Mankind must be independent, His creatures, though undoubtedbecause uncontrolable in the ex- ly they are but instruments in exercise of powers once bestowed ecuting his purposes, are in that upon them way of training, which unerring wisdam dictates, and to which infinite power will give effect, for their moral improvement and everlasting happiness And there can be no possibility And in due time there shall be of putting an end to the spread an end to the prevealence of sin and continuance of evil, unless and misery, while these themhe annihilate them by irresist- selves, shall appear to have been ible force. working together for good. No middle scheme can be devised. And, when both sides of the alternative have been duly considered and weighed, let the serious and pious mind determine which part of it is most honour, able to God and most comfortable to man. THE QUAKERS. To the Editor of the Monthly Repository. I HAVE been reading lately with great pleasure, " Clarkson's Portraiture of Quakerism," and though I am not sufficiently acquainted with the sect of the Quakers to form an idea of its likeness to the original, I confess I think it a beautiful picture. But when I read the chapter on war, &c. I wished to have a Quaker by me to explain why they refuse to pay for a substitute if drawn in the militia, and yet pay, which I am informed they do, a tax avowedly styled a war tax,-namely, the tax on income ! As the Quakers are, we are now told, an informed, 'reading people, it is probable some of them may see this, and I will thank any one of them if he will, through the medium of your Magazine, explain this seeming inconsistency. Blackheath. I am Sir, yours, P. M. SIR, DEFENCE OF CHURCH DISCIPLINE. To the Editor of the Monthly Repository. HAVING taken up an opinion, in most points opposite to that maintained by your correspondent in his " Arguments against church discipline*," I beg leave to state some of the reasons on which it is founded. Not having the Repository at hand, I am not able to quote your correspondent verbatim, but this omission cannot be of any great consequence, as my remarks will have respect to the main drift of the arguments by which he and others oppose church discipline rather than to any improprieties of phraseology or circumstantial misrepresentations. I presume it cannot be denied, with any great appearance of consistency, by those who profess to derive their ideas on the subject from the New Testament, that the Christian religion is a social religion, and was evidently designed to be supported and extended in a social state, by united counsels and fraternal efforts. On this principle, it should seem, the churches which are mentioned in the New Testament, and were under the immediate care and direction of the apostles, were instituted. May not this general principle, this grand basis of church communion be admitted, though it be stated, and the position not controverted, that the New Testament writers did not mean to delineate and patronize an ecclesiastical discipline, which should continue invariably in all future ages and amidst every vicissitude of civil society? Granting that the primitive discipline, as the most able writers on this head assert, was borrowed from the customs of the synagogue, and therefore there were some circumstances connected with it not necessary nor expedient to be rigidly regarded by the churches of the Gentiles; yet still, it may be affirmed, the principal objects and ends of that discipline were intended never to be lost sight of, but to be strenuously pursued in all states of the church, in all places and in all ages. These objects, I apprehend are, the edification, comfort and consistent behaviour of the members of the churches; and thereby the commendation of the religion of Jesus to the world as a moral, pure and divine institution. The discipline which is evidently calculated to serve these purposes and that consequently comes within the view of those general apostolic rules; "Let all things be done decently * In the Number for April, 1807, vol. ii. p. 183. Ed and in order," "Let all things be done to edification;"" Withdraw yourselves from every brother who walketh disorderly :" "Let all things be done with charity;" must be, from the nature of the case, of indispensible and perpetual obligation. If, therefore, any member of a Christian church should notoriously and habitually violate the precepts of his religion, and in such instances, as to give unbelievers of any description plausible occasion to suggest that christianity is an immoral system, or to excite christians, who are connected with other societies, differing in some articles of faith and modes of worship, to apprehend that the community to which the disorderly member belongs, on account of its peculiar tenets, gives a countenance or affords an excuse to vicious conduct; then it is expedient and incumbent on that church by some public, formal and decided act, (the specific mode is not of essential consequence,) to announce that such a person is considered no longer as being one of them. A transaction of this kind is required of them for the honour of our common christianity and the credit of their particular community. Keeping in view the grand purposes of christian fellowship, amongst which that of exhibiting to the world the religion of Jesus as moral and pure is one of the chief, it would be very easy to draw the line of demarcation; on the difficulty of doing which your correspondent plausibly descants. Crimes which expose men to the just punishment