Correspondence-On the Management of Association Business. also in Christ Jesus. And to hundreds, and in the course of a few years to thousands of us, it would be an oppor- | tunity, the only possible opportunity, of uniting in this ordinance instituted by our Saviour as one instrument of perpetuating and increasing the oneness of the body of Christ. ་ I do hope that this subject will be handled in your pages by abler pens, and introduced at the next Association by a fitter advocacy than mine. I am aware that the subject has been mooted and proposed before; but as it seems, not often enough. I hope there does not exist (God forbid there should exist) any other reason for omitting this celebration from our Feast of Tabernacles,' as it has happily been termed, than merely want of time. But I think time ought to be found for it. I believe if we resolved to have it, that the spirit it would naturally or graciously engender, would help us to save time, not now always most beneficially spent. I would suggest Thursday evening as the time; and that the arrears of business, if any, should, as formerly, be despatched early on Friday morning. The institution of a Pic-Nic might still be upheld; and if not, could be better foreborne than the great object of what the Apostle calls the 'comfort of love, and the fellowship of the spirit,' among the members of the body of Christ. In hope of this and of all good, I am, dear Mr. Editor, fraternally yours, M. B. ON THE MANAGEMENT OF THE BUSINESS OF THE ASSOCIATION. To the Editor of the General Baptist Magazine. DEAR SIR,-I think it is plainly the duty of some one to ask through the medium of our Magazine, a few questions in reference to the management of the business of our Annual Association, and at the same time I feel that the duty ought not to devolve upon me. Lest no other person should under. take the responsibility, I am constrained 297 to make a few remarks on that subject, and in so doing, I hope I shall not be considered as casting any reflection on the conduct or efficiency of our excellent chairman, nor acting in any way disrespectfully towards any member of the Association. During the sittings of the Association I confess that on the whole I could not but admire the very friendly and united feeling which prevailed, and the cool and deliberate manner in which the various topics were discussed. I think every one must have admired the spirit of enthusiasm which was manifested when the subject of College premises came on. The liberality displayed was far beyond what my feeble powers are capable of describing, and was worthy of the highest eulogium; and had that same feeling continued to the conclusion of the Association business, no one could have had any reasonable ground of complaint. I am sorry that was not the case, for very many of us were completely driven away with feelings that were anything but pleasant, and were compelled to form opinions that were neither profitable nor agreeable. Now as the past cannot be remedied, is it not our duty to take care that such proceedings shall be avoided in the future? Is it not important that the chairman should have the assistance of some person of great firmness and determination, so that the ninth rule may be strictly enforced, at least so far as it refers to persons speaking but once to the same question, and that no exception may be made to it? Is it not patent to all, that whilst some second time, others were permitted to persons were prevented speaking a waste a considerable portion of the valuable time of the Association by their much speaking to little purpose? But what was most to be complained of, was, the introduction of business into the Association which had no legitimate connexion with its affairs, and which has no right to be allowed from time to time to disturb the harmony of our annual gathering. I of course allude to the discussion of the teetotal question. Everyone knows that its introduction was quite contrary to the general feeling of the Associa tion, and that it was thrust upon us whether we would have it or not. I would ask, is it respectful to the Association for any ministers, or representatives, to propose the adjournment of the Association in order to make way for any lectures whatever, not excepting lectures on the teetotal question? Is such conduct a pattern of the refinement and courtesy which we should do well to imitate? Is it a manifestation of that good breeding which loses sight of itself in the desire that the feelings of others should not be injured? Or would it be more suitably characterized by the opposite of these, which proceed from the entire want of a knowledge of oneself? If the various representatives of the Denomination feel their incapacity to manage their business efficiently, by all means let them appoint some one to do it for them, and invest him with supremacy, and I doubt not the man will easily be found who will be glad to hold the office. But if on the other hand, they