LIGHT IS DAWNIWG IN OLD VIRGINIA. From the Religious Herald. “Church Rules.—Under the control of bigotry we might be compelled to withhold our support from every thing not designed to advance the interest of our own denomination; and governed by interest we might suffer to pass, unmolested, what we consider evils, countetianced and maintained among the Baptistis themselves. But we owe no allegiance either to bigotry or interest.* [*This is like a servant of the Messiah.]

It is stated that cases have occurred in several portions of our commonwealth within the last year or two, in which individuals of unexceptionable morals and acknowledged piety, have been expelled from churches merely on account of difference of opinion, in some matters in church discipline; but not affecting the faith of the gospel, or necessarily connected with experimental and practical religion. — For our part we feel it our duty to say, that the longer we live we are the more convinced of the justice and expediency of liberality in all matters, and especially in those of religion. From religious tests, professed or understood (and they are oftener understood than profes sed) have arisen a large portion of the dissensions and wrangles, and persecutions that have distracted the church and cursed mankind. Human theories have been substituted for revealed truths and injunc tions, and all who are conscientious enough to oppose them, have been denounced as heretics. What extravagance in Religion, as in Philosophy, has not found its advocates and supporters? Eminent men have denied the existence of matter, and others equally eminent, have opposed the doctrine of the connexion of cause and effect. Some have contended that the descendants of Adam are sinners by a Divine constitution, others by propagation-souls descending from parents to offspring by natural generation. One has asserted the identity and volition of our whole race with Adam in the first transgression; another, that moral character is transferred from one account to another, precisely as pecuniary transactions are; and a third, that in virtue of the death of Christ we are born with a corrupt nature only, but without guilt or exposure to punishment, original guilt being thus cancelled. Indeed almost every man has his own particular theory, as touching matters of opinion concerning human depravity, while that which the christian feels authorized and required to believe is, that by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned, Rom. v. 12; and so in relation to other matters in religion: the faith of the gospel is one and its experience is one; and theories and conjectures and opinions, inay be as numerous as the race of men. But some of our brethren are of opinion that no Creed or Confession of Faith is necessary but the Bible, and that they are in fact injurious-that the exclusive system of rules by which a church should be governed are those contained in the New Testament, that the instructions and edification of believ ers are better promoted by expositions of chapters or sections of the scriptures than by sermous founded on isolated texts-that the same Elder cannot preside over several churches at the same time, although he may visit as many as is convenient or practicable--that the Lord's

supper was celebrated by the early disciples, the first day of every week, and should be now,--because worthy brethren of sound moral and religious principles and lives, entertain opinions like these, shall they be declared disorderly and heretical, and expelled from fellowship!!

Now we know a number of such brethren, who are retained in churches tenacious of doctrine and order, without a word said, or a hard thought cherished; and these churches act wisely and correctly. Let us suppose that such opinions are not required by the scriptures, does it follow that they are improper, or if they are, that they are so to such an extent as to merit censure and excision! But it would be difficult to show that the opinions above mentioned are improper, and contrary to the word of God. And while, on the one hand, we deprecate the looseness of government and extent of charity which considers confusion to be order, and all sentiments proper, if sincere; on the other hand, we would watch with a jealous eye that rigor of discipline which demands unanimity of opinion in every particular, at the expense of pains and penalties, and those of the highest class allowed by the civil government under which we live. It is scarcely to be doubted that there are many persons, in other respects worthy of esteem, whose principles and habits would lead them, had they the power, to establish religion by law, and to renew all the terrors of excommunication, torture, confiscation, the inquisitorial tribunal, sanctified by prayer, and the auto-da-fe.* [*Like apples of gold in pictures of silver.] Thanks to God, we remain as yet free from the dominion of his Holiness the Pope, and are yet unthreatened by the glittering of the sword and the thunder of cannon; but unless our civil and religious liberties are guarded with a watchful eye, we may have, at some future period, to face the bayonet, or to go to the stake.* [*An important truth.]

