less than the least of all saints, is [dom and love thus guide all things, this grace given, that I should however mysterious, and that these print among the heathen, the un- are ever the same,-what remains, searchable riches of Christ," but that we all, who have seen so could he have foreseen the Divine many of the servants of God agoodness to him, he might have round us removed in the past year, added-in Twenty of their Lan- adore in humble silence what we guages;" for the Twentieth ver- are unable to comprehend-take sion of the New Testament in the new courage, and go forward in languages of India printed under the work of Him who will cause his eye, had advanced to the book his church to increase, till, like of Revelation at the time of our the stone cut out without hands, it beloved brother's removal; and we shall have fill the whole earth. believe it has been granted to few And to animate us thus to abound men in the church of God, ever to in the work of the Lord, and to print the New Testament of our do our own peculiar work in our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in day and generation, what can tend twenty languages spoken among more than the example and the the heathen. But for the prepara- end of our beloved brother; whose tion of all those founts of types life at least for the last twentywhich they required, and most four years, amidst all the difficulof which had never before been ties and trials he had to share with seen in India, was his thorough his brethren, was one uniform knowledge of the art, his nice dis- course of high usefulness and hapcernment, his assiduity, his inde- piness of mind; and who, after so fatigable diligence, his love for the long a course of bodily and mental cause of his Redeemer, and the labour, and spirituality of soul, was souls of the heathen, peculiarly in heaven adoring before the throne suited. Yet all these founts pre- of the Lamb, within forty-eight pared, and the difficulties attend- hours after he had delivered his ing these first editions of the Scrip- last message for the glorious Retures overcome, the way is now deemer below! Let us then lift made easy;-second and succeed- up the hands which hang down, ing editions with the same types and confirm the feeble knees, and involve so little difficulty, that the looking to Jesus, be steadfast, unvarious native Christian brethren moveable, always abounding in the and others, trained up by our be-work of the Lord; forasmuch as loved brother for so many years, we know that, prematurely as to can go on with the work under an eye of sense we may seem to common European superintend- be called away, our labour, worthless as it may be, shall not be in ence. 66 Seeing, then, that infinite wis-vain in the Lord." RELIGIOUS COMMUNICATIONS. INFANT BAPTISM. For the American Baptist Magazine. THE following narrative is ex-son, Governor of Nottingham Castracted from a work written in the tle and Town, representative of time of Charles II. and lately pub- the Town of Nottingham, &c. by lished in England, entitled, "Me- his Widow Lucy Hutchinson." moirs of the Life of Col. Hutchin- Col. H. was one of the greatest and best men of his time. He be longed to the independent party in the Revolution, and might justly be considered one of its most distir.ushed leaders. The extract wi show, that the question of the validity of Podobaptism was then warmly agitated, and that in the time of the Commonwealth, the distinguishing sentiments of Baptists claimed for their supporters some of the best men in Eng land. It ought in justice to be added, that Mrs. Hutchinson was in no respect inferior to her husband. The narrator is speaking of Col. Hutchinson at the time he was Governor of Nottingham Cas tle. in the error of the Podobaptists. After this, his wife being brought to bed, that he might if possible give the religious party no offence, he invited all the ministers to dinner, and propounded his doubt and the ground thereof to them. None of them could defend their practice with any satisfactory reason, but the tradition of the church from the primitive times, and their maine buckler of federall holinesse, which Tombs and Denne had excellently overthrowne. He and his wife then professing themselves unsatisfied in the practice, desired their opinions what they ought to doe. Most answered, to conforme to the generall practice of other Christians "When formerly the Presbyte how darke soever it were to themrian ministers had forced him (Čol. selves; but Mr. Foxcraft, one of E for quietnesse sake, to goe the assembly, say'd that except and breake up a private meeting they were convinced of the warin the Cannoneer's Chamber, there rant of the practice from the word, were found some notes concerning they sinned in doing it; whereupon Pedobaptisme,which being brought the infant was not baptized. And to the governor's lodgings, his wife now the Governor (Col. Hutchinhaving then more leisure to read son) and his wife, notwithstanding than fe, having perused them, and they forsooke not their assemblies compared them with the Scrip- nor retracted their benevolences tures, found not what to say a and civilities from them, yet were gainst the truths they asserted they revil'd by them, call'd fanaconcerning the misapplication of tics and Anabaptists, and often hat ordinance to infants: but be- glanced at in their public sermons. ty then young and modest, she And not only the ministers, but thought it a kind of virtue to sub- all the zealous sectaries concurred at to the judgement and