feel that they are yet capable of managing their own affairs, then let them take care that the privilege of doing so is not wrested from them. I think they will do well not to allow any business to be forced upon them, the tendency of which would be to destroy their harmony, and endanger their peace. at such a time is by no means desir able. It would be as easy to clamour it out of the meeting as to clamour it in. I cannot but feel however, that it will be a great pity if our sense of propriety alone is not sufficient to prevent a re currence of such unworthy proceedings. Is not the appointment, before the conclusion of the Association business, of a teetotal lecture by members of the Association not only disrespectful to the brethren but undesirable on other grounds? Is it right that the business of the churches of Christ should give place to anything else? Should not the gospel be the tie that should bind together the hearts of Christian men rather than teetotalism? And when the latter alone is the bond of unity, is it not delusive and dangerous? I have only to say, my motive in offering these few remarks is, that the peace and harmony of our Associations may be increased and not diminished; and that the time and expense of persons from a distance may not be wasted on subjects which can only interest a few. I remain, my dear Sir, Loughborough. H. J. DO WE CALL OURSELVES Magazine. I say nothing of the merits of the G. B. AND P. B.: OR WHY teetotal question. Right or wrong, with that I bave nothing to do. All I say is, It is not the legitimate business of the Association. I for one should never object to the discussion of the To the Editor of the General Baptist subject at proper times and places; and if it be done in a proper spirit it may prove very beneficial. But if this subject be allowed to disturb the harmony of the churches and Associations, depend upon it there is more to be feared from it than from all the drunkards in the world, inasmuch as this is within the fold sowing discord and separating very friends, whilst that, however degrading and debasing, is without. It seems clearly to be our duty not to allow it to be discussed at our annual Association, since it invariably produces feelings that are painful; and though the responsibility must rest upon the parties who introduce it, the discussion of this subject DEAR MR. EDITOR,-What unexpected things came out to view at our recent very interesting Association! The subscription for the College was wonderful, unprecedented, and in the highest degree animating and hopeful. The other point of most peculiar interest was the discussion of the question of the desirableness of a closer Union with the other or Particular Baptists. It appeared that some of us do not wish to retain the distinctive title, General, because it is not understood by those outside, or rather because it is said to be misunderstood;—so that some think it means 'free communion Baptists ;'— Correspondence-Why do we call Ourselves General Baptists. 299 others, that it means disregard of any | believer even in this life from the strict doctrinal principles, and even moral practices. If this be so, it is somewhat a disgrace to us: people ought by this time to have learnt from us that we are called General Baptists because we believe in General Redemption, effected for mankind at large by the blood-shedding of our Lord Jesus Christ; and because we are thus distinguished from those who hold that the Son of God poured out His life only for a particular or elect portion of mankind. power of indwelling sin: and sometimes they designate that ultimate emancipation from all sinfulness, from all temptation, and from all the lamentable effects of sin,-for which every believer fervently prays. Now, redemption may in some of these senses be General, in others Particular. We believe it is so. 1. We believe there is a general redemption effected by the death of the Lord Jesus for every child of Adam, without exception, and that this redemption is the foundation of the other redemptions, as well as of every invitation and every scriptural hope. Such passages as the following prove it. 1 Tim. ii. 6. 'Christ gave Himself a ransom (avτiXvтpov) for all.' Gal. iii. 13. Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us, (e§nyopaσev).' But the most astounding fact was thus elicited, that some of us did not ourselves believe in this General Re-evangelical demption. Happily it appeared that these brethren did not doubt but that the atonement of Christ was made for all the world but they thought that atonement was one thing, and redemption another; that the atonement was general, but the redemption is particular; that the atonement was a general provision made for all, but that redemption is the actual enjoyment of benefits, in fact enjoyed by but few. To such brethren, whether in the ministry or not, the following remarks offered with all respect and deference, may, it is hoped, be in some degree helpful, and show why every genuine General Baptist, in common with the Church of England, says, 'I believeIn God the Son who hath redeemed me and all mankind.' Our old divines distinguished between redemption by price, and redemption by power. This is a true and important distinction. It is enforced on us by the Greek words in the New Testament, viz. :-lutroö, lutrosis, Jutron, antilutron, apolutrosis, apoluo, ágorazo, and exagorazo. These words seemed to be used interchangeably, whether applied to the same or to different objects; the common meaning of them all being redemption, ransom, or deliverance; but the redemption itself meaning sometimes one thing, sometimes another. Sometimes these words designate what Christ has by His blood-shedding already effected for us, that is, making an atonement and propitiation for the guilt of our sins; sometimes they designate the deliverance experienced more or less by every Ephes. i. 7, and Cor. i. 14. 'In whom we have redemption (añoλurрwow) through His blood even the forgiveness of sins.' In these passages the redemption is said to be equivalent to forgiveness, as is remarkably evident in Luke vi. 37, where aroλvere is justly translated; Forgive and ye shall be forgiven.' As it is also in Heb. ix. 15, where the Apostle says, By means of death for the redemption (i. e. the forgiveness of transgressions.) This redemption in the bloodshedding of Jesus, the atonement, we believe to be general, for all mankind. For all we like sheep had gone astray, and the Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all.' Isaiah liii. 6. He was the propitiation for the sins of the whole world.' 1 John ii. 2. This redemption by the bloodshedding of Jesus is so distinguished a benefit, so peculiar to the Christian revelation, so essential to the gospel as a message of mercy to all mankind, that it is no wonder it should be regarded as the redemption; and because it is that which Christ effected and finished when he died for all,' it is no wonder that believers in Divine revelation should believe in general redemption. II. Still it must be gladly acknowledged that the same word redemption is employed to signify those personal in- | xiii. 39. How different is it to be dividual deliverances, which are ex- justified by faith without works; and perienced by those who heartily believe to be justified, as the doers of the law in the first fundamental redemption, shall be justified in that day. Rom. effected (as we have seen) for them by ii. 13, 16, and iii. 28. By thy words the death of Christ. Both these thou shalt be justified. Matt. xii. 37: blessednesses seem set forth by Paul, and were not Abrabam and Rabab Rom. v. 10. For if when we were justified by works? James ii. 21, 25. enemies we were reconciled to God by All these words contain consistent and the death of his Son, much more being indispensable truth; but the term reconciled we shall be saved by His life.''justify' does not in all these cases This other individual redemption is mean the same thing. of course subsequent to the first, is contingent, and is limited to those who believe. Sanctification presents the same diversity. God is said to be sanctified; -His name, His day, His tabernacle Such is the redemption from all and its vessels, His priests, His people, iniquity' spoken of in Titus ii. 14. Israel wholly and Jerusalem. Isaiah Such was Jacob's redemption from all v. 16, and viii. 13. 1 Peter iii. 15. Matt. evil; Israel's redemption from Egypt; vi. 9. Gen. ii. 3. Exod. xxix. 43. the saint's redemption from deceit and Levit. viii. 10. Exod. viii. 30. Numb. violence. Psalm 1xxii. 14. Such is viii. 17. Exod. xix. 10, 14. Deut. the redemption the watchful shall see vii. 6, and xiv. 2, 21. Matt. xxvii. 53. 'drawing nigh,' when the Lord Jesus Christ is said to be sanctified. John is about to return; Luke xxi. 28. x. 26, and xvii. 19. Even unbelievers, Such is the redemption of the body' husbands and wives, are sanctified to Christians anticipate as a conspicuous one another. 1 Cor. vii. 14. But all part of their adoption.' Rom. viii. 23. this is very diverse from that sanctiThen will take place the entire re-fication by the truth and by the Holy demption of the purchased possession.' Ghost, without which we sin-defiled Ephes. i. 14. Then and not till then, ones cannot see the Lord. will be completed Christ's wreath of glory, which consists of His titles as our wisdom and righteousness, sanctification and redemption.' 1 Cor. i. 30. ་ III. Now let no one start at the assertion, that the same word is used to describe things considerably different, and different words to describe things essentially the same. Let him recollect that many other of the most important terms in the Bible are employed with similar latitude. For instance, how vastly different is that salvation which Israel enjoyed from Egypt, (Jude v.) from that enjoyed by Christians now, Titus iii. 5. 