to lay their brethren who have embraced the sentiment of open communion under such restrictions, as will pave the way for their excommunication.

Again; the scripture saith, "No man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:" Eph. v. 29. but in our attempts to extricate ourselves from those whom we acknowledge to be members of the body of Christ with us, we have manifested a hatred towards our own flesh; and the practice of separating members from our churches, and at the same time acknowledging them to be good christians, cannot be supported by scripture. If a member of a man's body hecomes a dead; destructive member to the man, reason requires, that it should be completely separated from the body; but to eut and mangle a member that is not dead, and neither heal nor cut it completely off, but put the meinber, and the whole body in pain, or to cut off a limb, and afterwards make use of it when about our labour, but when we sit down to eat lay it by, is contrary to nature; but, alas! it is similar to the proceedure of some of our churches! “My brethren, these things ought not so to be.” James iii. 10.

The following remarks of Mr. Hall ought to be considered by every serious minded christian: "In withholding the signs from those who are in possession of the thing signified, in refusing to communicate the symbols of the great sacrifice to those who are equally with themselves sprinkled with Christ's blood, and sharers of its efficacy, in dividing the regenerate into two classes, believers and communicants, and confining the church to the narrow limits of sect, they have violated more maxims of antiquity, and receded further from the example of the Apostles; than any class of christians on record.'

It is not known by the close communion baptists, how many there are of their own denomination, who believe in their hearts in open communion. I was surprised myself, after de

*Hall's Terms of Communion, page 42, 43.

Many of our brethren do not like the term, close communion; and they will not admit they put up bars, but they say that the Podobaptists put them up; but this would be a very absurd thing, for the very people who had a desire to come to the Lord's table, to put up bars and shut themselves away. As to the term, close communion, I sometimes use it be. cause it is generally used as the most convenient word to express our idea on this subject. They think the word is improper, and that their commun ion is no more close than that of the Podobaptists. I am not certain that the term, close communion, is the most proper one; but I suppose it will be admitted by its advocates, that the true import of their sentiments and practice is this, that the privilege of commemorating the death of Christ; is confined within the narrow limits of the haptist denomination. Now, as no other christians can be admitted to the table of the Lord, the ques tion is, whether there is not some propriety in the use of the term, close communion?

vn'ging my sentiments to my brethren, to find so many who replied that they entertained the same belief, and some had for many years; but they had mostly kept their feelings to themin selves, knowing that as soon as they introduced their sentimente to their brethren it would bring a trial, and they should get ath blot to themselves, if they were not cut off from the church. My dear brethren, it is not possible that you can know the feelings of our hearts in such circumstances, unless you know by experience. It was above two years that I kept my feelings hid from all as much as possible, except a very few brethren with whom I conversed in a private way; but since I have di vulged the sentiment publickly, influence has been used from dif ferent quarters, and in different ways, to persuade us to recede from the sentiment. I have learned the painful, but true lesson, that our baptist brethren take those methods to retain and multiply proselytes, which I once with regret beheld among some other christians. Did I say the same methods? Some of them have gone so far beyond those other christians, that they consider their own judgment, on terms of communion, almost an infallible standard; and with this principle do actually proseed, in the view of other christians, to put asunder "what God hath joined together." In view of such a proceedure, many christians, foreseeing what their fate must be, if they did noth shut their mouths about open communion, have concluded tom he as silent as possible at present, and continue as they were. In this way, probably, I should have continued even until this very day, if God, by his grace, had not convinced me that it was better to do his will, and meet his approbation, than to have the whole world on my side, and God against me.

SECTION 4.

A union and communion amongst christians soon expected. My dear brethren, and especially those in the Ministry:

Ir appears that the night of close communion darkness, which confines the celebration of the death of the Son of God to the baptist church only, is far spent!! and that the day is at hand, wherein it will appear that other christians besides ourselves, who have a Saviour, may commemorate his death. Light is pouring in from different directions. The writings of brother Hall, of England,* and the hints from the regions of the East, by brother Ward,† and from Massachusetts, by brothers Going and Branch, and from brother Benedict, of Rhode-Island,§ and of brother Hough, in the East, who has recently wrote to a friend

* See Robert Hall's pamphlet on terms of communion. -† See Boston Recorder April 6, 1822 See Boston Recorder May 25, 1822.-10thor of the history of the Baptists, with whom I have conversed personally and found him established in the sentiment of open communion.

New Hampshire, informing him that if he was in America, e should use all his influence to do away close communion, and he full conviction that many deserving christians have arrived > in their own consciences, and the exertions that our opponnts are making against even the sentiment, before it is reduced o practice, all conspire to forebode the appearance of day. The time has come, when some begin to think they must act or God and eternity! and must love the praise of God more han the praise of man! And although we love our brethren, and the fellowship of the Associations, yet we must love our Saviour more than all! And we must not inquire "What shall this man do?"* but, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?"† The fear of excommunication for advocating in favour of christian communion, and the loss of fellowship with our Associations, hath long struck a dread on the minds of many, like the appearance of Goliah the Philistian on the armies of Israel, before whose presence the host fled in sore dismay, till David, the stripling appeared in the strength of the Lord, and gained a sighal victory! Blessed be the Lord, there are some Davids at the present day. But by this time some of my brethren may begin to say, "Thou art beside thyself; much" zeal "doth make thee mad." But "I am not mad, most noble" brethren, "but speak forth the words" (as they appear to me) "of truth and soberness." My brethren, as the voice of the multitude, and of the chief priests prevailed over Pilate to pass sentence against our Saviour, so the voice of the body of our denomination and Chief Ministers, hath too long prevailed over us, when we continued in a practice that militates against our own conscience. Let us consider ourselves obligated to act for the honour of our bleeding Saviour, and to exercise those feelings in our hearts, that we shall wish to possess in the day of death and judgment.

