that too in the absence of the five hundred. Read the 4 first verses of the 2nd chapter, read the 14th and 15th verses, and the 41st and 42nd, and the 47th verscs. Now you have seen that the door of the church was opened by the apostles, and 3000 believing Jews were added to them; and to the church, that is, to the Apostles and those with them, the Lord added daily. All this, too, in the absence of the 500; or if there at all, they were counted with the 3000 which were added to the Apostles. Turn, if you please, to the 12th chapter, 28th v. of 1 Cor.; you see here, that the Apostles were the first set in the church, and of course were the first church. It is believed by all christians as far as I know, the Stone's River churches not excepted, that the sacrament of the Lord's Supper is a church ordinance; as such the Lord acknowledged the Apostles to be the church, for he gave the Supper to them in the absence of the 500. According to his own showing, the writer of this letter is a very singular character in the Baptist church, for he is a non-commissioned officer. The commission to teach and baptize having never been given to the church, she can never confer the commission on any of her members, for it is impossible for her to confer what she never had; hence his act in baptizing, and solemnizing the rites of matrimony, are both done without a commission. But it may be, the writer claims his office by succession to the Apostles. If he does, his claim is not good, for the Apostles are now on their thrones, and can have no successors while they sit there. Read Matt. 19: 27, 28. If he claims this succession he is not a Baptist, for they never did allow their ministers. to sit on thrones. If the writer claims this succession he is a Catholic; they have thrones and dominions. St. Peter's chair has been filled (they say) by one of their fraternity, ever since his decease.

We are now at the forks of the road, one leads to a clerical government, the other to a democratic. The one leads to thrones, the other to seats. In order to see which road this writer has taken, we will quote again. "We admit these things were given for the benefit of the church, but to particular individuals. Now if the commission had been given to the Apostles as a church, then the church should have appointed them their respective fields of labor afterwards, as the Convention folks do now, but this was not done

by the church then, neither should it be now. The church is only called upon to fellowship and acknowledge what the Lord as the great Head of the church does in these respects." -Page 8. Here lies the foundation of Episcopacy. The Church prays for, prays to, and obeys those whom the Lord may appoint to office from time to time. Although I have aleady proved, that the commission to teach and baptize, was given to the Church, yet as I have men to deal with, strongly prejudiced against that idea, I will enlarge the proof.

"And at that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of Judea and Samaria except the Apostles." Acts, 8: 1. Now, reader, do you mind, these men who had fled for their lives were members of the church in Jerusalem, and the Apostles, who, it seems, had received the commission to teach and baptize in contradistinction from the church, were all left behind. Now let us see what those church members did. "Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen, travelled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word to none but the Jews only. And some of them were men of Cyprus, and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus Christ. And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed and turned unto the Lord. Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jeru salem, and they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch." Now, it is clear as the face of day, that those men who went abroad understood that the commission under which they acted was given to the church, and the church, when she sent forth Barnabas, had the same understanding. See Acts, 11: 19, 20, 21, 22. The Lord required the church at Antioch to separate 'Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto he had appointed them. But why request their concurrence and action, when they had nothing to do in the commission? for it seems there had been eleven appointed under the commission independent of the church, and the Lord is now appointing two members of this church to the same work: if, therefore, the Lord had appointed the eleven independent of the church, he would have appointed

these in the same way. See Acts, 19: 1, 2, 3, 4, and chap. 14: 26, 27. Once more. "Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch, with Paul and Barnabas: namely, Judas, surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren." Acts, 15:22. Here was an act under the commission, done jointly by the Apostles, elders, and the whole church. To the reader, it may appear childish to have adduced so much proof, when Mark, Luke, Tim., Titus, and the hundreds of cotemporary ministers beside, in teaching and baptizing, acted under no other commission than the one given to the church.

I take up the second division, under the head of

ABSURDITY.