2 Tim. i. 9; and from that eternal salvation they shall enjoy hereafter. Matt. xxiv. 13. Heb. v. 9 and ix. 28. How different must be our understanding of Justification, when we hear God saying 1 will not justify the wicked, and when we read that Abraham was approved for 'believing that God justified the ungodly.' Exodus xxiii. 7. Rom. iv. 5. How different is God's justifying of believers from the publicans justifying of God. Acts Reconciliation; how diverse that which takes place in mere things, from that which is done for living men, and from that which is subsequently felt in their heart. Levit. xvi. 20. Ezekiel xlv. 20. Rom. v. 10. Rom. xi. 15. 2 Cor. v. 18, 20. How different are Abraham's children in John viii. 37, from Abraham's children in v. 39! and how different God's children in Job. i. 6, and ii. 1. Ps. lxxxii. 6. Acts. xvii. 29. Isaiah i. 2. Deut. xiv. 1., from those we read of 1 John iii. 10. Rom. viii. 16. Gal. iii. 26. The same sort of distinction must be acknowledged between the 19th and the 21st verses of Isaiah lvii., and between Exodus xxxiv. 7, and xxiii. 21. We conclude, therefore, though redemption in all its meanings and completeness is limited to the believers of the gospel, that that gospel itself which they believe, is the doctrine of general redemption in the blood of the Lamb. 1 remain, dear Mr. Editor, your and your readers faithful humble servant, M. B. Correspondence-On Reading Sermons. 301 ON READING SERMONS. Daleth makes of Acts xv. 21, ' For Moses of old time hath in every city To the Editor of the General Baptist them that preach Him, being read in 'Let those teach others who themselves excel, And censure freely who have spoken well.' The tendency of Daleth's letter is to confirm prejudices already too prevalent, and to foster antipathies which are neither rational nor holy. It is this consideration, and this alone, which induces me to notice his dogmatical and offensive effusion. The practice of reading sermons is at variance with Christ's commission.' I say it is not. For the term 'preach,' expressing the duty of the apostles, is taken from the name of the herald or crier. That ancient public officer was furnished with a document containing the very words of the message he was sent to proclaim; and be was not at liberty to make any extempore announcement. A modern crier, of the common sort, whose message though short is usually written, is bound by his instructions, and is accustomed either to read from his paper, or to deliver bis message from memory. If, therefore, reading be not preaching let Daleth, when he next hears the bell man, go to him and assert that he is no crier, since he simply repeats, perhaps from a paper, what was written beforehand! Again, if preaching be in its proper nature the delivery of unpremeditated matter, what will Daleth make of such Scriptural phrases as 'Preach the Word.' Preach to it the preaching that I bid thee,' viz., Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown. He preached Christ in the synagogue, that He is the Son of God. Especially I ask what the synagogue every Sabbath day.' After confidently quoting the commission, Go and preach,' Daleth sagaciously reasons, (?) Now if the first ministers had understood the commission, as many do in the present day, the phraseology of the Scriptures but a D. ever concluded that the would have been very different.' Who been expressed could alter the expresunderstanding of a thing after it had sion of it! This, however, is Daleth's conclusion, and it is tantamount to the affirmation, that if a man understood the clock to have struck one when it actually struck two, the hour struck would have been different from the actual number. Passing over his equally preposterous observations on the cloven fongues and Peter's preaching, I beg to contradict his statement respecting Bunyan, Whitfield, and Wesley. The first and last of these were not extempore preachers. They premeditated and wrote most of what they uttered in public; and, either by the help of manuscript or memory, they delivered it as it had been prepared. And with respect to Whitfield, is Daleth ignorant of the fact that he left as many sermons written out at full length as are sufficient to fill several octavo volumes? Cornelius Winter who accompanied him in one of his voyages to America says, He spent his time in largely composing sermons, writing letters,' &c. The dramatic oratory of Whitfield could not have sustained its power over the same auditors: he had a fresh congregation every Sunday.' It may be granted that these famous preachers did not read their productions but that they studied and wrote their sermons, and made themselves master of them beforehand, there can be no doubt. Among modern preachers, the most instructive, impressive, and useful, are those who take their manuscripts into the pulpit, and who read therefrom. I know there are illustrious exceptions to this order of preachers; but they are exceptions. And even these, who pass for natural orators, have modes of |