Precisely on this ground, the|pular on this subject, may, withRev. C. Jerram, in his Conversa-out hesitation, go over to the tions on Infant Baptism, p. 152, establishment, or to any church has said, "We may challenge where his inclination leads him, the world to substantiate such a and no previous views of the incharge against us, as would ren- stitutions, or discipline of the der it improper, on these princi- primitive church need stand in ples, to continue within her pale, his way. There are various in[i. e. the pale of the established stances occurring of persons church,] or make it a matter of changing their religious connecindifference to desert her com- tions in a manner that strikes munity." If such principles as some with surprise: let them be the Reviewer seems to admit, in examined;-it will more often be all that he says, be received, Mr. found than at first would be imaJerram is perfectly correct: no gined, that precisely the same. churchman, who understands his sort of reasoning which is used ground, needs desert the field, or for mixed communion, is adoptfear any attack from any Dissen- ed as a salvo for other things. ter. He can always reply, you Time will shew that this principay so little regard to the New ple will be greatly injurious, not Testament regulations yourselves, only to those Baptists who adopt that you do not think an ordi- it, but to every body of Disnance of Christ's own appoint-senters that fairly act upon it. ment worth supporting, nor, what you confess was the universal practice of the church, worth preserving!-Indeed, the consequence goes still farther, the churchman may add, this mode of reasoning, by which mixed communion is maintained, frees me from many difficulties, which Dissenters have urged with all their might, for it grants that the New Testament state of things needs not be followed, that maxims and practices then proper enough, and even permanent ordinances, supported by divine authority, need not be insisted on. There is an end, therefore, to all their objections against the principles of our establishment, as being contrary to the New Testament; they give up the most evident New Testament rites, when it suits themselves: Why, then, should they contend about New Testament authority, when an appointment of the Lord himself, is not suffered to retain its place? Whoever adopts the lax reasonings which have been po

But the Reviewer makes a stand upon another ground, and thinks the strict Baptists will be entangled in unanswerable difficulties, by not denying the right which others have to receive the Lord's Supper in their own denominations;-and, by their esteem for those who, in some things differ from them. Suppose, then, that the Reviewer is so far correct, that these Baptists have too much endeavoured to act on as broad a ground as they could, with those who were not of their body; is their argument in support of their sentiments destroyed? Does it therefore follow, that in their own churches, they ought not to act on what they conceive to be the plan of the New Testament? Or, does it follow, that their principle is not correct, that members of a Christian church ought to be persons who have been baptized? Let the Reviewer prove, as soon as he pleases, that it is the design of the New Testament to admit persons professedly unbaptized as members

of the church, let him shew us a is right, the strict Baptist leaves single instance of the kind, if he to God and their own conscican; we will then listen to him.ence; he is not their judge. But If he cannot, let him give us a of this be is certain, that he canreason why the Baptists, who not receive them without admitting form churches of their own for a principle ruinous to the obligathe very purpose of acting more tion he is under to the Head of in conformity to the will of Christ, the church. For it would be an than they could elsewhere, are acknowledgment, that though he bound to open their doors to and his brethren see and confess every one who chooses to knock the authority of a permanent infor entrance! If, in this, they are stitution of Christ, yet, they need in the wrong, they acknowledge not regard it. He, therefore, says the error is of wide extent; for to the applicant, I judge you there was no sufficient reason not, but you ought to go to a why they should form a separate denomination agreeing with you denomination; and, in many on this point, for this reason, if cases, none, why they should be for no other, that then, neither Dissenters at all. you' nor your brethren fly in the face of what you and they be

ciple. It may be replied, it is very hard that you treat me thus: to which the answer is, do you wish us to receive you on terms which would practically declare that what we believe is a permanent institution of Christ, ought not to be regarded in his church?

