temporal concern, in the absence of Divine Revelation. But to walk by opinions rather than faith, or in opposition to faith, is effectually to make the Book of God of no authority. Moreover, in the decisions of that volume, he that propagates an opinion and seeks to attach persons to it, or to himself on account of it, is a factionist in embryo, in infancy, or in manhood. Unless this matter, is better understood it will fare with us as with Presbyterians, Methodists, Baptists, and other religious communities. We shall be broken to pieces as well as they. It is owing to the patience of contradiction and the great good sense of some of our more intelligent brethren, that schisms have not already appeared amongst us under the assumption that every Christian has a right to propagate his opinions. While it is conceded that on some matters we have all liberty to form opinions, and, if asked for them, to express them; we must regard this as very different from the right to propagate our speculations, instead of practising the precepts of the gospel. There are two things hard to be uttered :—The first is, "I have erred;" the second, "I am ignorant." A haughty spirit, rather than say the former, will frame many an excuse for himself; and rather than acknowledge the latter, he will advance many a speculation. Yet it is both piety and wisdom to acknowledge an error, when guilty; and, in the absence of revelation clear and explicit, it is our privilege to be ignorant and to acknowledge it! Some of our brethren to this very hour, connot perceive the difference between what is faith and what is opinion. Even one of our muchvalued correspondents, who writes many excellent things, seems to have been off his guard and to have fallen palpably into the same error. We shall quote a recent letter of his from the "Primitive Christian," as a text, because we expect as much patience and candor from brother Winans as from any other brother :— "Dear Brother Shepard.-In spite of all that has been said to the contrary, I find that differences in opinion still continue to alienate brethren, and that in some sense opinion is made the bond of union. This state of things exists to a greater extent than we are fully aware of, and it is not confined to the illiterate, but extends through all grades of intelligence. Therefore, there is evidently a fault among us; for while we teach that all men have the right to think and judge for themselves in religious matter religious matters, still we condemn them for doing so, provided their conclusion differ from our own. One man thinks there is an intermediate state of conscious ness between death and the resurrection; another thinks that all consciousness, and susceptibility of pain or pleasure ceases at resurrections of the dead spoken of in the Scriptures; one past, including the saints who died in the faith, preceding the coming of the Messiah; another, of the saints who death. One man thinks there are three die in the faith between the first and second comings of Christ; and another of all the dead both great and small, who never heard of a Saviour; this last to take place at the end of the next dispensation but one resurrection of the dead, which immediately precedes the judgment. Another thinks that the spirits of those who die go immediately to heaven or hell, or millennium. Another thinks there is and that their bodies follow at the resurrection. And another thinks that the wicked are not raised at all; or he divides them into two classes, such as have heard the Prophets or Apostles, or both, and such as have not heard either-the former of which will be raised and the latter not. And another thinks that there is no such thing as the spirits of men separate from their bodies. here confounded with "the right to propagate one's own opinions." These are very different matters-The right to think and judge for one's self respects not opinions, but faith, precepts, promises, and threatenings. We do not condemn any one for thinking and judging for himself on faith and duty; but we do dissent from him, and perhaps, censure him too, who insists upon propagating his own opinions as aforesaid. is to believe the testimony of Jesus; and Jesus has said, that all that are in the graves shall come forth they that have done good and they that have done evil! Are not evil-doers the wicked? Yet our charitable brother regards him who thinks that only some of the dead shall hear Christ's voice and come forth from the grave, as only differing in opinion from himself, who believes on the word of the Son of God, that all the dead shall be raised! A single specimen is all that we select on the present occasion, to call attention to this point. In a little time we shall have all the opinions of eighteen centuries under discussion, unless we learn that we have no right nor license to seek to be wise above what is written. But that is not the worst of it. If it be the duty of the present generation to canvas the ten thousand notions of two thousand years, it will equally devolve upon our children and their children, for a thousand generations, to go over the same ground — if, indeed, God would permit this state of things so long to continue. We must, I repeat it, set our faces against this course, or we will all repent it. But our principal objection to this letter is, that it confounds opinion and faith. One man thinks, another man thinks, &c. And what do they think? "One man thinks there will be a resurrection of all the dead, both small and great!" and another " thinks that the wicked are not raised at all!" &c. Yes, indeed, one man thinks there will be no punishment after death, and another thinks that the wicked shall be punished after death! This is charitable enough! It is all I think and " he thinks." But, according to Paul," there shall be a resurrection of the just and of the unjust;" and he that thinks differently, has erred not in opinion; but, as Paul says, "he errs concerning the faith." So far he denies the faith and contradicts the Apostle. "But all these men," concludes our charitable brother Winans, all these thinkers, "believe the testimony of God relative to his son Jesus Christ." Yes! and one man thinks that sprinkling is as good as dipping, and another thinks that an infant is as proper a