It sinks like lead in the waters into their minds; they ask, who did the minister mean? Me to be sure. Yes, replies unbelief, you are one of them, and tears are mingled with their bread. There may be in every church some, who should be observed with a jealous eye, but indiscriminate censure will not even do these any good. Have these gentlemen ever seen any valuable end answered by this conduct? Calmly reviewing the present times, may we not say, Many have desired to see the things our eyes have seen, and to hear what we have heard.Quench not the Spirit. P. Q. THE SUPRA-LAPSARIAN SCHEME Consistent with itself, but inconsistent with the Scriptures. THE supra and sub-lapsarian schemes, in their various ramifications and relations, are a source of division, and in some respects form a line of distinction among Calvinistic Believers. (All these terms however I here use merely for the sake of distinction.) While in the general conversation of Christians it has often been found that the differences which subsist among them are more in words than in things, and while this is still more evident in their prayers, yet it must be confessed that, even among good men themselves, there are some real and important differences. Under the name of Calvinists, both supraand sub-lapsarians are included; and it often happens, both with Ministers and private christians, that both these schemes, in part, compose their respective creeds, so that it is, in some measure, difficult for themselves, and more so for others, to know what are their real sentiments. It is not my province here to say, (if I could,) what is the common cause of this too frequent confusion of ideas, but I have thought that, a more systematic method, both of studying and preaching, might prove a considerable preventative. Let every one think and act conscientiously for himself. My intention is not to blame any man for the doctrines he has embraced. My aim is at things, and not at persons. It has appeared to me, that a simple statement of the outline of the two forementioned schemes, together with their agreement or disagreement with the divine. revelation, may be of considerable service to some pious, but ⚫not very intelligent persons. This outline I wish as plainly as I can to lay before them, and hope those who may differ from me, will candidly, with examination of the Scriptures, and with prayer, review the whole before they either censure of condemn. If wrong, I am open to conviction. I do not challenge controversy, but if controverted, will in some way, in the spirit of the gospel, endeavour to reply, keeping Truth, and not Victory, for my object; and as a very judicious Author observes, "If truth be found, what does it signify who finds it ?" I begin with the Supra-lapsarian Scheme. The doctrines of this seem to be as follow; i. c. if this Scheme be considered in harmony with itself. 1. God elected his people from all eternity out of the pure mass of creatureship to be finally and everlastingly happy; and as a Sovereign, left others, or rather ordained them, though in the pure mass of creatureship, also, to fall into sin, and to be forever miserable. The choice of the one, and the rejection of the other, being mere acts of sovereignty, irrespective of any other consideration. 2. The people of God, always were in the covenant of grace, and never were under the law-they never fell-"God never saw sin in his people."-God never was angry with his people -Their ignorance of him is not sinful in them, but sovereign in him; because the time is not come for them to know him, but independent of all means, they shall surely be brought to know him in his own time.-It is taking the work out of God's hands, and denying the work of the Holy Spirit, to attempt to instruct men in the knowledge of God. 3. The people of God are eternally justified, and never will be condemned, never were so. Faith is believing that I am chosen in Christ; but this is the gift of God, and no man is condemned for not having it. 4. All the promises of God are made to his people, particularly those which secure their final safety; for God has said, They shall never perish-that he will never leave them nor for sake them. 5. In the final judgment, the elect shall not be judged out of the books of nature and conscience, of law or gospel; but alone out of the Lamb's book of life. * Such appears to me a fair statement of the above Scheme, harmonized in all its parts. I am fully aware that other statements have been given, but never could find their component * This I heard stated to a very large Congregation very lately, parts agree together. They mention original and actual trans11 gressions, redemption by Christ, regeneration by the Holy Spirit, &c. In these last doctrines, and those which the SCRIPTURES Connect with them, I hope ever to glory, and shall endeavour to shew their indissoluble uuion in my next paper; but I can see no agreement between them and the things stated in this. For if God never saw sin in his peopleeither it was never there--or he cannot be the all-seeing God. If they never sinned-if God were never angry with themif never exposed to wrath.