lisher," to do good, by circulating religious newspapers in their respective spheres.

66

The Boston Recorder' casts his mite into the treasury of the American Education Society. To make learned teachers of Christianity is his grand object, next to enlarging his subscription list. "The reasons," he says, “ why the Education Society was formed may be found in the following facts: One hundred and forty-six towns in Maine; forty-five towns in two counties of New Hampshire; one hundred and thirty-nine towns in Vermont; fifty-three congregations in Massachusetts; three hundred and eighty-nine congregations in the Presbyterian church in New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio; forty-six counties containing three hundred and four thousand inhabitants in Virginia ; three hundred and thirty-two churches of different denominations in South Carolina, all Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, and Michigan, except so far as a few ministers can supply a population of three hundred thousand, scattered over a territory almost three times as large as New England; one thousand churches in the Baptist, and four hundred and fifty-one churches in the Presbyterian connexion, are destitute of educated ministers. Add to these appalling facts the unparalleled increase of our population, and the disproportionate increase of our religious institutions, and to these the deep darkness that covers vast portions of our globe, and truly the harvest is great, and the labourers are few. Hence, then, the necessity of the American Education Society."

6

How very different the course recommended by the 'Recorder' to enlighten the world, and that recommended by the Saviour and his Apostles! The scheme of a learned priesthood chiefly composed of beneficiaries, has long since proved itself to be a grand device to keep men in ignorance and bondage; a scheme by means of which the people have been shrewdly taught to put out their own eyes, to fetter their own feet, and to bind the yoke upon their own necks. From this iniquitous scheme a knowledge of the New Testament is the only means that can set the people FREE. A. C.

REFORMERS AND ANTI-REFORMERS, LISTEN TO THE WARNING VOICE!

[From the Millennial Harbinger, Vol. III.]

The following letter is worthy of the special attention of all men who either plead for reformation or oppose it. The force and point of the suggestions are irresistible to all who have, or are desirous to have, a good conscience towards God. I have been resolving and re-resolving for some months to devote some pages to exhortation on the subject of keeping the command

ments in the churches; but the misrepresentations and cavils, and questions, touching Christian immersion and the conversion of sinners, have hitherto prevented us. Our opponents say, "What is the reformation for which you contend?" and deign us no opportunity to reply, but proceed to denounce and condemn.

Our Essays on the ancient order of things were begun seven years ago the 7th of last month, under the conviction that nothing permanently valuable, worthy of the name of reformation in the church-nothing permanently and extensively useful in the conversion of the world, can be achieved unless the citizens in the kingdom of Messiah do their duty first as individuals in all personal purity and excellency, and as congregations in all social co-operations in keeping all the ordinances and traditions of the Apostles. The union of present professors, called the union of Christians, is not worth an effort, if united they were to proceed as the Baptists and Christians, and Methodists and Presbyterians, now proceed. If there was no division among them, but all united in the order now prevalent in any one of these sects, I would, were it my last breath, say, Reform," or “Come out of her, you people that fear God and wish to stand with Jesus in the new and heavenly Jerusalem." I fear, in the noise and commotion about. baptism and other first principles, about conversion and regeneration, the commandments and ordinances of the Lord and Saviour will be neglected. I thank the brother who writes the following for calling up this subject again to our consideration. A. Č.

66

King William, Va. March, 1832.

DEAR BROTHER CAMPBELL,

Although I think the subject of baptism has of late occupied an undue portion of attention on the part of those who profess to be reformers, and that it is desirable to let the subject rest now, unless some new ground should be taken; yet I cannot but think it may be of service to publish the following extract from the forty-fourth tract of the Baptist General Tract Society, entitled A Scripture Manual, or a Plain Representation of the Ordinance of Baptism, designed for the use of all who would answer a good conscience toward God, and give a reason of their faith and practice with meekness and fear. By Samuel Wilson. Published by the Baptist General Tract Society.'

Page 11.-The writer says, "Here I observed how

Peter understood his commission; he began with preaching or teaching, waiting for the success of his labour. Nor did I find a word of baptism till they were pricked in their hearts; then, indeed, and not before, he says, 'Repent, and be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus;' which I understand after this manner-If you are, indeed, grieved and ashamed of your conduct towards this Jesus, whom you have crucified; if you are convinced by the Spirit of God he is the Messiah, the great Redeemer and King of his Church, and have a confidential dependence on him for salvation; then you are to be baptized in his name, and may hope for a comfortable evidence in your baptism of the remission of your sins, and that you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." And, for their encouragement, he adds, "For the promise is to you and your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord your God shall call."

