vice, which he has furnished in the last paragraph, namelyto "come to close quarters ;" and as one good turn deserves another, I would recommend R. E. R. to make some little practical use of his own advice should he write again on this subject; for sure am I that had he used but two grains of this powerful specific, it would have saved him the labour of writing the reader the fatigue of perusing-and me the trouble of replying to matter the most incongruous, heterogeneous, and distant from the point at issue imaginable. But

First. R. E. R. appears to feel very sore, because in my last "reply" I noticed his" think;" and placed his thinking in contrast with the Word of God. This he thinks was very wrong in me, and appears to wonder if I wish people "to read the Bible without thinking!" No, R. E. R.; I do not desire that you, or any other should read the Bible without thinking; but in the most gentle manner I wished to reprove you, and those who thought with you, for thinking without reading the Bible, or for thinking what was nowhere to be found in the Bible: yea, for thinking what was in direct contradiction to the letter and spirit of the Bible. This charge is a heavy one, and ought to be well sustained; it ought, it was, and shall be again. The author of "How is it?" asked this important question :-" How persons who regard God's word and know they need remission, can ever hope to go to heaven without the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins? How is it?" This question, you, R. E. R., answered in the last Christian Messenger. How did you answer it? By a reference to the Word of God? No; but by three assertions unsupported by a single Scripture proof? Here they are:-(1) “We think it is not required of us by God. (2) It is no part of the Christian dispensation. (3) It belongs to times when divers washings and ordinances were required of the servant of God, which were to be done away at the times of reformation." These assertions I demolished by a few strokes with the "sword of the spirit, which is the Word of God," which you have not

so much as noticed in your present article, but which passages neither you, nor those who think with you will ever be able to set aside, should you continue to think them " empty and useless," till the dread realities of eternity burst upon your astonished vision. They are the words of an unerring and infinitely just God, who is not a man that he should lie, nor the son of man that he should repent. Has he said and will he not do it? Hath he sworn, and shall it not come to pass ? Has he said," Repent, and be baptized every one of you?" and shall those who dare to say "we will not," it is a" ceremony empty and useless," pass into the glory and felicity of heaven in such a state of mind? Then shall the Infidel and Atheist, for these only deny the whole, those a portion of what Jehovah has commanded. But, mark me: should a person from organic or accidental causes, be so mentally imbecile, as not to be able to comprehend what the Bible contains, or should he be deprived of the opportunity of reading the Bible, or of hearing it read, or should he be able to present a good and valid reason at the impartial tribunal of the Lord, my conviction is, that the Judge is too just to punish for what could not be avoided. But such cases neither enter into the question of the author of " How is it?" nor the three assertions which form your answer to this question. This is the true point of dispute—the "close quarters" of the subject: keep to it.

Secondly. R. E. R. finds fault with me for accusing him of making the astounding assertion, that the Christian dispensation is above all rites and ceremonies of whatever kind, &c.; and then accuses me of falling into the same error, when I affirm that if the Christian religion is above, &c., then is it beyond the comprehension of every human being. Now suppose that R. E. R. had asserted, "or supposed," or was "prepared to assert" that the social, commercial, political, and ecclesiastic affairs of this world were above the light of the sun, or any other light of whatever kind, and that in reply I affirmed, then the world would be in total darkness, and all colours beyond the comprehension of men. Would

proof be required do you think? No; well then, if all preaching, reading the Scriptures, the meeting together of saints, singing praise, prayer, exhortation, collecting for the poor, baptism, the Lord's Supper, and every other "rite and ceremony," were removed from the Christian religion, what would remain? Just nothing! Add nothing to nothing for ever, still it is nothing; and a religion of nothings I repeat, is indeed, above the comprehension of every human being, and superior to the cognition of sentient man.

Thirdly. R. E. R. again affirms that the commandment, "Love thy neighbour as thyself," "includes all the law and the prophets," &c. This assertion we shall, at present, meet with a flat and logical negative. The Scriptures nowhere inform us that all the law and the prophets hang on, or are included on this command. Let R. E. R. prove his assertion if he can. In the days of our Saviour on earth the Jews boasted that they believed in Moses; but He said unto them," Had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" And again, he said, "Why call ye me Lord, Lord, but do not the things which I say.” Yet R. E. R. affirms that they can comprehend the Scriptures, believe in God, get to heaven, &c., without attending to baptism, the Lord's Supper, or any other rite or ceremony of whatever kind; although these are the very words and precepts of the Saviour himself. What fearful delusion!