We are told, "the excluding party is bound to shew some scriptural ground for his proceeding?" But the applying

Again, it is thought a strong argument against the strict Bap-lieve is a general Christian printists, that the disqualification does not relate to the Lord's table, but only to communion with them. This, when examined, amounts to very little: the Baptists say, that Pædobaptists, who plead that they are baptized, as one of the grounds on which they come to the Lord's Supper, on their own principles do right; they acknowledge the order and connection of the institutions of the gospel; and though, as Bap-party should shew some scriptutists, they do not think their views ral ground on which he makes correct, yet they do not condemn the application; and, if he conthem. The case is, however, siders the point, he will not find not precisely the same, when a it easy to place his application ou person, on all hands allowed to a ground that will bear even his be unbaptized, or who considers own examination; for it will althe institution of baptism to be ways amount to this,-give up entirely abrogated, requests ad- your sentiments to gratify me, and mission. Even many Pædobap. then we shall do very well: but tists would hesitate to assert, that would the union effected by such he acted properly. But the mo- compromise be worthy of being dern system of mixed communion called "the communion of saints." proceeds on the ground that he is as welcome as any other; for respecting the Lord's Supper, the case is the same as if baptism was abrogated entirely. How far these persons are doing what

The subject is not exhausted, but I am restrained from saying more, from the length of this paper, I shall, therefore, only add, I am yours very respectfully, Oct. 1824. A STRICT BAPTIST.

Miscellanea.

Illustration of Hosea ii. 21, 22. 4to. 1643. Bishop Horsley's New

The concatenation of causes is wonderful. The first, and governing link, is in the hand of God. From this, and similar passages, origina-hood, he broke through the reted, perhaps, the fabulous account of Jupiter's letting down his golden chain from heaven. See Jeremiah | Burroughe's Lectures on Hosea,

is peculiar to the Bible; and it is the abuse of a contrivance, that was designed for another purpose, the history and progress of which is worth considering.

"The sacred books, whether Hebrew or Greek, came from the pen of their writers, and were in the hands of those, for whom they were originally composed, without any division of this sort. The first need of any thing like such a division, was after the Babylonish captivity; the Jews had then mostly forgotten the original Hebrew; and when it was read in the synagogue, it was found necessary to have an interpretation into Chaldee for the use of the common people. To make this interpretation intelligible, and useful, the reader of the Hebrew used to pause at short distances, while the interpreter pronounced the same passage in Chaldee; such pauses became established, and were marked in the manuscripts, forming a sort of verses, like those in our present Bibles, This division into verses was confined to the Hebrew scriptures, and to the people for whose use it was contrived; no such division was made in the translation of the seventy, nor in the Latin version; so that the Bible used in the Greek and the Western Churches, was without any such division, either in the Old or New Testament,

in conversation with a pious relative, he expressed himself to this effect: "What is there," said he, “of pleasure that I have not tried, yet I cannot obtain happiness. I know the good man is the only happy one. I would give the world to be such; but I cannot pray." His relative wished him to attend religious service at the chapel. "I would," he replied," do any thing almost that you wish me, except attending there that I cannot do." Such were the sentiments of his heart, and such the despairing condition into which he had brought himself by his sin. Did he find satisfaction in his iniquity? No-be confessed the contrary-he was wretched-he honestly acknowledged that: for with all his crimes, he abhorred deceit, and urged, as one reason, why he could not attend the house of God-lest he should seem, by hypocrisy, to disgrace the cause of religion. His Sabbaths, of course, were misspent ; and, it is said, some former escapes from a watery grave, might have taught him wisdom. Being an excellent swimmer, he thought himself always secure; but the time was come, when divine forbearance grew weary. He was found a great distance from the place where it is supposed the boat was upset, and, probably, sunk, after contending with the waves for a great length of time. He was naked, "It was, however, found necesand so disfigured, as scarcely to be sary, in after times, to make a divirecognized by his relatives. The sion and subdivision of the sacred immortal spirit was for ever gone. books; but it was for a very differReader, reflect on the wages of ini-ent purpose; it was for the sake of quity! Be admonished. Art thou a barren fig-tree? Even now the axe is laid unto the root-if thou bear fruit well-but if not, God shall speedily cut thee down.-Beware, Jest he take thee away with a stroke —then a great ransom cannot deliver thee.