practice in implacable malice against them of most churches rather than to upon this account; which was cardefend a singular opinion of her ried on with a spiritt of envy and one; she not being then enlight-persecution to the last; though he ened in that greate mistake of the on his side might well have said nationall churches. But in this to them as his Master to the old peare she communicated her doubts pharisees, Many good workes to ter husband, and desired him have I done among you, for which to endeavour her satisfaction, which of them do ye hate me." Yet the e he did, he himselfe became generallity even of that people had unsatisfied or rather satisfied a secret conviction upon them that inst it. First, therefore, he dil- he had beene faithfull to them, and dy searched the scriptures a- deserved their love, and in spite of , and could find in them no their owne bitter zeale could not and at all for that practice; but have a reverent esteeme for he bought and read all the him, whom they often rayl'd at for ent treatises on both sides, not thinking and speaking accordWhat that time came thick from ing to their opinions.”—Vol. 2d, the presses, and still was cleared pp. 103-5. 66 LETTER TO THE REVIEWER OF MERRIAM's ESSAY ON COMMUNION. The following letter on the Review of Merriam on Communion was received too late for insertion in our last number. We are pleased at the attention which the subject has excited, and cheerfully lend our columns to promote a fair discussion of it. We here present our readers with the letter to the Reviewer, and the Reviewer's answer.-Editors of Am. Bap. Mag. To the Editors of the American Baptis? Magazine. MESSRS. EDITORS, I have read the article in your September number, on Close Communion, with attention, interest and profit. But the argument seems to me a little defective. For the sake of having the subject more fully discussed, as well as with the hope of receiving farther light myself, I will briefly state wherein the defects consist. 1. The Reviewer assumes, that whatever renders a person an improper subject for admission to a church, renders him a proper subject for excommunication, p. 408, 409. But, whatever be the opinions of certain great and wise men on this subject, and whatever certain books may say, is not the practice, not only of Podobaptist, but of Baptist churches, at variance with this principle? How numerous are the churches, in which there are members of such equivocal religious characters, that, had they not given more evidence of piety before their admission, they would not have been received into the church and yet there can be no question, that, in many of these cases, excommunication would be improper. The reason is, that while a refusal to admit a man into the church affects his standing in society very little, excommunication would, in all probability, ruin him. admission to a church, renders it proper to withhold occasional communion, p. 409. Does he mean to assert this as a fundamental, practical maxim? Or does he mean only to silence our Podobaptist brethren, by quotations from their ter was his object, he has given us own standard works? If the latis called argumentum ad hominem, a very ingenious specimen of what and I have nothing farther to say. But if the former, then I should like to have him enter more fully into the subject. At present, his views seem to me to lead to the result, that no man should commune with another, no matter whether belonging to his own, or to some other church, whose pious character would be thought sufficiently equivocal to authorize a vote against him, were he a candidate for admission. That such cases are considerably numerous, I have already intimated, and bably shall not be contradicted. In discussing this subject, I wish the Reviewer to go into the inquiry, for what purposes particular ecclesiastical churches are formed; because I think he cannot do justice to the subject in any other way. Let him manage the cause fairly, and as ably as he can, and demonstrate, on the principles of sound common sense, why it is, that a member of another religious community, which rests on a constitution, scriptural in the main, though differing from ours in some few particulars,-why it is, that a member of such a community, though bringing with him a passport testifying his good standing in his own country, may not be permitted to sojourn among us, nor to eat and drink at our tables, without becoming first an alien from the land of his birth. I speak figuratively, but your Reviewer will understand me. 3. The Reviewer is very posi2. The Reviewer assumes, that||tive, that if a Podobaptist refused whatever renders it proper to refuse to offer up his children in baptisın, that refusal would be considered a The above is all I have to say respecting the defects of this very interesting article. But I cannot help desiring, that, if the Reviewer takes up the subject again, he will shew that baptism is an essential prerequisite to partaking of the Lord's supper, (if such is the fact;) and, also, that we are not at all inconsistent in admitting our Pœdobaptist brethren into our pulpits. I love the practice, however, so much, that if it were inconsistent, I would have it continued. A Constant Reader. REPLY. To the Editors of the American Baptist Magazine. GENTLEMEN, we should all very soon become much more closely united. The rst defect which Constant Reader discusses in my argument, he states thus :— 1. "The Reviewer assumes, that whatever renders a person an improper subject for