the paths of sin. In the service of our heavenly Father we may hope all things, venture all things, encounter all things. We have a sure word of promise that he will never leave us nor forsake us.

Let us then be encouraged to imitate the King of Israel in his holy and humble resolution, and in his entire dependence upon God. Let us avail ourselves of the present season to take a solemn retrospect of our past lives, and before the mercy-seat of the Allseeing Jehovah to offer up our thanksgivings and petitions-recording, in his awful presence, our determination that we will henceforward serve the Lord. Conscience will convict us all of foul

guilt and ingratitude, but we will seek afresh to the atoning sacrifice, and record anew our covenant with Father, Son, and Spirit. Experience will tell us of past weaknesses and failures, but it will teach us too wherein our safety lies. Fearfulness may come upon us at the prospect of the snares, and ruggednesses, and perils, that await us, but hope and trust will animate us to " I mingle with the toil"-there is yet much land to be possessed, and we will go forth to conquest and a crown." A path of noble enterprize and exertion lies before us all, and may it be the heaven-inspired language of every heart—I will go in the strength of the Lord God.

ON THE UNION OF INDEPENDENT CHURCHES.

THIS interesting and important subject seems destined, at length, to be brought fairly and fully, at least so far as discussion goes, before the attention of the congregational body. Dr. Wardlaw's sermon, followed by the excellent discourse of Mr. Morison, and the discussion to which that discourse has given rise in the Congregational Magazine, and the Eclectic Review, have all combined to revive the consideration of this question. The object is unquestionably entitled to all the investigation which it can possibly receive; and in the hope of keeping it before the eye of the public, where it is now placed, I am induced to offer the following remarks. The great desideratum now proposed to us, a "Visible and effectual union of all the congregational churches in England, for the sake of mutual advantage and general usefulness." It is most readily admitted, that much, very much, is said in the New Testament about the union

is

of Christ's disciples. In many places, this refers to the harmony and affection of the members of one particular church. Roinans xiv. 17-19.; 1 Cor.i. 10.; 1 Cor. x. 17.; 2 Cor. xiii. 11.; Col. iii. 13-15.; Ephes. iv. 3. These passages, then, cannot be fairly pleaded, as proving the necessity of a union of churches. Other passages, it is granted, may be quoted, which extend the idea of union, to the whole body of the redeemed on earth; such, for instance, as 1 Cor. xii. 12, 18.; Ephes. iv. 4-6. But then, what is the nature of the union alluded to in these latter texts? not, I apprehend, a visible association, but that oneness of spirit and feeling, which is to subsist between all who are partakers of like precious faith, and of the common salvation. I do not think that it can be proved that any other union existed in the primitive churches, than that of mutual affection, sympathy, and intercourse. It does not appear that there was any thing like that visible association, that systematic

union, which is now contended for. They recognised each other as the churches of Christ; received each others' members and messengers when they had occasion to journey from one place to another; sent pecuniary relief to each other in time of need. But it might be fairly asked, whether in all these things we do not imitate them? Do we not recognise each other as churches of Christ, by our mode of dismissing members from one to the other; by the mutual exchange of ministerial labours; by our joint support of identifying periodical publications, and seminaries for the education of our ministers? Do we not occasionally extend pecuniary relief to those Societies, in our respective neighbourhoods, which are in indigent circumstances? All these things, certainly, are indications of a real union; of that most essential feature of the Christian church, the unity of the spirit. I cannot help thinking that it has become rather too common to deny the existence of a right brotherly feeling in the congregational body of the present day.

Let it not be thought, however, that I am contending against any rational and scriptural plan for a general visible union of our churches. I am only proving, or at least attempting to do it, that there is no scriptural precept, or precedent, which absolutely enjoins it. Like many of our usages, it may indeed be contended for, on the ground of general principles, but not on the basis of particular injunction. It is expedient, and it is an expediency which the New Testament allows. On this ground I desire it, and will do every thing in my power to promote it.

