denomination, under a plea of catholicism, depart from their avowed fentiments, and connive at infant fprinkling ?They are fufpected, by others of the Pædobaptifts, as a fet of temporizers. So that like thofe unhappy perfons who fell into the hands of Proctuftes, fome of us are too fhort, and we must be fretched; others are too long, and they must be lopped.-But I return to my argument. It should be observed, that forbearance and love, not lefs than refolution and zeal, must be directed in the whole extent of their exercife, by the word of God; elfe we may greatly offend, and become partakers of other men's fins, by conniving when we ought to reprove. If the divine precepts, relating to love and forbearance, will apply to the cafe in hand; or fo as to justify our connivance at an alteration, a corruption, or an omiffion of baptifm; they will do the fame in regard to the Lord's fupper. And then we are bound to bear with fincere Papists, in their mutilation of the lat ter; and to exculpate our upright friends the Quakers, in their oppofition to both. For it cannot be proved that baptifm is lefs fundamental than the facred fupper. There is a falfe, ungodly charity,' fays a fenfible Pædobaptift writer, a ftrange fire, that proceeds not from the Lord; a charity that gives up the honour of religion, merely because we will not be at the pains to defend it-Vile principles can eafily cover themselves with the names of temper, charity, moderation, and forbearance; but thofe glorious things are not to be confounded with lukewarmness, self-feeking, laziness, or ignorance-As there is a cloak of covetoufnels, fo there is a cloak of fear and cowardice-You are never to make peace with men 6 at the expense of any truth, that is revealed to you by the great God; because that is offering up his glory in facrifice to your own-Do not difmember the Chriftian religion, but take it all together: charity was never defigned to be the tool of unbelief. See how the Spirit has connected both our principles and duties. Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man fhall fee the Lord.'* I know not that man in England,' says Dr. Owen, who is willing to go farther in forbearance, love, and communion with all that fear God, and hold the foundation, than I am: but this is never to be done by a condefcenfion from the exactness of the leaft apex of gospel truth.'† 6 Another Pædobaptist author, when treating on charity and forbearance, expreffes himself in the following language: A confiderable fuccedane. um for the Chriftian unity, is the catholic charity; which is like the charity commended by Paul, in only this one circumftance, that it "groweth exceedingly"-Among the stricter fort, it goes chiefly under the name of forbearance. We fhall be much mistaken if we think that, by this foft and agreeable word, is chiefly meant the tenderness and compaflion inculcated by the precepts of Jefus Chrift and his apoftles. It strictly means, an agreement to differ quietly about the doctrines and commandments of the gofpel, without interruption of vifible fellowship. They diftinguish carefully between fundamentals, or things neceffary to be believed and practifed; and circumftantials, * Mr. Bradbury's Duty and Doct. of Bap. p. 201, 213, 214. In Mr. Bradbury, as before, p. 198. foundation there may be for fuch a diftinction in human fyftems of religion; it certainly looks very ill-becoming in the churches of Christ, to question how far He is to be believed and obeyed. Our modern churches-have nearly agreed to hold all those things indifferent, which would be inconvenient and difreputable; and to have communion together, in obferving fomewhat like the customs of their forefathers. Many of the plaineft fayings of Jefus Chrift and the apostles, are treated with high contempt, by the advocates of this forbearance. The common people are perfuaded to believe, that all the ancient inftitutions of Chriftianity were merely lo cal and temporary; excepting fuch as the learned have agreed to be fuitable to these times; or, which have been cuftomarily observed by their predeceffors. But it would well become the doctors in divinity to fhew, by what authority any injunction of God can be revoked, befides his own; or, how any man's confcience can be lawfully releafed, by custom, example, or human authority, from oblerving fuch things as were instituted by the apostles of Chrift, in his name. --This corrupt forbearance had no allowed place in the primitive churches. The apostle, in the epiftle to the Ephefians, required of them to adorn their “ Vocation with all lowlinefs and meeknefs, with long tuffering, forbearing one another in love." But had they difpenfed with the laws of Chrift, for convenience and ease, it had been forbearing one another in hatred. For thofe laws were expreffions of his love, the most fervent love that was ever fhewn amongst men, directed by infallible wisdom. Whofoever, therefore, would obliterate them, or any how attempt to change them, must either fuppofe himself wifer than Jefus Chrift, or a greater friend to mankind. He must be moved, either by an enormous felf-conceit; or by the fpirit of malevolence. The more thinking part of religious men, obferving what great mifchiefs have arisen from contentions about truth,—have found it most defirable to let truth alone; and to concern themselves chiefly about living profitably in civil fociety. To be of fome religion is but decent; and the interests of human life require that it be popular and compliant. If men have different notions of Jefus Chrift, his divinity, his facrifice, his kingdom, and the customs of his religion, even from what the apostles feemed to have; charity [with many] demands that we think well of their religious characters, notwithstanding this. It is unbecoming the modefty of wife men to be confident on any fide; and contending earnestly for opinions, injures the peace of the Christian church. Thus kind and humble is modern charity.—Instead of rejoicing in, or with the truth, it rejoiceth in contemplating the admirable piety that may be produced from fo many different, yea, oppofite principles.-It is very true, that the power of godlinefs has often fuffered in a zealous contention about rites and ceremonies; but the contention has been chiefly about forms of human device. The Chriftians of old time were taught, not to dispute about the inftitutions of their Lord, but to obferve them thankfully; and hereby they expreffed their affection to him and to each other. If that affection be grant ed to be more important than the tokens of it, it would be unjust to infer that the latter have no obligation; which would imply, that Christ and the apostles meant nothing by their precepts. The Methodists have not, indeed, gone fo far as their fpiritual brethren [the Quakers] have done, in rejecting all external ceremonies; but they are taught to believe, that all concern about the ancient order and customs of the Christians is mere party fpirit, and injurious to the devout exercifes of the heart. Thus the modern charity vaunts itself, in anfwering better purposes than could be accomplished by keeping the words of Chrift. It produces a more extenfive and generous communion; and animates the devotion of men, without perplexing them by uncertain doctrines, or rigorous felf-denial. Although it fuppofes fome revelation from God, and fome honour due to Jefus Christ; it claims a right to difpenfe with both; to choose what, in his doctrine and religion, is fit to be believed 'and obferved.'*-So, that illegitimate charity and falfe moderation, which incline profeffors to treat divine inftitutions as articles of small importance; led that great man, Melancthon, to place the doctrine of juftification by faith alone, the number of pofitive inftitutions in the Christian church, the jurifdiction claimed by the Pope, and feveral fuperftitious rites of the Romish religion, among things indifferent, when an imperial ediâ required compliance.+ But, as we must take 1ced that we do not add the fancies of men to our divine religion; fo we should take equal care that we do not curtail the appointments of Christ,'‡ out of any pretence to candour, * Strictures upon Modern Simony, p. 48-55. |