How can we, my dear brethren, judge those whom we acknow!edge to be Christians, and separate them from our company at communion, without one, at least, plain text of scripture for so doing; and it must be acknowledged, that when we search for such a text, it is not to be found in the bible,-nor can it be proved, that all the twelve Apostles, with whom our Saviour communed, were baptized any way; but we are not informed

* John xxi, 21, 22. Acts ix, 6. 1 Sam. xvii

§ It is a very solemn thing to sever the members of the body of Christ, and to put "asunder what God has joined together." And it ought not to be done without some plain direction in the word of God. The scripture saith "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinueth." Deu. xix, 15, and in this case we have not one witness.

It is the opinion of Mr. Frey, the converted Jew, as he recently in formed me, that some of the 12 Apostles were not baptized any way; and

24

that our Lord was afraid that the want of an external washing their bodies, would defile him; but I fear, my brethren, that w have been over much righteous, and unwilling to commune will those with whom our Saviour communes.

The Apostle says, "let a man examine himself, and so le him eat of that bread and drink of that cup." 29* Every commu nicant should examine for himself, and be fully pursuaded in his own mind; for "to his own master he standeth or falleth. If he feels it his duty to partake, he must act for himself, and if he is under a mistake concerning our duty, his presence will not defile us; we shall not be accountable for his mistake. The Apostle rejoiced at the preaching of Christ, although "some preached him even of envy and strife." And have we not reason to rejoice, when the death of Christ is set forth by those who do it of "good will," if they are mistaken concerning the ordinances of baptism?-But one thing I hope we shall not for get, and that is this; that after our long and zealous contention for baptism's being an essential prerequisite to communion, we are wanting in proof: and not only so, but we cannot prove that christian baptism was instituted tiil after the Lord's Supper; for this was instituted before his death; but Christian baptism was not instituted till after his resurrection, and then it was enjoined upon the Apostles to practice as follows: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." It is evident that there was no such commission given to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, by our Saviour, or John the Baptist, or any other, that is recorded, before the institution of the supper; and we must at once admit, that baptism would not be valid, if it was not administred in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. Another thing that confirms this opinion, is the circumstance of the diciples, that Paul found at Ephesus, who were baptized the second time. See Acts xix, 1-5 there is certainly room for a query why there was not mention made of their baptism, if all were baptized since they were called to such a distin guished office, as to lead the van in the Church of Christ; and express in formatian is given not only of the baptism of our Saviour and of Paul, but of many common saints. If our opponents by this time begin to say that the author is explaining away baptism, I reply that this is not the case, l would not do it for my right hand: but my object is this, to shew the dan ger of excluding members from our communion presumliously, without sufficient testimony against them. The express command of our Saviour to his diciples to teach and baptize, which he gave them after he instituted his supper, destroys the idea of doing away baptism* 1 Cor. xi, 28.— t Phil. i, 16-19.

Mat. xxvi, 26, 27. § Mat. xxviii, 19. Another circumstance that requires our candid attentiou is, what is said of Apollos, that he knew on ly the baptism of John. This statement implies that there was onother baptism besides John's, that was necessary to be understood and attended

It seems that Paul and those diciples, did not consider their first? baptism valid, because it was not administered in the name of the Lord Jesus. However, perhaps many who had been baptized unto John's baptism, received no other, but continued under that mistake, and yet were not debared from the table of the Lord. And shall we debar our Poedobaptist brethren from our communion, because we think they are mistaken in the performance of baptism? when at the same time we acknowledge that "Christ has received them" as-Christians!! O my dear brethren "Let us not judge one another any more.

CONCLUSION.

C

.

Ir has a very unfavourable appearance for brethren, who have become disaffected towards ea ch other, on account of a mistake in one of the externals of religion, to see them inclined to separate from each other, and to dissolve those ties of love, which once appeared so strong. How is it possible, my brethren, that we who have covenanted together as a church of Christ, and have once appeared so united, that the world took knowledge of us that we had been with Jesus, should, on account of a desire in some to unite with other christians in showing forth the death › of our Saviour, separate them quite from our company at the Lord's table. Did our Saviour exercise a spirit of separation? No! his love was stronger than death! and when he saw his disciples' mistakes, he corrected them, but did not separate his lit- tle flock from each other. No, the scripture informs us, "that nothing shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." When our Saviour speaks of separating the people, he does not tell of dividing and subdividing his little flock, but of making one general division; and that will be between the sheep and goats. When he speaks of his sheep, he does not say that he must divide them into different folds, but he says, "Them, also, I must bring," not separate, "and there shall be" not two, but "one fold, and one shepherd." If he should decide for us, my brethren, concerning our having two or more tables, have we not reason to believe, that he would say, as of his speep-fold, there shall be but one table? And, indeed, if Christ be not divided, why should his table and little flock be divided? How do our baptist and Podobapto and it is still more evident, when we take into consideration, that, Aquilly and Priscilla took Apollos and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly. And it adds peculiar force to the argument, when we consider that it is called the way of God, shewing that there is a baptism besides Jubn's that is of God, and will not every deliberate Christian be convinced that it is the baptism that Christ commanded his diciples to bap tize with, after be instituted the supper. Acts aviii, 24, 25, 26. aiv, 13. Rom. viii, 39, John, x, 16.

3.

*Rom

3