not my business to account for his conduct, my present intention is rather to reprove it. It is readily admitted that where other evangelical societies exist in the neighbourhood of a Baptist church, the subject of believers' Baptism will most likely come within their hearing and consideration; and it cannot surely appear strange, if some of the most serious and most conscientious of their members should occasionally imbibe our views and adopt our practice respecting that ordinance. The secession of one such person from his former connexions, in order to join the Baptists is more noticed than their acquisition of many converts from the world. This may form a sort of ápológy for persons, who without much, thought on the subject, might hazard an opinion similar to that I am controverting; but when a writer professes gravely to give an enlarged and liberal view of the state of evangelical Religion in various Countries, and sends his production to a publication which assumes to be the Oracle of the Evangelical World, to be dispersed in twenty thou sand directions amongst people, most of whom are not within reach of better information.-Such a writer ought to acquaint himself very correctly with his subject, and be quite certain of the truth of his assertions before he circulates twenty thousand libels upon his brethren. I would not judge harshly of any man's motives, but when I reflect on the probable influence of such an assertion, as it respects our Cases, our Public Semina ries, our Mission, and various other particulars, I can make no apology for the man who would rob us of the countenance, the prayers, and the support of our Brethren of other denominations; let him come forward and apologize for himself.

VINDICATOR.

To the Editor of the Baptist Magazine.

Thy Correspondent T. P. has, in the number for the second month (February) last, exposed the want of candour and christian charity in some accusations preferred by W. T. in his Letter to a friend, against the Society of Friends, usually called Quakers; but as T. P. has but slightly touched upon the doctrines adverted to in W. F.'s charge against the Friends; I hope that thou wilt permit me, as a Member of that Society, to say a few words on their behalf, in reply to W. T.

I will not detain the reader by any observations on the in

* See the number for the twelfth month (December) last, pige 609.

consistency of W.. T's introductory acknowledgment that it is a million to one whether he be right in many things wherein he believes he is so," with the "tone of authoritative decision" he afterwards assumes; but proceed to consider the object of his paper: which appears to be to prove that the Doctrine of Universal Restoration adopted by his friend is opposite to the whole tenor of Scripture. As this is a doctrine not embraced by me, I shall leave his arguments against it to stand or fall according to their merit; but so far as the Friends are implicated as believing it, I say, and I say it with confidence, that whatever W. T.'s friend has learned of George Fox, he has never learned of him the Doctrine of Universal Restoration; a doctrine which I challenge W. T. to discover in any authorized publication of the Quakers. Neither has his friend learned of them that the Holy Scriptures are not inspired, and that "we cannot have in them any criterion of truth." This, and some of the charges of W. T. which immediately follow it, are of so serious a nature, that the only effectual way of answering to them is to let the Quakers speak for themselves, by which the candid reader may judge whether the uniform benevolence they manifest towards their fellow men, and their nonconformity to the world, are (as stated by T. P.) the fruits of their christian principles: or whether (according to W. T.) they are only to be viewed as "the apparent sanctity of pretended prophets,' adopted as "the means of deceiving many.' My extracts shall be taken from the English edition of Hannah Adams's View of Religions, edited by Andrew Fuller, the work referred to by T. P.

"ON THE SCRIPTURES. They believe the Scriptures to be of divine authority, given by the inspiration of God through holy men--and that they contain the mind and will of God, and are his commands to us; in that respect they are his declaratory word, and therefore are obligatory on us, and are profitable for doctrine, reproof, &c.-and for our parts, we are very willing that all our doctrines and practices be tried by them,— for we look upon them as the only fit outward judge of controversies among christians; and that whatever doctrine is contrary to their testimony, may therefore justly be rejected as false."

"ON CHRIST. They believe that Christ is both God and man in wonderful union, not a God by creation, or office, as some hold;-but God uncreated-The true God-The great God-And Man conceived by the Holy Ghost, and born of the Virgin Mary. Who suffered for our salvation, and was raised

again for our justification, and ever liveth to make intercession for us."-Again,

"We believe that Jesus Christ was our holy Sacrifice, Atonement, and Propitiation-that he bore our iniquities, and that by his stripes we are healed of the wounds Adam gave us in his fall-that God is just in forgiving true penitents upon the credit of that holy offering Christ made of himself to God for us.~ That through the eternal Spirit he hath for ever perfected them (in all ages) who were sanctified, who walked not after the flesh, but after the Spirit."

"ON THE RESURRECTION. They most stedfastly believe, that as our Lord Jesus Christ was raised from the dead by the power of the Father, and was the first fruits of the resurrection, só every man in his own order shall arise; they that have done well to the resurrection of eternal life, but they that dave done evil to everlasting condemnation."