subject of baptism as a believing adult; and one thinks Jesus Christ is a mere man, But we sin against the teaching of and another thinks him to be a super- the Apostles if we do not abandon angelic being, and a third thinks him this course. Paul enjoins that we to be the only begotten Son of God," give not heed to fables"—" to endas fully possessed of divinity as his less genealogies" "that he that Father; and so it is all I think. consents not to the doctrine which is No man "believes the testimony of according to godliness, is proud, selfGod relative to his son Jesus Christ" opiniated, doting, or sick about queswho does not believe all that testimony: tions, and debates of words; from and it is a part of that testimony that which come envy, strife, railing, evil Jesus Christ always spoke the truth. surmisings," &c. "Avoid profane Now to believe the testimony of God, and vain babblings, oppositions of The weakest are generally the most dogmatical; and those who know the least, the most positive and overbearing, and therefore there is no convincing them: nothing to be hoped from strifes of opinions-for the chorus will ever be, “ My opinion is as good as thine," and "Am I not as infallible as thou?" 66 it is to prove, that the members of Christ's body, or Christians, ought, wherever they may go, to enjoy the fellowship and communion of those who, in that place, belong to the same body; and that none but such be admitted to these privileges. This, we imagine to have been the aim of the writer, although he seems, from the science falsely so called; which some professing have erred, not in opinion, but from the faith." He reiterates these precepts in his two epistles to Timothy : Shun profane and vain babblings, for they will increase to more ungodliness, and their word will | eat like a canker. Of this class are Hymeneus and Philetus," (men of science !) " who concerning" opinions! | whole of that article, to confine this nay, "the truth have erred, saying freedom of, and this right of commuthat the resurrection is past already, nion to, a limited number of Chrisand have overthrown the faith of some." tians, because they belong to the soThis gives a key to the whole chapter called churches of the Reformation. of vain babblings, &c. Hence said the Apostle, "Foolish and untaught questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes." These untaught questions are precisely questions about opinions; and that they do gender strife we have proof from brother Winans, who avows that "differences in opinion" —that is, in untaught questions, when persons became dogmatical of course "still continue to alienate brethren." Paul, it seems, was alienated from Hymeneus and Philetus for affirming an opinion concerning the resurrection being in some sense or in some part already past. It was but an opinion, yet it "overthrew the faith of some." I presume it will require a good deal of plain showing to make this matter of dogmatizing and of opinionism evident to all. We shall, however, devote an essay or two to the subject. I have no doubt but all partyism now in Protestant Christendom, and most of the errors too, grew out of neglect of the scriptures quoted from Paul, and a misunderstanding of the faith and of untaught questions. A. C. REMARKS ON COMMUNION OF SISTER CHURCHES. IN the article headed " Communion of Sister Churches," in the September Harbinger, there are a few remarks which appear to be erroneous, or at least confused. The object of | The expressions sister churches, and sisterhood of churches, are not found in the Word of God, and are calculated to convey an incorrect idea of what is necessary in the organization of every congregation. These terms were introduced after there had arisen sects and parties in the church of God, and were employed to designate, not those churches founded on a scriptural basis, but such as advocated one class of opinions in opposition to another. But in the present age, when an attempt is being made to return to the primitive order, and to build upon the only sure foundation laid by our Lord, and built upon by his Apostles, care ought to be taken, that no appellation be given either to individuals or to churches, but those bestowed upon them in the New Testament. In the apostolic age, every individual who believed in Jesus, and was baptized into his death, became a member of his body, irrespective of opinions, and was recognized as such by all the holy brethren. To such an one the Apostles, and particularly the Apostle Paul, gave many exhortations to live in harmony, love, and unity with his brethren; which exhortations have, by some of our brethren, been taken and applied to churches. Hence has arisen that confusion of ideas in which a "sisterhood of churches" is substituted for a brotherhood of saints. To illustrate this, let us take Paul's that "a person under censure in one church, was not" to be "admitted to communion in any other." Of the following facts there can be no doubt: Epistle to the Corinthians. From the introduction, it is evident the Apostle addressed his letter to the members of the congregation at Corinth, individually as well as collec-That, during the first two centuries tively, and likewise to "all in every place who invoke the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;" and not to a congregation of churches, or representatives of churches. In it he tells them "Now, you," Corinthians and not you churches in Corinth or in any given district-"are Christ's body, and members in particular :" and he urges upon them the necessity of filling up .each that part in the body which has been assigned him. Observe, it is individuals, and not churches, he styles" members in particular;" and in making use of passages of such a nature, this fact should always be borne in mind. From the manner in which the extract from ecclesiastical history is introduced, we are inclined to infer that it fully expresses the ideas of the writer, and on it we would make a few observations. As ecclesiastical history is the history of a period in which all the various parties in Christendom have been fighting and devouring each other to establish their own exclusive tenets, it would perhaps have been much better not to have introduced the extract. Even in the days of the