From a beneficed Clergyman, to the Rev. S. T. DEAR SIR, 1 Glebe, Nov. 9, 1808. THE difficulty of discussing by letter so copious a subject as that which you propose, has heretofore deterred me from writing; nor should I now attempt it, were it not for your second application. In this, and, indeed, in every controversy, it is a material point to ascertain the questions in debate. In his Essay on Baptism, Mr. states that a profession of faith in Christ was all that the apostles required, in order to admission into othe church; he also admits, that the profession of faith made by the members of the Church of England, would have been abundantly sufficient to have introduced them into any of the apostolick churches; but he adds, they would not have been allowed to continue in such churches: by a due exercise of discipline they would (for the most part) have been excluded, on account either of unchristian sentiments or unchristian conduct. To these observa❤ tions I can fully subscribe. We must all admit, that, from want of discipline, members are allowed to enjoy the privileges of members of the Church of England, who ought to be excluded.It merely then remains to be considered, whether the want of a scriptural discipline obliges us to withdraw from a church which contains nothing sinful in the terms. of its communion, and which maintains the doctrines of the gospel in its articles and liturgy. The only mode of collecting an answer to this question would be, to consider whether the case occurred to any of the apostolick churches; and, if so, whether the apostles enjoined, or the Christians who were members of such churches adopted, the plan of separation as a necessary remedy. Indeed the controversy, when reduced within the compass of this question, is nearly at an end; for it must be admitted, that, through a neglect of scriptural discipline, disorders crept into several of the primitive churches; that no separation took place on ac count of these disorders; that such churches are addressed by the apostles and by the Lord himself; and while the church at large is rebuked, no intimation is given, that those who wished to maintain apostolick regulations ought to have formed themselves into a separate body for that purpose. In proof of the above positions, I refer to the following scriptures:22 Cor. xii. 20, 21. 3 John, ix. 10. Rev. iii. 4t to estr 94 The necessity of separation must rest on the supposition, that it is sinful to continue in communion Vols 1 aldaciqq'ui an Botolp -4 ve a with a church that does not observe apostolical ins junctions, or, as they are now called, the laws of Christ; but let any one consider what must have been the constitution of that church, in which Diotrephes obtained such an unscriptural ascendency. What member of any church in our day's could be have worse? And yet, ver. 9, and the apostle's threat, ver. 10, make it evident that he continued in that church to which the apostle had written; nor is it intimated that real Christians ought to have withdrawn from publick worship on his account.90 The church at Sardis is said to be dead, while it had a name to live. Does not this expression imply that Christianity was reduced almost to a mere profession? Even in that church were a few whose conduct adorned the gospel our Lord particularly addresses those few: he commends them for having kept themselves from the surrounding contagion, without hinting in the remotest degree that they ought to have separated. A strange confusion seems to prevail respecting two very distinct questions:→→ 1st. Ought every church, to maintain a scriptural discipline? 2d. What ought to be the conduct of those who are members of a church in which strict discipline is not observed? anThe importance of scriptural discipline is as eagerly insisted on, as if it necessarily implied the necessity of separation, and the latter question disregarded as unworthy a dis tinct consideration. The titles of the churches which occur in the different Epistles are sometimes quoted as inapplicable to the established church. They might also be quoted as inapplicable to many of the members, even of apostolick churches, (see Phil. iii. 18;) but they apply to real Christians of every denomination. They describe what real Christians are, and what all who profess Christianity ought to be. No. XI. EXTRACT OF A LETTER From the Rev. William Digby, Archdeacon of Elphin, to the Editor. MY DEAR FRIEND, Carrick-on-Shannon, I CANNOT Suppose that any communication coming from one so weak as I am, upon the very important subject proposed in your letter, can add any thing to what you know already, and are able to say to the world, to warn those awakened persons whose minds have been turned to the question of separating themselves from their brethren, against such a step. However, as you call upon me for the discharge of a duty incumbent on me as a minister, I must not refuse; especially as I was permitted to learn something experimentally upon this subject, perhaps that I might be able to speak a word in season to them, as well as for my own humiliation. It certainly appears a most enticing idea to a person newly awakened, to endeavour to have the church on earth perfectly pure, until a further acquaintance with self and with scripture shows this to be both impracticable at present, and also that the attempt itself is forbidden. We become hereby involved in much positive transgression, by being led |