I never cherished a scheme so Utopian as the scheme of union which floats in the minds of some professors. Men unite not as masses, but as individuals. We come together one by one, not in nations nor organized masses. Parties, like nations, indeed, may hold an armistice they may agree on a cessation of hostilities-they may even propose a reciprocity of kind offices-they may open their respective houses, pulpits, and communion tables to each other-they may form a confederation of communities to a certain extent; and still reserve certain peculiarities for further discussion. But as voluntary associations farther they cannot go. Yet this would be but an ecclesiastic, not a Christian union; and only a partial ecclesiastic union.— Christian union is a more intimate, spiritual, celestial sort of thing, into which we can enter only in our individual capacity and upon our own individual responsibility. It presupposes closer acquaintance, stronger personal confidence, more spiritual attachment, a real oneness of spirit, a full coalescence of souls in the joint participation of the same holy spirit.

But to return to our meeting. In the "onset" of Mr. Broaddus it is misrepresented, grossly misrepresented-as much misrepresented as were our views in his inhibiting address forbidding the presence of the Baptists. Mr. Broaddus has already an apology in advance of this fact. He was in some matters rather taken by surprize. He took no notes he made no record. This, together with his occasional agitation of spirit, which overwhelmed him in silence and embargoed his tongue, may have originated those phantasies in his brain, reported in his notices of the meeting. The following synopsis of our speeches on union are neither just nor true:—

"The great body of them desired union with those only who will adopt their distinguishing peculiarity, which, after all that can be said. about it, is neither more nor less than this-that if a man will confess the name of Jesus, and be immersed, he is entitled to citizenship in the Christian kingdom, no matter what erroneous opinions he may entertain upon the whole subject of religion." The falsehood and misrepresentation of which synopsis Mr. Broaddus clearly developes by giving the resolution which I had the honor to offer, to support, and to see carried unanimously by a large assemblage of Christians, viz.— Resolved, That union among Christians can be scripturally effected by practically acknowledging such articles of belief and such rules of piety and morality as are admitted by all Christian denominations.”— Now among all pious and conscientious persons, it must be a question, How any one of ordinary sense, in one and the same paragraph, could exhibit two views of the grounds of union so perfectly antagonistic and 23

VOL. Y.-N, S.

contradictory. He represents the whole drift of the discussion to be about mere confession and baptism, "no matter what erroneous opinions any one may entertain upon the whole subject of religion;" and then affirms that we require a "practical acknowledgment of such articles of belief and such rules of piety and morality as are admitted by all Christian denominations." Let any candid man reconcile these two versions of the discussion, if he can! Mr. Broaddus had condemned the meeting before it existed-he came into the house determined to condemn-and he could not help pronouncing sentence of condemnation on the whole matter.

A second misrepresentation, equally palpable, though less injurious. is,-"One of the proclaimers told us with great apparent delight, that after being baptized for the remission of his sins, he continued to preach the restoration of all, having been previously a Universalist." This I affirm is positively false. The preacher said that he never preached these sentiments afterwards; nay, he ceased to think of them, and finally forgot the very arguments which he used to support them. This was alleged in proof that if mere opinions, though false, were not opposed and made matters of essential importance, they would naturally die in the minds of those who cherished them. Brother Raines, the proclaimer alluded to, wrote something to the same effect, which was published in the Millennial Harbinger some years since. Bigots and prejudiced persons are not good witnesses in any case. hear right.

They never

This misrepresentation is introduced to prove a false representation which I instance as a third calumny:-"Provided a man believes, confesses, and is immersed, he may place any construction he pleases on the Bible; and as long as he will cry out, Down with your creeds. and come to the Book! he ranks a good and an acceptable member of the Christian fraternity. If he should embrace the doctrine of the real presence of the annihilation of unbelievers, no matter."

6.

