that all believers are capable of improvement by it; and that they have a right of communion, entirely independent of our judgment? Is he to be refufed one ordinance, in the enjoyment of which he has reafon to expect the prefence of Christ and the bleffings of heaven; merely because a fovereign God has not been pleased to shew him his duty and privilege in regard to another? And though you may not pay fo great a regard to the reafoning of one whom you call a rigorous Baptift, yet you cannot be deaf to the arguing of a friend, an ally, and one of the first advocates for free communion. Hear, then, I beseech you, what Mr. Bunyan fays, who fpeaks to the following effect. None can render a bigger reafon than this,' for not fubmitting to baptifm, I have no light therein.' Such a perfon has an invincible reafon, 'one that all the men upon earth, and all the angels in heaven, are not able to remove. For it is God that creates light; and for him to be baptized without light, would only prove him unfaithful to his own confcience, and render him a tranfgreffor against God.'* What, will you keep him from celebrating the death of his Lord, in the facred fupper, only becaufe he does not fee baptifm with your eyes! Confider, I befeech you, that he is in your own judgment, a fincere, a confcientious man; that he is born of God, and fervently loves our dearest Lord. Yes, the fincerity of his heart and his difpofition to obedience are fuch, that, could he be once perfuaded of baptifm being a permanent ordinance in the Chriftian church, he would not hesitate a moment to be baptized. Nay, he would rejoice in an opportunity of fo manifesting his cordial subjection to Je

Bunyan's Works, Vol I. p. 135, 136. 8vo. edit.

fus Chrift, were he convinced, that he is under an equal obligation to be baptized, as he is to receive the Lord's fupper, and that prior to this. And must, after all, the bare want of a little water be an infurmountable bar to his having communion with you? Shall this one circumftance of water * Drown and sweep away all his excellencies; not counting him worthy of that reception that with hand and heart fhall be given to a novice in religion, because he confents to water ?'-Nay, no man can reject him; he cannot be a man if he object against him; not a man in Chrift; not a man in understanding. How unreasonable it is to fuppofe, that he must not ufe and enjoy what he knows, because he knows not all! And it will appear yet more unreasonable when it is confidered, that baptifm gives neither being nor well-being to a church.'* Is this your kindness to a Christian brother! Is this your charity, your candour, your catholic spirit! Away with fuch rigid and forbidding notions; with fuch an unreasonable attachment to an external rite, and let your communion be free indeed! univerfally free, for Quakers, for Pa pifts, for whomfoever appears to be born of God and defires fellowship with you. For though a converted Quaker may happen to be no friend to baptifm; and though a reformed Catholic may still be prejudiced against wine, at the Lord's table; yet, as both may have communion with you, in other refpects, why fhould you object against it? Befides, do you not hope to have communion with them in heaven? On the fame principle, you might refuse communion to Enoch, or Elijah, or Paul, were any one of them now upon earth, if he would not fub

• Bunyan's Works, Vol. I. page 134, 169, 174.

mit to baptifm! Were you aware how much this uncharitable and dividing fpirit has a tendency to injure real religion,' and how much it contributes to the caufe of infidelity; fuch is your veneration for the revelation of God, and fuch your affection for Jefus Chrift, that, I am perfuaded, you would never fay a word about baptism, nay, you would wish it out of the world, rather than give fuch occa fions of scandal and mischief, as you unwittingly do. For the author to whom I have just appealed affures us, and lays it down as a maxim, which you ought never to violate; that in fuch cafes, baptifm, though an ordinance of God, is to be prudently founned. Let the cry be never fo loud, Chrift, order, the rule, the command, or the like; carnality is at the bottom, and they are but babes that do it; their zeal is but a puff. What shall we fay? All things must give place to the profit of the people of God; yea, fometimes laws themfelves, for their outward prefervation, much more for godly edifying.'*-Further; Though, in the cafe fuppofed, the candidate for communion oppofes baptifm, yet there is not fo great a difference between the two inftances as may, at first view, be imagined. For, on our brethren's Baptift principles, infant baptism not being an appointment of Chrift, they who have had no other are unbaptized. In this refpect, therefore, the cafes are parallel. Befides, they are equally unwilling to fubmit to what our opponents confider as the only true baptifm and are equally confcientious in their refufal. The genuine, the neceffary confequence, therefore is, (if our brethren would act confiftently) they must

Bunyan's Works, Vol. I. page 136, 141, 144.

either accept both, or neither; for in the judg ment they form of each, God has received the one, as well as the other. But, as before hinted, by the fame rule that we receive one to communion, who is not baptized; who does not confider himfelf as baptized; who does not pretend to be bap tized; we may receive all: for as there is but one Lawgiver, there is but one law, relating to this matter; and he who has a right to difpenfe with it once, may do so as often as he pleafes. Confequently, the principle adopted, by those who plead for free communion, has a natural tendency to exclude baptifm from the worship of God.

Again; Though our brethren plead, that the perfons whom they receive and continue in communion with them, are, in their own judgment, baptized; yet we may venture to query, whether this be always the cafe. The following is a well authenticated fact. Several perfons being convinced of believers' baptifm, and wishing for fellowship with the people of God, related their Christian experience to a church and her pastor who practise free communion. It was agreed to receive them. But when the time appointed for their being baptized came, and the pastor was ready to administer the ordinance to them, one of them was abfent; and, confequently, was not baptized with his brethren. The ftated feafon for celebrating the death of Jefus at his own table, quickly approaching, he was, notwithstanding, received into fellowfhip, had communion at the Lord's table, and was baptized afterwards.*—Now this person was not a

If I be not greatly deceived, the pastor of this church has pleaded the caufe of free communion, under the name of Pacificus. A character, no doubt, very happily

Pædobaptift; this perfon was not even in his own judgment, baptized, when he took a feat at the Lord's table. No; by defiring to be immerfed on a profeffion of faith, he declared that he was unbaptized; as fuch he approached the holy table; and as fuch the paftor, in the name of the church, gave him the right hand of fellowship. Hence we fee, that our opponents can admit fuch perfons to the facred fupper, as confefs themselves to be unbaptized, if occafion require; that is, if their Christian friends do not approve of the old, establifhed mode of proceeding.-Besides, as it is not uncommon for the Pædobaptift members of thofe churches that practife free communion, to defire baptifm upon a profeffion of faith, after they have been in fellowship many years; fo it is probable, that fome fuch members may be convinced, that infant fprinkling is not a divine appointment, and confequently, that they themselves are not baptized; yet live in the neglect of baptifm for months and years, having communion at the Lord's table

chofen, to exprefs that pecu'iarly peacefu! temper and admirably condescending conduct, which are fo clearly displayed in this little anecdote. But, as a perfectly consistent character is hard, exceedingly hard to be found among mortals, my reader will not be much furprised if I obferve; That Pacificus himself has failed, in cne particular, to answer his name. Yes, he and his coadjutor Candidus have, in a very unpeaceful, uneandid manner, charged a vast majority of their Baptift brethren, with not a little contributing to the caufe of infidelity,' merely because they do not practife this Remark able free communion. Peace and Candour are, indeed, very excellent things, as Pacificus and Candidus are most amiable names; yet I would take the liberty of hinting, that peace and unity, without truth and righteousness, are an illicit combina tion; a wicked confpiracy against both God and man. Am. irus Pacificus, amicus Candidus, fed magis amica Veritas.