another; another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. He that regardeth the day, regardeth it to the Lord, and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord, he doth not regard it. He that eateth, eateth to the Lord, for he giveth God thanks; and he that eateth not, to the Lord, he eateth not, and giveth God thanks. The application of these principles to subjects in debate between Christians as well as others, at the present day and in this country, ought most seriously to be considered. What torrents of contumely and abuse poured out upon each other, and what heavy reproaches thence resulting to the sacred name by which they are called, had been spared, had these divine sayings been duly regarded, it is not difficult to see. Their application to the more specific form of communion, not contemplated, is also plain. For if the apostle so strongly reprehended those unkindnesses in the ordinary intercourse of brethren by which the comfort of their union was marred, what would he have said had they proceeded, for the same cause, to an open rupture? If notwithstanding their differences they were to receive each other in the embraces of mutual affection, because both were received of God, surely they could not refuse each other those sacred symbols of the love of Christ which he expressly appointed as the visible pledges of that affection.

How is it, then, that Christians can violate a principle so vital to their religion, and so dear too to their own hearts when the love of God is shed abroad in them by the Holy Ghost? To mistaken views of the consequences of a strict adherence to it in cases of difference, must this in part be ascribed. The notion is firmly wrought into the minds of some that by sitting at the table of the Lord with those by whom, as they conceive, errors in doctrine or practice are embraced, they virtually certify their approbation of those errors, and become partakers of the sin. Does our communion with another in the Lord's supper, then, imply our approbation of all that belongs to his character and conduct? On this principle all communion whatever in this ordinance is forever cut off; for not an individual on earth can be found whose character in every point another can approve. And why are we not equally precluded from all other acts of communion? Social prayer, the right hand of fellowship, the commendatory epistle, the appellation of brother or sister as a term of spiritual relationship, are as really tokens of communion as the Lord's supper; and equally involve a par2

SECOND SERIES, VOL. II. NO. III.

ticipation in the sins of those with whom we reciprocate them. But in truth social communion goes no farther than the acts which express it. Uniting with another in prayer is only assenting to the worship. Giving a brother a letter of commendation only certifies his standing in the church. So also to sit down with him at the table of the Lord is an act of communion with him in the body and blood of the Lord, and nothing more. Whatever errors in doctrine or corruptions in worship or in morals he may adopt, provided only that these are not inconsistent with his having communion with Christ in his body and blood, they are not inconsistent with our communion with him in these. His sins are his own; and to his own master he standeth or falleth.

6

But it is said, we are bound to testify against all sin, and sins which have found their way into the church and are tolerated there, it is especially our duty to rebuke; but to sit down at the table of the Lord with those who freely practise and justify them is to make void our testimony.' There are unquestionably sins which call for the judicial sentence of the church on such as persist in them, excluding them from its communion. But the power of this infliction is not given to individual members, and least of all, the power of inflicting it on sincere though erring disciples. And for what purpose should it be desired? For the reformation of the erring? The apostle has shown us a more excellent way. "Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted." To the performance of this office, with the very best hopes of success, communion with "such an one" in the supper of the Lord, interposes no hindrance. Who is so likely to convince another of an error, as he who first convinces him of his own love? Or who will so powerfully persuade him to repentance as he who avails himself of his known regard for him, plainly, yet tenderly, to tell him of his faults? No-it is not by first casting out each other among the dogs, that brethren can hope to exert upon each other a reclaiming influence. Let them meet as children at their father's table; let their hearts be melted together by the love of their elder brother as exhibited there; and let their habitual demeanor and spirit be correspondent, and they will then be prepared in the best possible manner, to canvass together the subject concerning which they may have been at variance. Or if the object be a public testimony against prevailing sins, nei

ther is this precluded by sacramental communion with any who, even though they may be considered as giving countenance to those sins, are yet to be regarded as members of Christ. The apostle Paul did not think himself precluded from an open testimony against the sins of the Corinthian Christians-their party strifes, their litigious spirit, and their profanation of the sacred supper, because at the same time he acknowledged them to be "a church of God, sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints." Nor did the Lord Jesus Christ forbear to testify against the sins of the seven churches of Asia, nor to call on all who had ears to hear what the spirit said to those churches, because he walked among them as the golden candlesticks of his spiritual temple. And what minister of Christ is there who reproves the church of his care with the less freedom or boldness, because he glorifies God for the grace that is conferred upon it?

