down into a river. In Europe they almost universally have baptisteries in their meeting-houses, which is an ancient practice, and attended with many advantages, which can never be conceived of but by those who have experienced them. But this is a mere circumstance connected with the Institution. The objection, I suppose, lies against the thing itself; and as baptism is enjoined by Jesus Christ himself, it is impossible for us to alter it with impunity. Moses was commanded to make all things according to the pattern shewn him on the mount.

The Baptists cannot allow that the verb baptizo, though "a derivative and a diminutive of bapto, is of equivocal signification, and means something less than the root from whence it comes:" "May be rendered wash, or, that it signifies the application of water, it matters not in what way." Bapto signifies indefinitely to immerse ;

baptizo, to immerse for a short time. We might as well say that to throw dust in a man's face, is a derivative and diminutive from the verb to bury. The fact is, it is a word of a different signification and applied to a different act. This is equally true of the case in hand. We are confirmed in this opinion both by the original of the New Testament and the translation of the Old into Greek, by the accurate distinction there observed either in the different applications described of water to the body, or, the body to water.

If it be to pour, ratachio is the verb-If to sprinkle, rantizo,— If to wash, nipto-If to dip and take out again, baptizo. These verbs all signify the application of water to the body, or, of the body to water. If any man will assert that, they mean the same act, he ceases to be an opponent fit to be argued with, and becomes an object of pity.

The Baptists, Sir, though despised, are happy in being supported by scripture, antiquity, and the concurring testimony of the truly learned of all denominations, such as, Calvin, Zanchius, Beza, Witsius, Campbell, Vitringa, Towerson, Venema, Bossuet, Lenfant, Dr. Doddridge, Dr. Watts, Macknight, Vossius, Bp. Taylor, Sir I. Newton, Dr. Whitby, Dr. Wall, Abp. Tillotston, A. Bp. Secker, Dr. Edwards, Dr. Samuel Clarke, and the late professor Porson, than whom, no man was ever a greater critic in the Greek.

There was a time, Sir, when sprinkling was held in as much contempt as baptism is now, and such a time will return, we have every reason to believe. If our practice be despised, we have this consolation, it is scriptural, and therefore rational. We invite you, Sir, to bear reproach with us in prospect of that day when we must all stand at the impartial

tribunal of him who once said, "Thus it becometh us to ratify every institution." Matt. 3. xv.

The custom of requiring a verbal relation of experience in order to joining in communion with our churches, is a difficulty in the way of such people as you mention; and especially, seeing this is submitted to the judgment and decision of many who are in every external sense inferior to those supposed candidates. I would ask, Sir, is religion dis graceful? Is it unphilosophical that it should have its class of feelings, hopes and fears? If these are possessed, is it inconsistent to profess them? May not persons possess these to a great degree, who have but little taste and refinement, and may not these same people be competent judges in the case in hand, and ought they not upon principles of common sense, and the allowed right of all societies, to be consulted, who shall unite with them in communion? As personal religion is the great qualification for church fellowship, I know of no other way by which we can know whether a man be qualified for that station or not, but by examining his faith, feelings, hopes, fears and conduct, and no better way suggests itself to me of doing this, than by hearing an account of them from his own lips. You have only to look into communities where this regulation is not observed, and you will find in them, gentlemen who can sing a jovial song at a tavern, and the praises of God in his house, can attend the ball-room, card-table and theatre, and the table of the Lord, without remorse of conscience, or any sense of discrepancy, or even once recollecting that the friendship of the world is enmity with God. In these communities, Sir, you will find gentlemen of taste and refinement, but we fear they have no disposition

to deny themselves daily and follow Christ. Where the door of a church is wide enough for such gentlemen to walk in, it is generally the case, that purity, simplicity and devotion retreat. Such churches may have more wealth, more shew, more dress, more members, and more influence than the Baptists, but after all we cannot envy them; nor will you, in your calmer moments of reflection, wish us to imitate them.

The second class (if there be any remaining.) must be obsta cles within the churches. What are these? They must be either order, or disorder; ministers, or private members. Your objec

tion cannot lie against order, provided it be scriptural, and this is an object at which we aim. You must know that we have not more disorder in our churches than other denominations. It is a fact, we have a number of uneducated ministers, but we believe they are men of God, of unblemished lives, and good sentiments; and what makes us prize them the more is, they are such, whose labours God has seen fit to bless. We feel this. In the old countries, our denomination has always had its churches and ministers, but as the first people who came here were unbaptized, our beginning has been under great disadvantages. Suppose we had rejected those good men from the ministry, would it not have been displeasing to God, and injurious to the cause of truth? You will agree with me, Sir, that however important, in a secondary sense, learning may be, yet scriptural truth, personal religion, and an aptitude to teach, are of greater importance. We are very anxious to give education to those whom the Lord has called to the work of the minis try, but we have daily proof, that learning is not the great qualifi

cation, and we cannot think that our churches should be destitute for the want of learned ministers. We have also, in our churches, a large number of poor uneducated members, and for gentlemen of taste and refinement to mingle with these, and place themselves under the teaching of such ministers as the above, is mortifying, and requires more than common humility. But there were fishermen among the Apostles; and in the time of Christ and his immediate followers, the poor seem to have been the majority. I do confess, Sir, whatever partiality I may feel for taste and refinement, I would sooner place myself and family under the care of a pious uneducated minister, than under a man of learning who will in one company defend, and in another ridicule orthodoxy, or, who can become all things to all men in the worst sense.