admission to a church, renders him a proper subject for excommunication. And the reason which is assigned why this principle is false, is, that to refuse admission to a church would not injure a man's standing in society, whilst exclusion would probably ruin" him. His I must confess this reason has not at all altered my opinion, and I question much whether it will that of your readers. Certain qualifications entitle a man to membership in a church. right to membership depends upon his possessing them. If he possess them not, he has no right to membership, and of course neither to admission to nor continuance in a church. These qualifications cannot be varied at pleasure. They are as immutable as any laws of Christ. None of the relations which exist among men can in the least affect them. This point, I am aware, might be argued at greater length; but I apprehend that this simple statement will be sufficient to put the question of abstract right wholly beyond dispute. But your correspondent will ask, Are there not many persons in all our churches of such equivocal I have read the letter of "a Constant Reader" with considera-religious character, that had they ble attention, and will briefly attempt to meet the objections he has raised against the review. I take this opportunity to return him my sincere thanks for the notice he has thought proper to bestow upon the article, and especially for the catholic spirit which breathes through the whole of his communication. If the differences between professing Christians were more generally discussed by such men, not given more evidence of piety before their admission, they would not have been received into the church. And if it be asked again, why are they not excluded? We answer, because we have no means of ascertaining their present condition. When a candidate is proposed to a church, he makes a declaration of his present moral feeling. An opportunity is then offered for admission or rejection. But such opportunity || sertion on which it rests. It sup does not occur after admission. Whenever any outward conduct brings the moral condition of a member a second time before a church, we presume the same rule is adopted as in the case of admission. It seems, then, that the reason why equivocal members are continued in a church, is, that from the fallibility of human judgment, no opportunity is afforded for deciding upon them a second time, unless for some moral deviation, and that as soon as an opportunity offers, we always act upon the same principles. I will go farther, and state, that if, without any outward moral deviation, a member of a church should make such a declaration of his religious views as would have barred him from admission, they would be fully justified in suspending or excluding him, after proper efforts had been made to reclaim him. And here permit me to add, I cannot but believe the course which is so generally adopted by our churches of both denominations to be exceedingly judicious. At any rate I can conceive of none other which the present fallible condition of human nature would justify. The practice is precisely in accordance with the well known rule of charity and good sense, to retain an opinion concerning another which is founded on facts, until other facts oblige you to alter it. Should it therefore be insisted on that we use more lenity towards those within than to those without the church, this rule, in cases where no vicious conduct can be proved, would evidently justify it. The evidence of religion which a member gave at the time of his admission, offers a very marked distinction between him and one of whom we never had this evidence. poses that a man's character is affected by the simple act of exclusion. Instances in abundance could be mentioned to show, that this is not the fact. The loss of character depends wholly on the cause for which the exclusion takes place. If it be immorality, the same effect is produced as would be produced in any other case when impartial judges found a man guilty. If the cause were worldly mindedness or doctrinal error, and he remained unstained by immorality, his character would remain precisely as before. I presume the recollection of your Constant Reader, or of any other of your readers, will furnish them with abundant instances to show that I am correct. But were the assertion true, it would not be sufficient to overturn the argument. A church is a voluntary association. Every one who joins it knows that he is, and believes that he ought to be, liable to discipline as soon as he fails to exhibit evidences of Christian character. There is therefore no hardship in acting upon the principle to which he voluntarily assented, and by which he submitted to be governed. But were there ever so great hardship in the case, still we must do what is right. We hesitate not to say, that after gospel measures to reclaim him have been used, any member is liable to church discipline, who gives his brethren reason to believe that he is really and truly unworthy of the privileges of membership. Let it affect his standing as it will, this cannot be helped. A church would be worth little, which was kept together because a profession of the name of Christ was necessary to support the tottering character of its members. I will add a word or two on the Your correspondent's second obreason by which your correspond- jection is as follows. 2. "The ent supports his objection. And Reviewer assumes, that whatever first, I doubt the truth of the as-renders it proper to refuse admis |