We hope that kind demeanor, and good feelings will be cherished in churches in which such differences may exist. It is not our wish to wound the sensibilities of our brethren; nor would we set up our selves as umpires of contending parties, but moderation and forbearance are respectfully and affectionately recommended. Let brethren who, without reproach as to morals, standing, and the faith of the gospel, have been discountenanced, be restored and be declared to be restored, to all former confidence and affection. If such differences as those referred to be inconsistent with harmonious union, let the separation be friendly. What good object is gained by strife? Seeing ye are brethren, why do ye wrong one to another? Grieve not the Holy Spirit of God whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption. "Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamor, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice. And be ye kind one to another, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, even as God; for Christ's sake, hath forgiven you." "Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations. For one believ eth that he may eat all things; another who is weak cateth herbs.Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth, for God hath received him.Eph. iv. 30: 32-Rom. xiv. 1.3.-Acts viii. 26.

We are decidedly of the opinion that expulsions, or any other harsh measures, in cases like those to which we refer, are calculated to promote the object they are intended to impede. Persecutions always injure the persecutors, and benefit the persecuted. If severity in these cases were right, it would be IMPOLITIC, but its RIGHTEOUSNESS may be seriously called in question."

Ma. EDITOR:

Campbell County Ky. July 3, 1829.

I AM not a professor of christianity, nor am I a subscriber to your valuable work, but a friend of mine takes it, and I have an opportunity of reading it, and am happy to say it affords me much entertainment and instruction. Your remarks on text preaching I was much pleased to see, for I was in hopes your remarks would have the effect of causing some to abandon the absurd custom of preaching sermons three hours long on three words. Disgusted with this kind of preaching, and wishing for a reform, you can well imagine the pleasure I felt, when attending divine service, (for so I believe it is called) I heard Mr. ——————, when he fist arose, say he had always disapproved of text preaching, and having lately read your remarks on that subject, he was now confirmed it was wrong, and should from to-day stop. He said he should read the 9th chapter of Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, and then make his remarks on the whole. I am not able, sir, to give you all his remarks. I will give you some of those on which he seemed to lay the nost stress, and which I found, from the conversation of some of the congregation, had most effect. When he got to the seventh verse, he repeated, with great emphasis, the whole of it-you see, says he, that this is so plain that it scarcely needs a comment-can you not plainly see that it all relates to the clergy and the people-that it is your duty to pay them if they preach. He made nearly the same commen's on the following verses until he came to the 14th, when he exclaimed, "Is there a command in the whole Bible, more plain than this, "That they who preach the gospel should live of the gospel?' Now, my brethren, though I agreed with Mr. Campbell about text preaching, I never can think he is right when he says the clergy ought not to be paid, as long as this chapter is in the Testament-certainly he has never read it, or he never could entertain the opinion he now does. It seems to me quite plain there can be no figure-if there be, I should like to see his explanation of it." Indeed, sir, his remarks appeared to me just, taking the Testament for our guide. If they were incorrect you will confer a favor on me, and probably on others, if you would, in your next Christian Baptist, show the falsity of his arguments.

Yours,

J. T.

If the term clergy and the word apostle were synonymous, the argument drawn from 1 Cor. 9th chapter would be conclusive. Or if we had any persons called and qualified to the same work, who devoted themselves to it as the first promulgers of the gospel did,

the argument from this chapter would be unanswerable. But when we reflect that we neither have, nor need, in this country at least, such a class of men as the apostles or first promulgers of christianity; that we neither have, nor need, such gifted men, so long as we have the writings of these supernaturally endowed and divinely called persons named apostles and evangelists of Jesus Christ-then the argument is as convincing as it would be to argue that every teacher should have a rod like Moses-neither purse nor scrip, like the original Seventy-because Moses and the seventy disciples were divinely commanded so to equip themselves.

We have some hundreds of christian mothers, who are now as useful preachers of Jesus Christ, to their children, households, and neighbors as are a majority of our modern preachers, at least; and whenever it is decreed that a fund shall be raised for preachers in general, I will claim a reasonable share for the christian matrons who teach and preach as Paul directs in Timothy and Titus.