But situated as we are with uneducated ministers and poor members, what can we do, Sir?

The remedy is not to be sought with us, but with the very gentlemen who object, and they only can remove the difficulty. It is desirable that every thing should be done consistent with the purity of our churches to improve their state, especially when we consider that the population around us is making rapid advances in information; but if we were to gain taste and refinement, and lose the power of religion, our state would be deplorable. Let but a few gentle men of taste, refinement and piety, make the experiment by joining any one church, and, if I be not mistaken, they will find the poor, humble, peaceable, teachable, and the people preferring a pious educated ministry, provided they can support it, to an uneducated one. If such gentlemen were not consulted in the great affairs of the denomination,

and if they did not find an extensive field open before them for usefulness, they might complain; but let them remember it is unreasonable to blame others for the existence of an evil which it is only in their power to remove. I remain dear Sir,

Yours, &c.

G. K.

For the Amer. Bap. Mag.

ON DISCIPLINE.

"Moreover, if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him hast gained thy brother. alone; if he shall hear thee, thou But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word be established. may And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto

thee as an heathen man and a pub

lican."

Matt. xviii. 15-17.

The essential rules laid down in this passage by our divine Saviour, are so plain, that no explanation seems necessary; but there are some things growing out of them, or closely connected with them, that ought to be noticed.

First. This gradual labour is by no means to be commenced or prosecuted with a view merely to get the matter into the church, or to punish the offender, or to gratify a hard unchristian temper towards him; but to reclaim the transgressor, and to render him still useful, ought through the whole to be the great

motive to action.

Secondly. While dealing with our brother according to these rules, the difficulty ought not to be communicated to others, for in so doing we injure our brother.

unnecessarily burden those to whom we mention it, frustrate the end for which the rule was given, (that is, to prevent the evil from spreading) and are guilty of disobedience to a special command of Christ."Tell him his fault," said the Saviour, "between thee and him alone." Incalculable evil sometimes arises to the church from such a sinful manner of treating a brother. It partakes of the nature of speaking evil one of another, which is directly prohibited by the scriptures.*

Thirdly, A difficulty existing between two individuals, is not to be admitted to a hearing in the church till previous duty, according to these directions of our Lord, is faithfully attended to. Otherwise a labour may be brought on the church, which might have been avoided, had faithfulness been used in its proper place. And when we proceed contrary to a divine command, we can hardly hope for success.

Fourthly, These rules will not strictly apply to such offences as are of a more public nature, or are acted more directly against the church, or against the cause of God in general. Indeed if the nature of the crime be not such as to require immediate exclusion without any other labour, as some crimes are thought to be, there ought to be private labour with the delinquent by the pastor, or some other suitable person, or, by any one, to endeavour to bring him to a sense of his fault; yet this is not particulariy designed by the rules under consideration. For should an individual gain ever so much satisfaction, still the offender must be brought before the church. And further, if these steps are to be taken with a public offender by one individual, why not by another, and by every one? which would render dis

cipline a burdensome task indeed, if not altogether impracticable.

Fifthly, A member for a private offence ought not to leave the communion on account of the offender, till he pursue the matter through, and the accused finally prove incorrigible upon a hearing before the church; for,

1. By such conduct he presumes to take the staff of discipline into his own hand; for while his brother is in good standing in the church, he condemns him as unworthy of fellowship. And indeed he suspends, at least, his fellowship with the whole church; for he refuses to commune with them in the Lord's supper, and for no other reason, than because they are about to partake with one, whom he has already censured as unfit for the sacred ordinance. This is truly an arbitrary way of proceeding, and bears a little resemblance of the cruel edict, that destroyed all the children of a certain age in the vicinity of Bethlehem in order to effect the destruction of one, that was esteemed very offensive. The whole church is sometimes neglected to gratify our feelings towards one, whom we esteem an offensive brother.

2. Such a one passes censure upon his brother before he knows whether he will persist in the wrong or not; and sometimes before he knows him to be guilty, or has ever spoken to him on the subject. But, says the offended brother, I have been credibly_informed so-and I believe it. But still it is necessary, that "he, who is accused, should have his accusers face to face," and not be condemned without a hearing.

3.

Such conduct is very opposite to the precepts and example of our blessed Saviour. In the passage under consideration Christ enjoins in the first place