But here a very important and difficult question will present itself, "How shall this union be formed, and what objects shall it embrace?" In reply to this, I would observe, at once, that we

must be careful not to go for too much. This is the very cause why all attempts have hitherto failed in limine. Mr. Morison admits this, and yet has, in my opinion, fallen into the same error.* What does he propose as the objects, of a congregational union? "It might with much profit receive, from the Secretary of each county association, a brief account of the existing state of the local churches; it might devise measures for the assistance of necessitous interests in remote scenes of labour; it might determine on the best methods of extending the congregational cause; it might, from time to time, take cognizance of all questions affecting the civil or religious liberties of the denomination; and finally, it might in the best method possible, give due circulation, from the press or otherwise, to such parts of its proceedings, as might be likely to promote the edification of the churches, the improvement of other denominations, and the general good of mankind." This scheme may appear, upon paper, to describe a very narrow outline, a very contracted circle. But let any man attempt to reduce it, in imagination, to practice. How much calm deliberation, cautious resolve, and yet vigorous exertion, there must be to carry even this seemingly limited plan into execution. Who are to compose the executive department? For there must necessarily be a committee. Shall it be a metropolitan committee, or a country one; or composed jointly of London and provincial members? Under any circumstances it must, if it act up to the spirit of the above-mentioned scheme have more business than it can ever get

*Mr. M. does not seem aware, that the union he refers to in the note, page 50, was not an attempt to form a general

association, but a mere county one; and that it failed from causes altogether different from those he states.

through, without such frequent sittings, as would render it impossible for the distant members often to attend. As a national association, it would, if it did any thing worth the object of union, soon draw an accumulation of business upon itself, which it would be utterly unable to despatch, and excite expectations which it could never satisfy.

"It is also to extend relief to necessitous churches in remote scenes of labour." Having once avowed this as its object, how numerous would be the claims upon its bounty; and what funds could it expect to raise, equal to such demands. How difficult would it be to gain satisfactory information, and how embarrassing would often be the situation of the committee on receiving contradictory statements. Is not this better left to country associations, and a well regulated Home Missionary Society? If it is "to devise means for extending the congregational cause," would not this involve, when a whole nation is the object of its zeal, a degree of responsibility for wisdom, caution, and zeal, from which any committee would shrink? If it is" to improve other denominations," then it must be, necessarily, controversial. I confess, that it appears to me, that such a summary of business for a general congregational union, would require a fund of wealth, wisdom, and zeal, for its efficient management, which we are not likely soon to raise. Then be it recollected, that while this machine requires so much discretion to manage it, the managers would be open to animadversion at the public meeting, and it would be next to impossible for the wisest and best men upon the earth so to conduct it, as to escape censure. The committee would be the objects of increasing jealousy with those, and they are not a few, in whom there is a morbid sensi

bility to every thing approaching to associated energy and advice. They would be suspected as a band of conspirators plotting an invasion of the freedom of our churches, and the right of private judgment. By some snarling and cynical men, their actions would be misrepresented, and their motives misconstrued, and strong prejudices would be speedily raised up against them.

For the protection of our civil and religious privileges, there seems no need of withdrawing from those bodies with whom we are already associated. In this respect, "union is power;" and the Dissenters, in all questions affecting their common rights, present a more imposing aspect, when joined in one compact body, than when divided into parties. Disunited, each party will be thinking only of itself, and it is not impossible that cases may arise, in which some party may lend their aid to oppress the rest; or, at least, may give up the rest to the jealousy and encroachment of the civil power; were there none, at the time of Lord Sidmouth's abortive effort, who, had they been disunited from the public body, would have been the secret abettors of that ill-advised measure?

What then, it might be asked, should the congregational union embrace, and how should it be conducted?-It should embrace but little, for it cannot do much. Simplicity is essential to its existence and continuance.

1. Let there be an annual meeting, at the season of the missionary festival, to which the pastors, and deacons, and other members of our churches shall be generally invited. At this meeting, let a sermon be preached, explanatory of our principles in doctrine, duty, and church government. Let it be occasionally addressed to pastors, to deacons, to members, to the world at large, as the committee shall decide.

2. Let an annual epistle be published by the committee, addressed to the churches, on such topics as they may see proper, embodying in it all the information they can collect of the number and state of our churches in general.

3. Let the congregational board, or ministers belonging to the monthly meeting, in London, be a committee for managing the business; and their meetings be always open to their brethren from the country when in town.

As a country minister, I should not feel the least possible degree of jealousy of my London brethren. -I love them, honour them, and confide in them; and upon this plan, their business is so simple, and so accurately defined, that it is impossible they can become metropolitans in any obnoxious sense of

the term.

4. Let the committee choose the preacher, and prepare the annual epistle; and to do this more effectually, let it be respectfully requested that every county association should send an annual account of the state of their churches; and that, where there is no association, individual ministers should send a general statement of their flocks.