6

This at least furnishes us with a good argumentum ad hominem. You that teach baptism for the remission of sins, do you charge us with the same doctrine, and complain of us for teaching it! I hope you will give this a place in the Harbinger,' and ask the supporters of the Baptist General Tract Society what they mean by it. Are not Messrs. Brantly, Clopton, cum multis aliis, who oppose this doctrine under the title of the "Brooke Doctrine," the patrons and advocates of this Tract Society? Surely this ought to suggest to them the propriety of revising their tracts, and expunging everything like "Campbellism;" or else they should cease to call this the "Brooke Doctrine." They should recollect, if they will not admit that this doctrine is as old as the apostolic days, it is at least eighty-two years old-Samuel Wilson, the author of the tract, having died in 1750. It was moreover adopted as a tract as early as the year 1827, about the time that you commenced your publications on this subject.

I have not yet had the pleasure of seeing your father, but I am informed the Baptists generally yield their assent to the principles which he lays as the foundation of the contemplated reformation. Bishop A. Broaddus, after expressing his approbation of them, has published an admonition to the churches of Virginia, guarding them against

your father. I have not seen his publication; but, from a conversation which I had with him, I think he apprehends your father has some ulterior design. Now, I do suppose he has a farther design; and that is, to urge them to carry out their principles in practice. With the extract before us, which I have made from their 44th tract, may we not say to them, If this is your doctrine, surely you act inconsistently in not practising upon it, or rather in not insisting upon it in your addresses to sinners? for as long as they continue to refuse "the blood of the new covenant which is shed for the remission of sins" to unimmersed persons, we are authorised to say they do practise upon this doctrine. The fact is, this is with them a "tangled broach," and until they can get it out of the tangle, it is well for them to back out of the controversy on baptism, as it seems Messrs. Ball and Sands wish to do.

But, as I said at first, I do think we have (at least in this part of the country) paid an undue portion of attention to the subject of baptism. I think it has engrossed attention to the exclusion of other important matters upon which reformation is much needed. It is reformation in the churches, in the now existing disciples, that is the grand desideratum. Until this is effected, we are not properly prepared to make converts to Christianity. The churches, with the Scriptures, should, I apprehend, occupy the place of the Apostles. The Apostles were commissioned to go forth and make converts, baptizing them, and teaching them to observe all things that were commanded. Unless the churches practise the things commanded to be observed by the Apostles, the converts made by them are not made to Christianity as taught by the Apostles. The individual who enters our churches at present, does it without having in prospect to be called on to exercise any great degree of self-denial. The test to which his love to Christ and his people is put is a very easy one-one through whose ordeal almost any man, whose character is tolerably moral, might pass. I fear there is not a majority of our professors who could bear to be called upon to meet with their brethren in the Lord, if, to effect this, they should have to deny themselves the privilege of going where they would meet with a large crowd, convened to attend upon the ministrations of

a popular orator. This part of the reformation, I think, has been neglected among us. Some of our leading reformers have been engaged in going from place to place, making converts, and leaving them to go on upon the old systemthat is, the monthly meeting system, and travelling from place to place after the preachers. This is a point upon which reformation is much needed. While weekly meetings of disciples are calculated to fan and keep lively the love of Christians for their Master and one another, it would operate as the best safeguard against the introduction of false disciples a much better one, I apprehend, than that of requiring an experience as the condition of admission. I should hail it as an auspicious day to Christianity, could I see the disciples with delight, each Lord's day, hasten to meet with each other. Then might they "We know we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren." But how can that man avail himself of this testimony who has not love enough for his poor brethren to be willing to meet with them, unless when the people in the neighbourhood generally convene? who, possessed of the means of travelling to a meeting at a distance, will rather travel from place to place after the preachers?—thus treating himself to the pleasure which variety of scene and society affords, than submit to the irksomeness of seeing the same faces every Sunday.

say,

"If

a man love not his brother, whom he has seen, how can he love the Lord, whom he has not seen?" The fact is, there are many members of churches in this part of the country, who, if acquainted at all, have but a passing acquaintance. My dear Brother, I think this subject, together with the weekly breaking of bread, ought to be more insisted upon by the reformers; and I should be pleased to see it urged upon the churches more in the 'Harbinger,' than it has been of late. It is in vain for us to assume the imposing name of reformers, unless we indeed reform.

In the fellowship of our common Lord, yours,

INQUIRER.