Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

call raving sectarians, and with churches which impose any thing sinful as a term of admission to their fellowship. But the exception ought to extend further. The most corrupt churches, in which Arians, Socinians, and other enemies of our Lord Jesus Christ are suffered to teach, and to seduce the simple. yea, churches chiefly or wholly made up of such men, will admit any to their communion who own themselves Christians; requiring nothing more of them than that they believe the scriptures of the Old and New Testament. This is a suare of the subtle fowler. The communion which is most pernicious, and which is indeed nothing else than a confederacy against Christ, may be offered on very easy, and apparently fair terms. But as the body is to which we join ourselves, so must our adherence to it be. If we join a church obstinate in backsliding; we take part in its backslidings. If we join a church maintaining heresy; we act with it against the truth. If we join a church avowing a contempt of any part of the testimony of Jesus, a church which refuses to assert and vindicate the truth, when called upon so to do; espe cially a church which makes our approbation of its indifference and neutrality in the cause of God, a condition of our being admitted into it; we are surely approving these evils. If we join those who are attempting to suppress any proper testimony against the apostacy of the present time; we strengthen the party we ought to oppose.

Neither the defects of a church, though many, nor the faults of individuals, while the order and discipline of the Lord's house are not commonly and wilfully neglected, render its communion unsafe. But into the society of those who are obstinate in backsliding and corruption, we ought not to enter; to come out from among such and be separate is our duty.

It would be tedious to enlarge on every subject about which the parties of whom we speak differ. If the Associate Reformed Synod adopt the work of their committee, by passing into a judicial deed, the Draught of an overture, &c. the dif ference between them and the Associate Presbytery of Pennsylvania will be much increased. That work contains sundry things both with respect to doctrine and discipline, which we apprehend are not agreeable to the word of God. But while it is uncertain whether they will as a Synod approve it; or if they do, what alterations they may see cause to make, the discussion of it may be left to themselves. The remarks which have been made on it are only such as were necessary to show, that the spirit, design and tendency of it, and of the Constitution of the Associate Reformed Synod are the very

same.

The Associate Reformed Synod must, themselves being judges, either allow that the difference between them and us is very great, or that they are very inconsistent. They profess that they will be slow to censure offending members among themselves, and that they reckon it their duty to treat pious people of other denominations with great attention and tenderness; yet how much have they labored to suppress us altogether? Either they are not so charitable as they seem to be; or they are persuaded in their conscience that we differ so much from them, that they can exercise little charity towards us.

The difference between us and the Associate Reformed Synod cannot be removed, unless by our deserting the principles of the Secession for the sake of agreement with them; or by their returning to the profession which the most part of them formerly made. As to the first of these ways, we desire to be kept from it. The agreement obtained at such a price would be too dear. And as to the last, we entertain little or no hope of it. If the Associate Reformed Synod shall continue in existence for any length of time, their opposition to the Secession cause will become more and more manifest. They have been departing from it for some years past, and have not yet gone so far as they will go. They are evidently more desirous of union with those whose views are more agreeable to their own, than ours are. The body of this generation are gone into a course of backsliding, which carries them farther and farther from the right ways of the Lord; and when men once give way to this, like a mighty stream, it sweeps them away, they know not whither.

In this time of general and grievous defection, all who desire to be found faithful ought to watch, lest they be ensnared, and led astray ere they are aware. The Lord Jesus is still saying to us, "Behold I come quickly, hold that fast which thou hast, that no man take thy crown."

(F. p. 56.)

NEW YORK Nov. 3, 1784, DEAR SIR-The deep concern I have for you, induces me to desire to know before sermon this evening, whether you have freedom to commemorate the Redeemer's death with us on these easy and generous terms:-that you profess your willingness, under scruples, to be open to conviction, and that

your joining with us, shall not, for this time be considered as forming a permanent connexion. I do not mean to draw you into a snare, but I would have you guarded against disobedience to a peremptory command of the blessed Jesus, which I am sure cannot be justified by all the scruples you have. Converse with your brethren about this proposal, and spread it before the Lord. The matter is serious. I aim sincerely at the good of your soul. May God direct you. If you shall have liberty to comply with this proposal, I will mention it to the session, who I doubt not will cheerfully invite you to a seat at the Lord's table.

I am &c.

ANSWER THE SAME DAY.