referring to them with more ease and certainty. We are told that Cardinal Hugo, in the 13th century, made a concordance to the whole of the Latin Bible, and that for this purpose of reference, he divided both the Old and New Testament into chapters, being the same that we now have. These chapters be subdivided into smaller portions, distinguishing them by the letters of the alphabet; and, by those means, he was enabled to make references from his concordance to the text of the Bible. The utility of such a concordance brought it into high repute; and the division into chapters, upon which it depended, was

adopted, along with it, by the divines | distinct paragraphs. But the Eng

of Europe.

lish translators, who had fled to Ge"This division into chapters was neva, during the persecution of afterwards, in the 15th century, Queen Mary, and who published adopted by a learned Jew, for the there a new translation, famous afsame purpose of reference, in making terwards under the name of the Gea concordance to the Hebrew Bible. neva Bible, separated every one of This was Rabbi Mordecai Nathan, the verses, making each into a diswho carried the contrivance a step tinct paragraph. This new confurther; for, instead of adhering to trivance was soon received with as the subdivisions of Cardinal Hugo, much approbation as the preceding; he made others, much smaller, and and all Bibles, in all languages, bedistinguished them, not by letters, gan to be printed in the same manbut by numbers. This invention ner, with the verses distinguished was received into the Latin Bibles, into paragraphs; and so the practice and they make the present verses of has continued to the present time. the Old Testament. In doing this, A singular destiny, to which no he might possibly have proceeded other book has been subjected! For upon the old subdivisions long be- in all other works, the index, or fore used for the interpretation into concordance, or whatever may be Chaldee. We see, therefore, that the subsidiary matter, is fashioned the present division of the Old Tes- so, as to be subordinate to the oritament into chapter and verse, is anginal work; but in the Bible alone, invention partly Christian, and partly Jewish, and that it was for the sole purpose of reference, and not primarily with a view to any natural division of the several subjects contained in it.

"The New Testament still remained without any subdivision into verses, till one was at length made, for the very same purpose of a concordance, about the middle of the sixteenth century. The author of this was Robert Stephens, the celebrated printer at Paris. He followed the example of Rabbi Nathan, in subdividing the chapters into small verses, and numbering them; and he printed an edition of the Greek Testament so marked. This division soon came into general use, like the former one of the Old Testament, from the same recommendation of the concordance that depended upon it; and Latin Testaments, as well as Bibles, were ever after distinguished into chapters and

verses.

"It remained for the translators of the English Bible to push this invention to an extremity. The beginning of every chapter had been made a fresh paragraph in all the printed Bibles; but the verses were only marked by the number, either in the margin, or in the body of the matter; such minute subdivisions did not then seem fit to be made into

the text and substance of the work is disfigured in order to be adapted to the concordance that belongs to it; and the notion of its being perused, is sacrificed to that of its being referred to. In consequence of this, the Bible is to the eye, upon the opening of it, rather a book of reference than a book of perusal and study: and it is much to be feared, that this circumstance makes it more frequently used as such; it is referred to for verifying a quotation, and then returned to the shelf. What book can be fundamentally understood, if consulted only in such a desultory way!"

A Remarkable Instance of the
Power of Divine Grace.

A REMARKABLE instance of the power and sovereignty of Divine grace, in the conversion of Mr. Morgan Howel, of Cardiganshire, Wales, under the ministry of the Rev. W. Cradock. A gentleman, who lived near where he preached, when he visited that country, was particularly inimical to his doctrine and preaching. He ridiculed him in his conversation, and made a mock of him in verses which he published, and opposed his ministry by all means. It so fell out, by God's pur