There is indeed a way of testifying against sin, which the conscience of no man, that is not past feeling, can permit him to employ with those whom he admits to an interchange of the sacramental pledges of christian affection. Brethren cannot go from the table of the Lord to brand each other with names and epithets which belong to the vilest of men. Herein lies the moral power-the restraining-the divinely blessed influence of the ordinance on those who seriously observe it. And if there are any who would cast out their brethren for the very purpose of feeling themselves at liberty in this manner to judge them, let them first judge their own selves, and solemnly inquire whether no spirit of vindictiveness has unconsciously mingled itself with their zeal against sin.

An argument has been extensively circulated asserting that by the authority of the apostle Paul, slave-holders are expressly excluded from the Lord's supper, as "extortioners:"-enjoining on us, as he does 1 Cor. 5: 11, "if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with such an one, not to keep company, no, not to eat." It should be considered that in close connection with this injunction 1 Cor. 6: 9, 10, the apostle declares concerning the very same class of persons, "fornicators, idolaters, covetous, drunkards, revilers, extortioners, and others, that they shall not inherit the kingdom of God." The argument, then, whether sound or otherwise, makes nothing against our position. That we are to join in sacramental communion with any whom the Bible declares specifically to have

no inheritance in the kingdom of God, certainly is not pretended. But it has been generally conceded on all hands that there are slave-holders whose christian character is not to be questioned. It has been avowedly with the hope of first disenthralling their minds of the perverting influence of the system, and by their means reforming public sentiment around them, that the anti-slavery enterprize has been carried forward. Whether wisely or not, this is not the place to show. It is only with a view to their bearing on a fundamental principle of the church of God, that these remarks are made. There are, then, slave-holders who are not "extortioners," in the sense of the declaration that "extortioners shall not inherit the kingdom of God." For the same reason there are those who are not extortioners in the sense of the injunction, "with such not to keep company, no, not to eat." It is true that to take advantage of another's weakness to wrest from him his due, whether by slavery or in any other way, and even the desire of doing this, is, in the sight of God, of the nature of extortion. So also is the harboring of impure desire, adultery-and hankering for that which is another's, covetousness; and inordinate love for the world, idolatry-and the unkind application of any opprobrious epithet to another, reviling. But if all those who are chargeable before God with sins of this nature, of whatever degree or form, may therefore be properly characterized as "fornicators, covetous, idolaters, revilers, and extortioners," whom can we know to be those with whom in the sacred supper of the Lord, we may eat?-who would dare himself to partake in that ordinance? who, indeed, could be saved? Surely it becomes those who on such grounds assume the authority of shutting away acknowledged brethren from the ordinance, to inquire whether there are not " with them also sins against the Lord."

The spiritual power with which Christ has armed his church is high and awful. As the means in the last resort of softening and reclaiming, when duly exercised, it has no parallel on earth. Many, however, seem to forget that its efficacy depends entirely on its harmonizing with the conscience of the transgressor. Responded to there, it comes as the voice of God to the soul, by the organ which he has expressly instituted, to be confirmed, unless repentance intervene, by a corresponding sentence, at the last day. But when the censure falls on those who are sustained by the consciousness of integrity, and more especially if they are also fortified by the approving sentiments of the com

munity or a respectable portion of the community around them; when the voice is regarded not as the voice of God, or of his appointed organ, but only of a party and is opposed by a contrary decision equally claiming a divine sanction, how much worse than powerless it becomes! As it confessedly carries no argument, so it is regarded only as a perversion of authority. It has no tendency to convince, and can have no influence but to excite prejudice and provoke disgust. As a public testimony also it is contemptible in its weakness; while it presents the church in an attitude by which supremely God is dishonored, his enemies triumph, and his friends are forced to retire and weep, disheartened, wounded, enfeebled. O when will these things cease? When shall "the envy of Ephraim depart, and the adversaries of Judah be cut off; that Ephraim shall not envy Judah, nor Judah vex Ephraim?" When will the followers of "the martyred Lamb" learn that to testify against sin, they have no need to thrust out the sinner;-that to pronounce a man criminal, is not of course to pronounce him unfit for the communion of the faithful; that the church of God is one; the common refuge and home of the Jew and the Gentile; the bond and the free; the strong and the weak; the enlightened and the ignorant; all of every nation, class and character who call upon the name of Jesus Christ in sincerity; and that its essential bond is love, pure, fervent, unfeigned; love surmounting all distinctions of nation, color, caste, rank, and sect; love prevailing over all errors, mistakes and infirmities among those who feel its power; constraining them to cover each other's imperfections, bear with each other's wrongs, befriend one another in trials, be careful of each other's reputation and feelings, deny themselves to do each other good, and labor, pray and suffer together, to promote the common end of all, the glory of God, in the salvation of souls, with the hope of standing together at last before the throne of glory, and there with perfect union of heart and voice, saying "Salvation to our God, which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb.”