A fourth misrepresentation:-"Mr. C. and others frequently, during the meeting, intimated that the Baptists could unite with them without sacrificing any thing." This is not true. I never said so I never thought so. Without sacrificing any thing"! Preposterous! They must sacrifice every thing that is incompatible with taking the Book, the whole Book, and nothing but the Book of God for their creed, dis cipline, and behaviour. On this ground only did any sensible Christian ever dream of a union with any Baptist community.

Fifth:-"Sometimes during the meeting we [the Baptists] were classed with drunkards, revellers, and murderers." This is positively false, as far as I was present, and I believe I was never absent one moment in which Mr. Broaddus was present.

THE CHRISTIAN HERALD vs. FREE DISCUSSION. 267

There are other and various misrepresentations of myself and brethren in this "onset" and assault upon the meeting, on which, at present, I have not room to dilate. Dr. Fishback, though a Baptist, took much interest in the meeting, and delivered one of the best discourses—nay, indeed, I believe the best discourse I ever heard from a Baptist preacher in my life. I could wish to have had it printed and sent to all the sectarian world. He was obliged to assume, in some of his numerous speeches, principles which he did not believe-because, as he told us, he seemed to have to speak for or represent all the Protestant parties, as they were either afraid or ashamed to appear in the meeting. I do not pretend to quote his words in this particular; but one thing I can say, he represented very ably and eloquently the Paidobaptist world on their great peculiarity.

I intend to prosecute this expose, as I have only examined one of Mr. Broaddus' addresses, and even that but partially. I do hope our brethren will not respond to Mr. Broaddus in the spirit and style of his "onset," nor attribute to the Baptist denomination the doings or sayings of one man, and especially of one of no higher standing among them for talents, education, and general biblical knowledge and attainments, than Elder Wm. F. Broaddus. I should exceedingly regret that the good feelings existing between a multitude of that denomination and our brethren should be interrupted, or that a new defensive war should be commenced because of the follies and waywardness of an individual.

A. C.

THE CHRISTIAN HERALD vs. FREE DISCUSSION. "He that doeth truth cometh to the light that his deeds may be made manifest that they are wrought in God."-The Sinner's Friend.

JAMESTOWN, Ohio, January 30, 1841. Dear brother Campbell-ENCLOSED I send you a communication originally sent to the Christian Herald," N. H., which was rejected by the council, and returned, together with another communication on Remission. You may, or may not publish it, as you think proper.Yours, M. WINANS.

JAMESTOWN, O. 16th December, 1840. Brother Carter-I see by the "Herald" of the 20th November, that your council have come to the same conclusions of some other councils —namely, that "the best way to fight Campbellism is to let it alone;" therefore they have determined not to publish any thing that favors "the doctrine of baptism for the remission of sins," which is called "Campbellism." This doctrine, it seems, does not suit the taste of the readers of the Herald, and they are not not to be fed on it, even if it be proved to be the bread of Heaven.

268 THE CHRISTIAN HERALD vs. FREE DISCUSSION.

But in the same paper, of the 3d December, I see Mr. Campbell's views on this very thing dragged before its readers, and condemned by a tribunal having no jurisdiction of the matter, and to which Mr. Campbell never appealed-namely, "Experience," and modern experi ence too; not the ancient experience of the saints from Pentecost to the destruction of Jerusalem. The question is, Will you affirm any of the things denied in that extract by Mr. Campbell? Or will you deny any of the things affirmed by him? The calling him a "mad man" does not make him so, any more than the calling Jesus and Paul mad men made them so.

Will you affirm that the reception of the Holy Spirit, or any other spirit, was ever called regeneration by any inspired man? Or,

Will you affirm that any unbaptized man, after Pentecost, was a regenerated man; or, that unbaptized men received the remission of sins?

If you will affirm either of these propositions, and allow the case to be tried in the Apostles' Court, I will defend. But I deny the juris diction of "Modern Experience" In this Court of Error all the super

stitions in the world can be sustained.

