although, on his reasoning, it must be a pre-requisite to public worship and every part of moral obedience. For thus sagaciously he argues :

The Supreme Lawgiver has expressly enjoined-first, to make disciples-then, immediately to baptize the disciples-lastly to teach the baptized disciples to observe, keep, or obey his laws or institutions. It must be admitted, that church-fellowship and the Lord's Supper fall under the last head; and if so, then, according to the order of the commission, men can no more be admitted to churchfellowship or the Lord's Supper before baptism, than they can be admittted to baptism before they are made disciples.'

But unfortunately, there is nothing about admitting to church-fellowship in the passage, and the substitution of those words in the place of teaching them to observe, savours more of legerdemain than of logic. Mr. M'Lean's argument is, that the order of the words shews, that persons must be baptized before they are taught to observe what Christ has commanded. Then it is wrong, it seems, to teach the unbaptized to obey the commands of Christ. What must it be, to sanction unbaptized teachers? But some things must be taught to the unbaptized, in order to make them disciples at all; and a person who had not been taught to observe, or who had not observed, some of the all things' which are commanded, would not be thought a proper subject for Christian baptism. By what means are we to gather from the order of the words, how much or how little it is allowable to teach the unbaptized to observe. May he be taught to observe the positive ordinance of Christian worship? We doubt much whether the Apostles ever inculcated that ordinance on the unbaptized, or taught it as a duty detached from the observance of the Supper. There is every reason to believe, that the Supper constantly formed a part of their religious observances on the Sabbath; and that any were admitted to join with them in other parts of Christian worship, who were excluded from this, is a position wholly gratuitous. Those who will not allow that any departure, in circumstantials, from the primitive practice, is both necessitated and warranted by the alterations in the circumstances of society, will have to tread back their steps further than they may be aware of. But, waiving this point, we repeat the inquiry, what do the all 'things' consist of which are to be taught exclusively to the baptized? As far as we can understand the expositors referred to, the all things' is a figure of speech, meaning one thing, for the unbaptized may be taught to observe all things but one. This one thing is the Lord's Supper; and when we ask for the proof of this exception, we are told, that it falls under the bead' of the-all things. Exquisite demonstration !

Behold, therefore, gentle reader,' says Bunyan in disposing of this palmary argument of his strict-communion brethren; the ground on which these brethren lay the stress of their separation from their fellows, is nothing else but " a 'supposition," without warrant, skrewed out of this blessed word of God. Strongly supposed!' But may it not be as strongly supposed, that the presence and blessing of the Lord Jesus with his ministers is laid upon the same ground also? For thus he concludes the text, " And lo! I am with you always, even to the end of the world." But would, I say, any man from these words conclude, that Christ Jesus hath here promised his presence only to them that, after discipling, baptize those that are so made; and that they that do not baptize, shall neither have his presence nor his ⚫ blessing? I say again, should any so conclude hence, 'would not all experience prove him void of truth? words, therefore, must be left by you as you found them: they favour not at all your groundless supposition.'

The

the opinion of different parts of a family may be divided. It • would be so desirable to keep them together, if it can be . done, that for this purpose mixed communion would be very ' expedient.' In relation to this point, we will not appeal to Mr. Kinghorn, but to Christian fathers and Christian husbands, whether expediency is precisely the word that they think ought to be applied to the desire of a Christian family to unite in the celebration of the Lord's Supper. Whence comes this ruthless system which would pour contempt on the best affections of our nature, in their holiest exercise, and term the union of husband and wife, parent and child, in the most solemn office of Christian devotion, a matter of expediency? Possibly, Mr. Kinghorn may think, that if a Baptist should commit the sin of marrying a pædobaptist, he ought to bear the punishment which the strict-communion law inflicts upon him. But what if one of the parties should have received light in this matter after Baptism : must he be punished for becoming a Baptist ? Since Mr. K. supposes a case, we will put a real one,—that of a pædobaptist husband debarred, during the latter years of his life, from accompanying his aged companion to the Lord's Table, by which the feelings of both were alike outraged. On the same church devolved the honour and duty of announcing to a most respectable Baptist gentleman and his lady, that their daughters, members of a pædobaptist church, could not be admitted with their parents. Expediency or inexpediency in cases like these, is not a consideration that we should feel inclined to insist upon, but the palpable impropriety of the proceeding, and the infinitely strong presumption it affords, that the hypothesis in which such regulations originate, cannot be a law of Christ.