But let none suppose that while we cannot infer the right of our clergy, to a regular salary from Paul's remarks in I. Cor. we do infer that the overseers of christian congregations have a right by divine appointment to a support from the brethren, whenever they call for it. But still they are more worthy of honor, who do, as Paul counseled the Ephesian Bishops, labor working with their own hands. When also it becomes necessary for any christian con gregation, or congregations, to employ any of their qualified brethren to go abroad and labor for the conversion of less favored neighborhoods, and the brother or brothers leave their homes and devote every day in the week to public and private preaching and teaching, the New Testament in its views of justice, mercy, righteousness, and the love of God, ordains that such should be provided for by the brethren who call them forth. But you may read at least seven times from Moses to John, before you will find a command, example, hint, allusion, or any thing else in the form of inference, direct or indirect, authorising the payment of an annual, monthly, weekly, or daily salary, to a man hired to preach by the Sunday, once, twice, thrice, or four times in the month, and during the six days work upon his farm, in his shop, in his school, or in his printing office, like Brother Brantly and myself.

Now such men as the editors of the Columbian Star and the Christian Baptist, et omne hoc pecus, who labor all week in other occupations, and go to church on the first day, have no more right, natural, inherent, or divinely bestowed, to take money, goods, or chattels for going to church on Sunday, than I have to a regular support as a magistrate, because once a year I make peace among my neighbors. But, perhaps, I ought to have classed some other person than Brother Brantly with myself, because one of his ser mons costs him half the week, at intervals, and many years prepar atory study, and it is worth something handsome when it is well rehearsed: whereas all my sermons in a year do not cost me six hours special study-and they are not worth more to the people than they are to me. EDITOR.

QUERIES FOR VOL. VII.

Quere 1.-DOES the parable of the Talents apply to Saints or Sinners, as recorded in the 25th chapt. of Mathew?

Answer.-To neither as such. It was intended to represent the administration of the Reign of favor during the absence from earth of the King. The persons to whom the management of the affairs of this kingdom was committed during the time from the departure of the King till his second coming, were compared to the public servants or stewards of a prince or nobleman. To each of these public servants certain trusts were committed and the management of these rusts were to be the subject of inquiry when the Prince returned.The stewards, according to their capacity for management, had more or less committed to their management. To one was committed a very large trust, to another a less one, and to a third a very small one. The same fidelity and diligence were exhibited by persons of very different capacities and trust. Hence he that had gained five and he that gained two talents were equally praiseworthy, for as the ratio of increase was the same, so the diligence and fidelity were the same; and the reward was equal. Now had the steward who had the least trust, only one talent, managed it so as to have gained one he would But the erhave been as commendable as he that had gained five. For was that he thought himself disparaged, conceived himself neglected, and formed a very unfavorable opinion of the King. This paralized all his energies, and he did nothing. His evil eye was the cause of his apathy, and instead of going to work he set himself to frame excuses for himself. As is very natural for persons of this character, he threw the blame upon his Maker, and vainly expected to justify himself by criminating the administration of the King. The parable very forcibly demonstrates the consolatory and animating maxim of Paul-viz: "It is always accepted according to what a man "" The widow and her two has, and not according to what he has not. mites exhibits just the contrast of the man and the one talent, and unequivocally teaches all disciples that it is equally in the power of all to obtain the greatest eminence in the Kingdom of Jesus, whatever their earthly means or opportunities may be. This parable has been grossly misapplied when turned to the advantage of unconverted

men.

Quere 2.-Is an unmarried person or a youth who has never been married, eligible to the office of bishop or overseer?

Answer-If Paul be admitted a competent witness in the case, he is not. A strippling married or unmarried, is not eligible. A person of middle age if recently converted, is not eligible. And a man who has had no experience in domestic management is illy qualir fied to manage the family of God. But Paul says a bishop or over-seer must be blameless, and as very intimately connected therewith, "he must be the husband of one wife." That elderly persons were most eligible is evident from his adding, "having believing children," of good behaviour too, "not accused of riot, nor unruly." We have very good reason to believe that if the apostle's qualifications were all