In your remarks upon Jerry Burgin's article I find that you lose sight of the main starting point-namely, PENTECOST. Mr. Burgin will not contend, nor will any body else, that baptism was a condition of salvation, or of any thing else, under the Mosaic dispensation; nor will any contend that Jesus gave commandments to himself how to do any thing. He did as he pleased in his personal ministry. But shall we infer from that fact that men are authorized to do as they please, and that they were not bound to work by any rule? The Apostles were authorized to remit sins; but could they do it in any way they pleased? or was there a way prescribed by the Lord in which they should do it? I think the Lord gave directions how it should be done. The Apostles were to preach the gospel to every creature; and when it was believed, and the believer was baptized, the Lord promised him salvation, or pardon-I say pardon, or salvation from sins. You may say future salvation, or salvation from death, if you please, and thereby make baptism a condition of eternal salvation, and cut off Wesley, Wickliffe, &c. from heaven, instead of the church on earth, and thus out-Campbellize Campbell himself, who only makes baptism essential to the enjoyment of remission while on earth.

The remission of sins in the absence of the Lord can only be enjoyed by faith; and without a promise predicated on a condition, there can be no faith. If the promise were without condition, all men could claim it; and Universalism would obtain here, if not hereafter.

I find that the Universalian argument is very handy when baptism is set forth as a condition of pardon. When faith is made a condition the Universalian cries out, Then all the deaf and dumb, and children and heathens will be damned.' So to save Wesley, Wickliffe, &c., we will whittle off baptism; and to save the deaf, infants, and heathen, we will whittle off faith; and to save all men, we will whittle off all conditions, and thereby make the gospel and all its requirements of none-effect. If one requirement may be whittled off, all may, and it is rendered useless.

Yours,

M. WINANS.

BETHANY COLLEGE.

THE Second Annual Meeting of the Board of Trustees of Bethany College was held at Bethany, Va., on Monday, May 10th, 1841.That the friends of this Institution may be duly informed of its affairs, we shall occasionally make statements of such proceedings of the Board of Trustees as may be necessary for this purpose.

From the Report of the Treasurer it appears that he has received since the last meeting in September subscriptions for the Institution amounting to 8,694 dollars. This sum, together with the subscriptions obtained last summer, and the legacy of Philip B. Pendleton, deceased, make the funds available in the aggregate $11,054; of which there have been received in cash, $1405. The subscriptions obtained this Spring are, with three exceptions, to be paid in 6, 12, and 18 months. The exceptions are 500 dollars subscribed by Martin Slaughter, Scott county, Kentucky; 1000 dollars by L. A. Sandige, May's Lick, Ky.; and 1000 dollars by Judge Charles Sumner, of Akron, Ohio. These brethren promise to pay instalments at longer intervals.

This sum is both small and large viewed from different points.With regard to the magnitude of the object proposed, the demands of the community, the good to be achieved, and the expenditures necessary to carry it into effect, it is very small; but with regard to the effort made, and the times, places, and circumstances in which it was made, it is large. I have only personally addressed the community at a few points; from all of which, with a single exception, I received some encouragement; and have numerous promises of help under more favorable times and circumstances. We, therefore, confidently expect that if equal liberality be exhibited from those in similar circumstances, we shall not want funds to complete this great desideratum.

We have left subscription papers in Cincinnati, Louisville, and some other points from which we are anxious to hear, as well as from some left in Eastern Virginia. Among Resolutions passed at the late session of the Board, the following are of public interest:

On motion of William Stewart, it was

Unanimously resolved, That A. Campbell be re-appointed Treasurer of Bethany College until the next annual meeting of the Board of Trustees; and that he be authorized to solicit subscriptions, donations, and legacies to Bethany College; to appoint such Agents as he may deem requisite to assist him in obtaining contributions to said College; and to adopt such measures as may tend to procure, as soon as possible, funds in aid of the Institution.