of human laws; and likewise such as habitual drukenness, adultery, and notorious lewdness, with other practices, though they may not be amenable at a human tribunal, or with regard to which the laws are often suffered to sleep, may still be those violations of the precepts of the Gospel that have in them the kind of publicity, enormity and repugnance to a religious profession and fellowship which requires those in whomsoever it may be found, without any partiality being shewn, to be cut off from the communion of the faithful. There are many species of vice which we may fear to be habitual and predominant in persons who stand in christian fellowship, and that exclude them from the approbation of God, and if not repented of and abandoned, subject them to his righteous punishment in a future state, which do not require that they should be formally excluded from their connexion with the church. It is the duty indeed of those who are in fellowship with persons of this character to watch over them; to reprove and exhort them; to endeavour to correct their irregularities and supply their deficiencies by all prudent measures; but if these cannot be done, they must be left to the decision of the supreme judge. The members of the church have performed their duty; further they could not consistently proceed. To separate persons who come under this predicament from their fellowship would not be warrantable, since their irregularities and deficiencies are not of the kind that can reasonably be considered, as identifying those who are in religious profession with them, as the adherents of doctrines and modes of worship, which are, in their own nature, indulgent to vicious practice. A member of a christian society may be judged covetous, which is the instance your correspondent brings forward, but the proof of this, from the nature of the case, is not of a public and decisive kind. He may have pressing demands for his money in channels, with which few may be acquainted; he may lay out more than is commonly known in acts of private benevolence and charity. Another may be thought to be profuse and extravagant; io indulge himself and his family in articles of luxury and scenes of amusement, neither suited to his situation in the world nor his station in the church. A third may be inclined to paroxyms of anger; or to habitual sullenness and moroseness; or to indiscreet levity and gaiety. Did those who are immediately in religious association with persons of these different characters know and do their duty, they would, without doubt, in the spirit of meekness and love, labour to correct and improve them; but still their imperfections are not of the kind which demand, for the causes before specified, as flagrant immoralities do, their being excluded from the fellowship of the church. I would briefly remark on the subject of the Lord's supper, that amongst most sects of modern christians, too great stress is laid on the participation of it, as the principal nexus or link of union; and therefore to refuse a person assisting with them in that rite, is deemed the most direct and eligible mode of separating an unworthy member from them. It ought however to be considered, according to the primitive ideas relating to discipline, that he who is so unhappy as to be separated from the communion of the church, is not to be viewed as having right of participation with it in any other of its solemn and devotional acts. He may indeed be present, if he chuse, at the performance of them, but he is to be reckoned only as "a heathen man," or as a mere spectator. On the whole, to me it appears, from the practice of the apostles and the primitive churches, which, with due allowance, ought to be considered as affording a model to modern churches; from the principle of expediency which I judge is quite in favour of discipline; from the good effects that have been actually produced by it, though under an imperfect mode of administration amongst the Quakers, Methodists and other communities in our own country; there is valid evidence of the propriety and utility of forming professing christians into distinct, organized bodies; of appointing suitable officers for the execution of the several branches of order and discipline, and for excluding, under proper regulations, vicious and unworthy members. Your correspondent seems to have fallen into the common error of arguing against a practice from its abuse. I do not see, I own, how the peculiar duties that are incumbent on christians as brethren of one family, as members of one body, can possibly be performed without a much closer union than that which is implied in assembling once in the week to hear a preacher, who is not considered in any proper sense, as a pastor, but merely as the man of the day; and in partaking together once in a quarter, or in a month, of the Lord's supper. I have no expectation that the primitive doctrines of the gospel will spread, without a revival, in those branches of it that are adapted to all times and states of society, of the primitive discipline. We may institute book-societies, and support popular preaching, but no body of rational and scriptural christians will be formed and become permanent, if not cemented by the order as well as by the faith of the gospel. I am, Sir, May 20, 1807. Yours, &c. SABRINA. DECISIONS OF COMMON SENSE. To the Editor of the Monthly Repository. I AM a plain man, one of those who consider the great doctrines of christianity to be plain and easy to comprehend, and take common sense for my guide in matters of |