Fourthly. I must of necessity pass over much of the irrelevant matter in this article, as space will not admit much more, neither would it render a whit more clear the subject in dispute, inasmuch as it has not the smallest bearing on the question. In conclusion, therefore, we shall come to the "close quarters," and decisively tell whether he (I) thinks such a character as here described will enter heaven? Should I answer No, would that keep your "character" out of heaven? Should I say Yes, would that be a sufficient guarantee for his going to heaven? His entering heaven neither depends on your conviction, nor mine, R. E. R.; but I

shall once more furnish you with a safe, unequivocal, and irreversible answer from one who could not be mistaken. Your "character" is one who has read or can read the Scriptures" carefully and faithfully"-can understand what they command, if he understands his mother tongue: then the Saviour says to him as one of the creatures to whom the gospel was to be preached, " He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." Is this difficult of comprehension ?

It is not. He says again, "He that believeth not❞—and what we have just written, namely, "believeth and is baptized," is part of what he is to believe and practice-" he that believeth not shall be damned," or condemned. "If ye love me keep my commandments," is an affirmative proposition it contains a negative, If you do not keep my commands you do not love me.

Baptism

One word, and for the present I shall retire. alone, without faith, love, and reformation, will avail nothing. Baptism to the believer, is an institution of God, under the Christian dispensation; and wilfully to neglect it, is to take the position of open rebellion against the Most High. In such a state it will be a "fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God!" From such fearful consequences it is my earnest desire and constant prayer that R. E. R., all who think with him, and all mankind may be saved; and this can only be fully accomplished by believing in, and obeying the commands of Jesus Christ the Saviour. G. C. R.

ITEMS OF NEWS.

Moree, near Dungannon, January 31, 1844. DEAR BROTHER.-Your Messenger has a most welcome reception amongst us; and with no less pleasure than surprise do we hear that the Christianity of the New Testament is obtaining so firm a footing in a country where it must encounter the scowl of those in authority, and the opposition of a dominant and vindictive priesthood. For you, brother Wallis, who have so long and so well maintained your ground in the conflict, and for all those with you who have aided in

the good work, we have feelings of deep solicitude. May the voice which has been heard in Nottingham, pervading the fastnesses of the northern mountains, and the great thoroughfares of the southern cities, awaken many from the deep sleep into which they have fallen! Much of what we were wishing for rather than expecting, we are told has been already achieved; and for this good news we hope we are not ungrateful. But what is this that has been said, my dear brother-nay repeated, and reiterated-that the Messenger shall cease to visit us? It cannot, must not be. The brethren will surely not suffer it; even ourselves, coming in at the eleventh hour will not permit it!

I would correct an inaccurate notice of this congregation which appeared in the January number. Brother J. W. Tener, who will shortly write to you, has not been returned from America twelve years; but has been here twice within that period. His brother is land agent to several gentlemen, but Lord Dungannon is not of the number. Our present number is about twenty, and it has seldom been more reduced. Four were absent when sister G visited us. If you can spare us a copy or two of the late discussion we should be glad. We have ordered twelve copies of the Messenger, and we promise to circulate as many as possible. Your donation (for which, in the name of my brethren, I thank you), shall also be made profitable in the same manner. Would that we could have the living voice of those whose written words afford us so much pleasure and instruction! Tell me, brother Wallis, should we ask too much in asking for this?

After deducting the cost of the books, you will please appropriate the remainder, as an earnest of the good will of the brethren, to the support of the Messenger. J. MACRUM.

We cannot at present do more-and less would be ungenerous-than express our gratitude to brother Macrum for his kind expressions of good will, and his liberality in supporting the cause of truth and righteousness as revealed in the Bible. Brother M. desires to hear the living voice of those whose written words have already afforded so much comfort to him, and the brethren with him. Would that it was in our power to say it shall be done immediately; butit