apostles, the "mystery of iniquity" had begun to work, and many "Anti-Christs" had appeared, so that no dependance whatever can be placed on any writing but the Word of God. However, had the extract expressed nothing but what is found there, we should not have so seriously objected to it; but in it there are some ideas nowhere countenanced by the Bible. We can fully comprehend what is meant by baptism, ordination, expulsion from communion;" but we cannot, with the light of the Scriptures discover where, or by whose authority, "the imposing and removing of censure" are commanded or who decreed 66 of the Christian era, many absurd and foolish practices crept into many of the churches; and that, to maintain the "sisterhood of churches" entire, "what was transacted by one, was acknowledged as valid by all the others," as the author of Ecclesiastical History justly observes. Again: we remember no passage in the injunctions Paul gives Timothy or Titus, or, indeed, in the whole of the New Testament, authorising the bishops, or overseers of particular flocks," to be " recognized as true ministers of Christ by all the churches, and always" to use "due care before and at their ordination, to obtain a recognition of brotherhood in the pastoral office." This "recognition of brotherhood in the pastoral office," seems to have been the foundation of all the clerical and ecclesiastical councils and assemblies which have ever been supplanting Christianity, and tormenting and perplexing the world. With the arrangement of the church in Nottingham we by no means wish to interfere, as each church has to arrange its own matters, independently of the others: but we cannot refrain from expressing our own opinion, that a private recommendation ought, in very many cases, to be as valuable and as satisfactory to all, as one from the officers of the church. J. MAIR. observations on the communication of [NOTE. We have no desire to offer any Brother Mair. The testimony of two or more to the good character and standing of a brother or sister in connection with any church, is always preferable to the testimony of one individual; especially as some persons, who have been excluded from a Christian church, when removed to a distanee, have taken upon themselves to give letters of recommendation to individuals occupying a similar position to that which they sustain. Now if all let brother migrates and obtains a letter of recommendation, the fact with its date is matter of record: so is the ex ters were written and signed by those in office, such gross impositions would be prevented, and much evil thereby avoided among the disciples of the Lord. By this means the factious (for there are, unhap-clusion of a member, with the reasons for which he was excluded. pily. factious persons in this, as there were in the apostolic age) and the excluded from every church, would be placed in the unenviable situation, which, by their unhallowed conduct, they had chosen for themselves. We still plead for all letters of recommendation being signed by those in office in the congregation-such testimonials being alike honorable both to the parties by whom they are bor e, and the individual to whom they are given-as well as in accordance with the principles of truth and righteousness for which we contend. "In the mouth of two or three witnesses let every thing be established." The Apostles taught the same things in every church-the same government, discipline, order, and worship under Jesusthe one Lord and King, who is over all, God blessed for ever more. There is no ecclesiastical Chartism or Toryism in the church of God. The following observa tions, from the pen of A. Campbell, will be found to bear upon the point under consideration.] ORDER AS RESPECTS SISTER EVERY church, like every family, has its own concerns; and while it owes much attention to its own interests, it owes something to the interests and prosperity of its neighbours. In order to the faithful discharge of its relative duties to sister churches, if not for its own sake, it ought for theirs, to keep a record of all its proceedings. In the church record should be enrolled not merely the names of all its members; but the date of their reception, and how received-upon their confession of the Lord in immersion in the presence of the congregation, or upon letter of recommendation from some other church. If at any time they may have been under censure, and for what offence, ought always to be noted. And ifon any occasion they may have been long absent from the church and returned to it again, good order requires that it should be registered. When any A little reflection and a small portion of experience will convince the most dull of perception that such a record is necessary in some cases of discipline; in others, to the defence of the reputation of our brethren; a useful expedient to prevent imposition, and always satisfactory to those of upright behaviour. Our experience has furnished so many instances where even the date of a person's admission, rejection, or removal has been requisite either to his own vindication or that of others connected with him; for so few there are who never forget dates and circumstances, or the incidents in the history of a church of even fifty members, that much trouble and dissatisfaction, and some damage have been incurred for the want of such vouchers. No person ought to be received from another church without either oral or written testimony of his good standing. The gospel had been preached but for a few years, till the Apostles themselves found it necessary to give letters of recommendation to those worthy of the confidence of the brethren. Even some of the Epistles extant contain within them letters of recommendation. Paul's letter to Philemon is a beautiful specimen of a Christian letter of introduction. In order to the purity of the Christian profession and the harmony of churches, when a member is excluded from one church by a solemn vote of the brethren, no other church can consistently receive him, while lying under such censure. He can only be restored on repentance by and with the consent of the congregation that excluded him: for should a sister church receive an excluded member, it would, in fact, be assuming an authority over the other churches, and |