Such are the opinions of the Quakers upon the points adverted to by W. T. and if he wish us to consider that it is a proof of superior "light and wisdom" to view those who hold them as "giving beed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils;" and as being "carried away by the subtle delusions of the grand father of lies;" I do not envy W. T. the possession of such wisdom, deeming myself more happy in that state of darkness and ignorance allotted by him to the poor despised Quakers.

There remains one point to which, though I object to the manner in which it is stated by W. T, I have not adverted, because my design is not to make the B. M. a vehicle of unprofitable controversy, but merely to clear the Friends of the aspersions cast upon them by W. T. I allude to the doctrine of the divine decrees. I trust my object will be answered without discussing this intricate point, respecting which I believe many who are sincere real christians, differ, and will probably continue to differ, till the arrival of that day when the knowledge of the Lord will cover the earth as the waters cover the sea: at the approach of which all, of whatever name, who love the Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity will, no doubt, rejoice with Their friend and well-wisher, J. B.

It is never our wish to misrepresent any one; therefore, if any person considers his Sentiments unfairly stated, in our pages, we deem it no more than common justice to permit him to state them himself. We think it will be admitted, on all hands, that in the Denomination of Friends there exists a great vari-,

ety of Sentiment upon most of the topics touched on in the foregoing Letter. We feel glad, however, that Hannah Adams's account of their belief on these Important Subjects receives additional confirmation from our respectable Correspondent's appeal to it as a correct exposition of their "Christian Principles."

Original Letters of the Rev. W. Pardoe,

EPISTLE. VI.

In this is contained an account of a remarkable mercy; after, there are profitable directions about family piety.

My Dear Brother,

and

L. Spooner.

Although I am like to add nothing to you by my writing, yet for your encouragement to set your faith and hope in God, and to engage you to serve and thankfully adore his most glorious Majesty, I would let you know of an undeserved and even unexpected mercy, vouchsafed to our poor and feeble Society. Our brother W. is now well recovered, both as to his senses and health, and was with us last First-day in breaking of bread. The Lord was the only Physician, and the means is acknowledged to our unmeriting prayers, or some other whom the Lord hath heard. I desire that as the Lord hath had mercy on him, and not only on him, but also very many more, so we may be greatly concerned to return all possible praise to him, who in this and also in many other things, hath appeared to be a Father of Mercies.

My very dear love to your wife, and to H. and D. and my unfeigned desires are, that all your souls may most truly prosper, and do therefore intreat you all to give yourselves constantly to real practical piety, and so your souls will be blessed in your deed; and more assisting and quickning grace will still abound, as that is carefully improved which is already received. And I beseech you let your house be more and more an house of prayer and let every one's own necessities, (which when you are truly sensible of will appear to be very great) engage every one sometimes apart in this so needful exercise. let I pray you the son of peace (that is, a peaceable, quiet, meek, and gentle disposition) dwell among you, that the peace of God, which passeth all understanding, may still rest upon you. But your experiences are great, and my endeavours are very small.

And

God Almighty assist you in pursuing his glory and the salvation of your souls. Amen.

WILLIAM PARDOE.

The Moral Law a Believer's Rule of Walk and Conversation.

In a series of Letters to a Friend.

LETTER I.

Dear and much respected Friend,

You will not, I presume, take offence at my addressing you in this and following letters, as it was your own request that I should give you my sentiments in writing, on the point, about which we have had many friendly debates, and about which we still essentially differ. The question between us is, whether the Law is a rule of moral action, binding on the believer? Or whether he is under obligation to obey the Law, or Preceptive Will of God, as his Rule of walk and conversation in the world? You took the negative, I the positive side of the question; and our last debate left us as wide as when we began. It is true, we agree in most points of divinity, and it would give me peculiar pleasure to find we did so in this. But as this is not the case, permit me, in my own way, to give my reasons for differing from you.

The more I consider the subject, the more I am surprised that any should entertain such a crude and inconsistent notion! To me it appears so unaccountable, that I am at a loss to give it name. That God should give to man a Law, and he under a certain dispensation, not be bound to conform to it, is a position so strange, that I am astonished that a rational being should fall in with it. That man, when privileged with the highest character he possibly can sustain, should thereby be rendered lawless, and under no moral obligation to his Maker, is a thought repugnant to consistency and truth, and derogatory to scripture, the nature of things, and the common sense of mankind.

This will appear if we consider that, there is no creature, animate or inanimate, that is not, throughout the whole of its existence subject to, or impressed with, some law, rule, or order, which is congenial to its nature, and connatural with its being. View every class of vegetables, from the humble moss and hyssop that spring out of the wall, to the towering cedar in lebanon, you will see them all regulated by laws from which they never