JOHN MASON

REV. AND DEAR SIR-I am much obliged to you for the concern you express for my welfare. I esteem your pains, in taking the trouble to write to me on the subject as a mark of your regard for me, as what you believe serves my best interest. But, as I am accountable to God for my conduct, and the motives that induce me to take the course that now appears to be my duty however disagreeable in other respects, (being under the necessity of separating from some of my dear acquaintances and friends in Christ whom I esteem and regard) yet a consistent profession and practice of the witnessing cause, I am under the most solemn obligations to adhere to, does not permit to take any step that would involve me in inconsistency. I wish to be enabled to act in such a way that my former profession and practice, may not clash with my present. It appears to me necessary, therefore, in order to maintain this uniformity, that I refrain from joining with you in shewing forth the Lord's death at this time. I am perfectly satisfied with the profession I have made, and am under solemn obligations to maintain and abide by it all the days of my life; and the grace and strength of Christ is still the same. O that we were enabled to make daily use of it!

I humbly hope I shall never be left to neglect shewing forth the Lord's death, when it is attainable in a way consistent with the whole of my witnessing profession. If our conscience condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God.

I am, Rev. and Dear Sir, yours,

JOHN MCFARLAND.

( G. p. 65. )

Reasons of Protest by John Foster [an elder in the congregation of New Perth,] against the Constitution of the Associate Reformed Synod.

The Constitution of the Associate Reformed Synod being published and having come to hand, after diligent perusal of the same, I find myself constrained to protest against it, and 1 hereby do protest against it for the following reasons, amongst many others that might be given. Viz: for its ambiguity, for its self-inconsistency, and for its opposition to the Testimony of the Reformed church in her Confession, and Standards, and to the Scriptures of truth adduced for the support thereof.

As to the first, Is it not dark and ambiguous where they declare in page 2d, their adherence to the fundamental principles of gospel worship and ecclesiastical government held forth in the Directory for public worship, and the form of Presbyterian church government? Pray, what may be called fundamental? and who is judge? On page 4th also: Nor is it to be construed as a resignation of our right to adjust the circumstances of public worship and ecclesiastical policy to the situation in which Divine Providence may place us. Would it not be proper that we should know what they account circumstantials, and that it should not be left to every one to explain?

Article 2d. is so dark and artfully worded, that the most of people imagine that they still adhere to these covenants as binding upon them, although it is evident the very contrary is their design. How inconsistent is the second article with the first, where they profess an adherence to the system of truth laid down in the Holy Scriptures and exhibited in the Confession, yet in this article, part of three chapters of said Confession are cut off. It is strange to profess to be under the most sacred obligations to avoid unnecessary criticisms on this excellent treatise which would have a native tendency to weaken their attachment to the truths therein contained, and yet to cut off these three articles of said Confession.

Again, what large allowance is here given, even for brethren, members of the Synod, to object against this excellent treatise? and yet article fourth will not admit an objection about the civil establishment of the Presbyterian religion, nor the origin of civil dominion. In article second, what a flow of good words and fair speeches, about the Covenants and

judicial Testimony; and of their bearing pointed testimony against the errors and delusions that prevail in this country. Now, who can reconcile this with their conduct in renouncing the binding obligation of these covenants as covenants, and in laying aside both covenants and judicial testimony as terms of communion? Where, also, is this pointed testimony against that unbounded toleration of all and every kind of religion in America? It is truly affecting, that the same generation that came under formal obligations to adhere to these covenants, should be the very generation that should break them.

I think it strange also, to find, in article third, such professions of regard to the religious denominations in Britain, to which they formerly belonged; and yet, in the formula, page 27, we find they are not to receive a minister from either the Associate or Reformed churches there, however well attested, until they renounce their former engagements by declar ng their hearty approbation of the Constitution of this Synod, and their resolution to adhere to it. Is it not strange, if, as this Synod would make us believe, there is no alteration intended only in circumstances, that they will keep these men at a distance only for a mere circumstance, however Associate or Reformed they may otherwise be?

I think that a strange and inconsistent like sentence in article fourth, viz: "they," the Synod, "esteem themselves bound to detach their religious profession from all foreign connections, and to honor the civil powers of America, conscientiously submitting to them in all their lawful operations." What, is there no such thing as conscientiously obeying said powers by any but those who adopt this Constitution? Or must people qualify by renouncing their covenant engagements and ordination vows? Surely the civil powers are more civil than that.

Article sixth makes soundness in the Confession mentioned above, the term of admission to fixed communion. When a member, then, of the Associate Reformed Synod, who resides in New Perth, administers baptism, and at the ordination of his elders, solemnly binds, as in the sight of God, to the Westminster Confession of Faith, without exception, and yet neither believes it himself nor intends that they should, as is evident from his approbation of the Constitution that cuts off part of it, it looks too much like daubing with untempered

mortar.

As to my third reason, viz: its direct opposing and injuring the Testimony of the Reformed church, in her best times since her Reformation from Popery, by cutting off and laying aside

« ÎnapoiContinuă »