-For what did they want a Redeemer? Or from what are they redeemed? If they never were sinners, surely the regenerating and sanctifying influences of the Holy Spirit must be to them unnecessary and useless. Though in the above sheme, (composed of well-known expressions in the professing world,) there seems an agreement with some detached parts of Scripture; I think it will strike every attentive reader, as repugnant to the general tenor of the word of God. If time and paper would permit, I would here shew its opposition to revealed truth; and this I will endeayour still to do if requested. But in my next paper, (if spared and permitted,) I intend to give the outline of the Sub-lapsarian Scheme, which to me appears united in all its parts, and perfectly in harmony with the Scriptures. Doing that will perhaps supersede the necessity of placing opposing Scriptures now. "Dear Sir, Dr. Clarke's Explanatory Note. [To the Editor of the Methodist Magazine.] "IN the postscript to the "Memoirs of Mr. Tripp, of Lowestoff," there is a circumstance alluded to, which without a note of explanation, may be improperly applied, at least, it struck me so on reading over the account this morning. may be sufficient to say, that no reflection is there intended on It that denomination of christians called Baptists, nor on their mode of administering Baptism. The reference is to a most shameful and unprincipled intrusion into the peace of a religious society, by a person wholly, I take for granted, unauthorized, even by persons of his own persuasion, who endeavoured by disgraceful arts to raise up a people for himself, out of other religious societies; and by his "trade of proselytism, separated the worshipping husband and wife," &c. This person, when he had made a proselyte, took care to make him the instrument of making others, by exhibiting him in the most public manner, and glorying in the conquest he had made. To such a case alone is the reference in the above postscript; and as some persons are still alive, I shall not enter into other particulars. No regular Baptist Church would have suffered such conduct, much less would the body of that denomination of christians; which, considered as a religious people, are as respectable, zealous, pious, and useful, as most people in the land. I know not that the account would be misconstrued, but fearing lest it should, I have taken the liberty to request you to insert the above note. I am, London, May 16, 1811. dear sir, your's respectfully, On the contents of this note we observe, 1. Dr. Clarke here completely exonerates the Baptist denomination from the serious charges in his former account of Mr. Tripp's curious temptations, and recants the false witness he had, through inattention, borne against his neighbour. Such a charge would have been overlooked in a local preacher, but Dr. Clarke ought to have been more circumspect and explicit. 2. The charge is now fixed on a particular person, with the heavy addition of other insinuations; but are we sure the Dr. here is quite correct? We remember who hath said, He that is first in his own cause seemeth just, but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him out. If the Dr. had favoured the public with the names of persons and place concerned in the transaction he alludes to, the parties might have answered for themselves; if he thought that unadviseable, he should have held his peace. It is a reprehensible meanness first to stigmatize a whole denomination on account of something which he afterwards avows his belief that no branch of it would authorise or permit, and then skulk from reprehension behind a nameless individual. If the Dr. will name the party, we shall explicitly avow our disapprobation of his proceedings, as far as they appear to deserve it; but till he does so, we cannot avoid suspecting some misrepresentation. 3. But what is most to be regretted, the Dr. shows no contrition for the contemptuous manner with which he treated a divine institution. If he had done that, it would have given the Baptists more pleasure than a thousand other apologies; perhaps this also proceeded from inattention. Probably we must wait until his Exposition of the Ordinance come' out, to know his real sentiments of it. H. L. T. Sir, Welsh Speech in favour of Union. [To the Editor of the Baptist Magazine.] BEING acquainted with the sentiments of a few Baptist Ministers in London, with whom I had a little conversation in the month of May last, when I was in the Metropolis administering the bread of life to my Welsh brethren residing there; and having perused Iota's Union essential to Prosperity, in your needful publication for last June, and B. D.'s Address to the Baptist Denomination, in the number for last August, I am greatly encouraged to send you the following account for insertion; and if you think it worthy of occupying a small space in your miscellany, let it appear as soon as convenient. At the Western Baptist Association in Wales, which was held last June at Newport, Pembrokeshire, when there was present, at least, fifty ministers, and more than double that number of members and messengers representing the various churches be longing to the above association; the assembly, at the request of a few English brethren, were addressed nearly in the fol lowing manner. Yn yr hen iaith Frutanaidd. Brethren, THE gratification which I lately had in hearing the excellent speeches of those noble advocates for religious liberty, in the house of peers, who are willing and desirous that both we and the whole world should be at liberty to choose our own religion, cannot be fully described, as you may partly judge by what you have already heard; but I was still more highly pleased on being informed that several of our brethren in England are desirous of uniting the Baptist Denomination more closely than what they have been for many years. No object, I believe, will be deemed more desirable by those who heartily wish the suc The Speaker had been present in the House of Lords at the first and second reading of Viscount Sidmouth's bill, and had just given the association brief account of their lordship's debates and proceedings on that occasion. 9 IV. C |