On the other hand, it is our firm persuasion, that the grand argument for strict-communion, in the view of the inajority of its abettors, is expediency, and expediency only. "In Mr. Kinghorn's reply to Mr. Hall, he tells us in the preface), that he does not intend to rest the argument on expediency, but he endeavours, nevertheless, to avail himself of this argument. • The eminent John Bunyan,' he says, “who zealously advo'cated the cause of mixed communion, seems to have had no great success in promoting the interests of the Baptists.' What,

а

dent that the decision of the learned umpire would be in their favour ; but when the Dr. was told that the pædobaptists could not communicate with any other church, he, without hesitation, gave his opinion in favour of mixed communion, as a matter not of expediency, but of bounden duty. VOL. XXIII. N.S.

3 B

then, are the interests of the Baptists? Are they those of a party, or those of Truth and Godliness? That the treatment Bunyan met with, did not promote the interests of the Baptists, we ca. readily imagine; and the interests of the Baptists have been not a little injured in more recent times by a similar spirit. Mr. Kinghorn does not see it in this light. He trembles for the existence of the Baptist denomination, should mixed communion prevail. We have not the slightest doubt that, if he could be brought round to the views of Mr. Hall and Dr. Ryland on this point, and believe with them that the sentiments of the Baptists require but the removal of this obstacle, to extend themselves indefinitely, he would soon see the whole subject in a new light. But, however this may be, we know that this is the case with many. There is a large proportion of persons in strict-communion churches, whose objection relates not to admitting pædobaptists to communion, but to church-membership. What, they say, if the pædobaptists should become a majority? These good people do not comprehend very distinctly the logic about our Lord's commission, but they can understand the expediency of keeping their church to themselves, and not letting pædobaptists have votes in their societies. An instance came to our knowledge very recently, in which this argument wrought so powerfully on the female part of the society, that it was notoriously the ground on which they attended in a body, according to a pre-concerted plan, to out-number the majority of the male members, who, with the pastor at their head, wished to adopt the Scriptural principle of Christian communion. It is but fair to mention, however, that some of them were told by a worthy deacon, that if pædobaptists were admitted to the Church, Socinians and Antinomians might follow.

Mr. Kinghorn, however, will agree with us, that the simple question to be determined is, What is the law of Christ? and that being ascertained, it is the duty as well of churches as of individuals to adhere to it at the hazard of any apprehended consequences. If it be against his will, and in opposition to his directions, that we reject those whom he has received, then, to persist in so doing in order to promote the interests of the Baptists, is but doing evil that good may come. The cause of God and truth stands in no need of a narrow, jealous, sectarian policy, nor can it be served by it. And as for the Baptist interest, may we be allowed to say, that its perpetuity and prosperity will, under God, depend far less on the zeal with which the churches contend for the honour of holding up to view one neglected truth, than on the fidelity with which they adhere to the whole of the Christian system ; that they

are in far more danger from the Antinomian leaven, than from any possible consequences of mixed communion; and that every legitimate interest of the denomination has been far more effectively served by the holy examples and apostolic labours of its Pearces and Fullers, Wards and Careys, Stennetts and Fawcetts, than by all the angry discussions which have taken place on the subject of Baptism.

Art. IX. Foreign Scenes and Travelling Recreations. By John Howison, Esq. of the Honourable East India Company's Service, and Author of Sketches of Upper Canada. 2 vols. post 8vo. Price 15s. Edinburgh, 1825.

THE

HE former occasion on which Mr. Howison was presented to us, was in the year 1821, on his return from Upper Canada. Since then, he has been passing part of his life at Sea,' and has visited the Island of Cuba, New Providence, and the Deckan. We frankly confess that he appears to us improved by his travels, and he has furnished us with two very entertaining volumes of light reading, containing much picturesque description and desultory information connected with foreign scenes and foreign manners.

At the present moment, when the political destiny of Cuba is a subject of so much anxious speculation, the most interesting article in the Contents will be, The City of Havana.' Humboldt, who visited the island in 1800, remarks, that notwithstanding the increase of the black population, we seem to be nearer Cadiz and the United States of North America at Caracas and the Havanna, than in any other part of the New World,' and that in no other part of Spanish America, had civilization assumed a more European physiognomy.'+ The port has been considered as the principal maritime key of the West Indies; it is at least the key of the Gulf of Mexico, and of all the maritime frontier of the United States. The occupation of this Island concerns almost equally the North American, Mexican, Guatemalan, and Colombian Republics, and the British Empire. Some of our highest interests, political and commercial,' remarks Mr. Poinsett in his Notes on Mexico, are involved in its fate.' Long have his countrymen jealously watched the proceedings of the British Cabinet in reference to this coveted possession. The following lan

Eclect. Rev. N.S. vol.: xviii. p. 352. + Pers. Narr. vol. iii. p. 472.