5. In addition, let us have an institution similar to that in Red Cross Street, which we may call our own ground; where we may meet as occasion shall require; where we may deposit the archives of our denomination; where a library shall be formed; and which, in fact, shall become the local centre of our association, and the established organ of intercourse. I wish not that we should secede from Red Cross Street.-No; we have as much right there as any other denomination, and that right has been never questioned, but it is not exclusively ours. I consider this a most important desideratum. It might easily be effected. Are there not Independents enough, both of ministers and laymen,

I

to set this thing going? It wants but some few public-spirited men to lay the foundation-stone, and the superstructure of the scheme would rise rapidly. will myself give ten guineas a-year to establish it, and will pledge myself to leave a legacy of books to it, of not less value than fifty pounds. Are there not others that will follow the example? Shall the present age, sublimely distinguished as it is, by every kind of effort for the cause of religion in general, pass away without any thing being done, in the way of giving still greater effect to those principles for which an Owen spent the vigour of his great mind? Such an institution will at once add to our glory and our strength. I call upon the congregational board to consider the subject. They shall take the lead, and many in the country will follow-æquis passibus.

This, in my view, embraces all that a congregational union can effect. It is the full measure of its comprehension. If others think differently, let them at least consent to try the simpler scheme first; if the plan admits of extension, it may be enlarged afterwards. To attempt too much, will prevent any thing from being attempted. Begin with operations that are at once practicable and unexceptionable, which will produce neither diversity of opinion, nor excite any degree of suspicion. Leave every thing else to county associations. They can descend to details which a national union cannot embrace.

I am aware that Scotland will be advanced as a proof that more may be done than what I contend for. But Scotland is not a parallel case; the churches of our order are so few, and scattered over so wide a surface, that if they unite at all, they must all unite. They are too few to be associated in smaller divisions, and, consequent

ly, the business they have to transact is within a very limited compass.

Let us begin at once. Let the congregational board take it into immediate and serious consideration. Or, if they prefer that it should be taken up in another way, let it be brought forward at the monthly meeting; and this probably would be the best method of giving a proper attention to the subject. Let the first meeting take place next May.

I would not give up a particle of christian love to increase the esprit de corps of our denomination: but I do want to see a little more enlightened and dispassionate zeal for the principles of nonconformity. The praises of our national establishment were never more generally, or more loudly, or more profusely lavished upon that institution, than at the present moment. The church friends of the Bible Society, to prove that their zeal for the establishment is in no degree diminished by their support of that noble cause, very laudably insist, probably more than ever, in their ministerial exercises, on the excellencies of the church of England; and surely then it becomes us, as Independents, to emulate their ardour in the maintenance of our identifying principles: principles which come down to us fragrant with the virtues, and consecrated by the blood, of our illustrious ancestors.

A COUNTRY DISSENTING MINISTER. Dec. 1822.

་་་་་་་་་

ON CONFIRMATION.

(To the Editors.) GENTLEMEN,-I was lately sitting in my study, preparing for the duties of the approaching Sabbath, when the bells of the parish steeple announced the arrival of the Bishop. Vehicles of all descriptions, laden with young persons, and walking parties, coming to be confirmed,

produced a degree of bustle and gaiety, unusual in our quiet streets. The giddiness and frivolity which the candidates for confirmation generally exhibited, were strangely at variance with the alledged importance and solemnity of the ceremony; and I was led to inquire,

"Were they such persons as these whom the Apostles confirmed? And is confirmation, in the sense in which it is now about to be administered, a scriptural rite?"— I could not discover that it was ever commanded by Christ or his Apostles, or practised during the period of apostolic history. Ecclesiastical historians tell us, that “Tertullian is the most ancient author who mentions this ceremony; but by his time, a great variety of superstitious, ridiculous, and foolish rites were brought into the church; and confirmation was then always performed immediately after baptism;" but if it is not a scriptural institution, I should be glad to be informed, how the opinion of Tertullian, or of any other uninspired man, or the practice of any age, becomes authority for the perpetual observance of it.

But the advocates of episcopal confirmation wish to make a show of scripture precedent, and in favour of their practice frequently urge Acts viii. 14-17; where Peter and John are said to have laid hands on some of the Samaritans, whom Philip had baptized, and they received the Holy Ghost. But this passage has no real bearing upon the subject; for modern bishops have not apostolic qualifications and powers. The gifts imparted to the Samaritans were evidently miraculous-they were something visible, something which raised the wonder, and excited the ambition of the sorcerer, who saw that the Holy Ghost was given by the laying on of the Apostle's hands. Now our bishops cannot pretend to convey the power to speak with tongues, to work mira