First. "We are now just what we were when we joined the United Baptist Church; then there was no Convention." Page 3.-Every word of this is true, and I am very sorry that it is true. This writer is the man who drew the "Bethesda resolutions," in which (if I recollect) he rebuked the churches for having neglected to sustain their ministers, and from the above avowal they still neglect it. 2nd. It was then agreed to furnish supplies not only for domestic, but for those who might wish to go into foreign lands. This they also disavow, as they are just what they were." 3rd. "Then there was no Convention." And because we were wrong then, it seems we ought to have continued so. Then the whole church were under the same obligation to "preach the Gospel to every creature" that they are now, and in, order to do it, the whole church were under obligation to support a whole ministry. And when the church felt this obligation, anciently, there was a combination of churches, and agents sent out to solicit and receive funds for benevolent purposes. But we have all slept over our commission, and if these brethren intend to sleep on, it is no reason we should. When a whole ministry give themselves wholly to the Lord's work, and a whole ministry live of the Gospel, then, and not till then, will the Lord's whole work be done. Paul was a foreign missionary; his pecuniary supplies from the churches are introduced here as a directory for the churches as regards the foreign mission now. This is also an absurdity. For this, I offer three reasons. First, Paul commends but one church for having done their whole duty

to him, in which he rebukes all the rest. See Phil. 4: 15, 16, 17, 18. 2nd. Paul could work miracles. When the viper fastened on his hand in the island of Melita, the barbarians knew that its sting was death, and because he received no harm, they thought him a god. This gave him notoriety, and Publius lodged him and his company three days courteously. In the mean time Publius' father was healed of a bloody flux, and others who had diseases were also healed. This gave him favor with the inhabitants, so that when they departed they were laden with such things as were necessary. See Acts, 28. This was more than any of our missionaries can do. 3rd. Paul could speak in the language of any country where he might go, but our missionary has to learn the language of the country before he can speak it; so that the difference between them is great, and this difference the church has to provide for, in order to preach the gospel to every creature.

2nd item. "Whenever we may see preachers starting out, under a spiritual exercise of soul concerning the heathen, and going in the way the Saviour commanded, without gold or silver, or with their own purse only, in the wisdom and power of the Lord, and in his providence connected with their work, we will hear of a spiritual work abroad." C. p. 6. Yes, we will so. But where did we ever see this? not in the New Testament-Paul gave a public challenge, to bring forth a witness to this point. "Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges?" And which of themselves have, or ever will go a warfare of this description, at their own charges? This system is contrary, not only to the New Testament, but to nature, for it is impossible to carry it out. This system charges tyranny on the Almighty, in that he lays a heavy burden on one, and does not require the rest to touch it with one of their fingers. The spirit which dictated the above sentiment is the cause, and the only cause, why there are now five hundred million of heathen. And this spirit has brought the Baptist denomination in the West to the brink of ruin. This spirit has defrauded the Almighty of millions of meat, which ought to have been in his house. You see that these people have a missionary system which they do not carry out, because impossible, and therefore they do not enter into this work themselves, and those who are entering they hinder.

And is it so, that Jesus Christ put his church on the minister's parish? as it seems they go "with their own purse only:" And since they are appointed to the Lord's work unreservedly, in what parish has he left them? These are important questions, and they ought to be answered, espe cially as this sentiment leaves the church on the parish.

3rd Item. "We are bold to affirm that no portion of the primitive Church ever went out into a distinct society, and assumed to themselves the right of hiring and sending out ministers, on pay per sermon, per month or per year." C. p.4. Yes, and I am bold to affirm, that no portion of the primitive Church, ever went out into such a society as the one which wrote this letter. I do not intend, however, to avail myself of this set off, but will examine the subject more at large. And as I understand this to be the charge against us, I will examine it piece by piece. 1st, "Went out." In order for the illustration of this, I will state two facts; an old minister once said to a young one, "go on and preach, and don't be uneasy about your family, they shall never want as long as I have." Did this old man go out when he gave this pledge, if not, the Convention has not gone out, for this is exactly their principle and position. Two brethren in this country not long since, each gave a minister fifty dollars, and told him to hire a hand in his place, and give himself wholly to the work. Here was the Convention complete in those individuals, and as far as they went, they went fully on its principles, but who will say they went out to do that. Have the Convention gone out of the world? No, we are all here. Has the Convention gone out into the world? No, none but orderly Baptists have a seat there. Have they not gone out of the Baptist church? No, whole Baptist churches belong to them. Have not the Convention gone out of the Baptist discipline? No, they are the strongest supporters of Baptist discipline. Have not the Convention gone out of Baptist doctrine? No, so far from it, they want more of it. Having shown from what the Convention has not gone out of, I will show what the Convention is in. 1st, It is within the Lord's arrangement, which he has revealed in the New Testament to carry out his work. 2nd, It is within the range of divine approbation, the Lord has abundantly blest missionary labour; the Baptists have translated the scriptures faithfully, into about