Vermont telegraph. [volume] (Brandon [Vt.]) 1828-1843, 1836-08-04


we 6eeieoe that it is clearly and repeatedly
the reoeaIed .0tH of their Lord and Mas
ter that they should not separate at the
b0ptasmGt tomt-at that very point where,
above all others, we think, he designed
they should exhibit their obedience to him,
as we'll as their love; for IF We love me-"
says he, keep my commandments. And
what are the commandments One is,
"Believe and be 6aptized' stop, STOP
we have almost invofuntarily got to quot
ing Scri pture, which was not done on the
other side, and SO may be left for the pres
ent on this. Let our Pedo-Baptist breth-
rem, whose terms of communion are the
same as ours, viz. baptism first and after
wards communion, join us in the former,
and there will be no separation between
them and US in the latter. For such a
! contamination we devoutly pray, with
open arms extended towards them. In
the light of their own views of commun-
ion as we'll as of ours, it will be seen that
the point of separation between them and
US is farther back than brother Halping
has placed it. The only question to be
settled between them and us is; what is
baptism? The moment there is agree
ment on this point, the two are one. Now
they agree with us that the immersion of
a beLierer IS baptism. We do not agree
with them that any thing less than this is
baptism. OF course while the views of
the two remain as they are, they must
perceive that the point Of separation is
where we Just placed it. We repeat then,
union at that point is union hroughout.-
And what isneeded to effect such a union?
1t will at once be seen by all, that, qcith
our present UierS, for US 10 60 over to them
would be on our part a wicked sacrifice
Of principle, because we religiousl y be-
lieve that nothing less than the immersion
Of a beIierer is baptism, and that baptism
is necessary prerequisite to communion
On the other hand, aoith their presrm
r1elrS, for them to come to US would in.
volve no sacrifice Of principle, because
they agree with us that our baptism 4
s baptism, and also that baptism is neces
S sary prerequisite to communion. AL
: then that separates us is, on their part
: feeling of repugnance to what they &C
knowledge to be baptism. Will our Pc
do Baptist brethren join Us in praying 70
!. the light that Shall discover to US the will
: Of the Lord and our duty in the matte
> between US!
, These latter remarks however digres
sive they may be viewed to be by any, ar
v offered as vindication against any Ger
h sure that may be harbored against us b
J. brother Hal ping or others, in view of hi
rs expressed sentiments relative to the dut
l. Of the two to unite at the communion ia
h bic.
IA Anticipated attempts to contrarene" c
10 violate his "rights Of conscience" ar
" strange creaturess11Rh imagination.-
a They certainly have never had existenc
among Baptsts, in connexion with tn
v sub Jet under consideration. Our brotE
I'd cr's language is difficult of Interpretation
r. Perhaps he expects to be labored with f
IS error. What then? Suppose that a men
We Der Of the Conference should be depute
ed to labor with him in the spirit Of the 90
x pei, with view to convince him that
be is in error. Would this necessarily il
NJ volTe an infringement of his rights ofop
as ion or Circumstance. Certainly not. {
ZEE suppose that he, being more faithful
no the cause Of his Master than they, CO.
te- WINGED that they are in an error, shou
ire set out first with his Bible in hand, al
or commence the labor himself to convin
cal them. This certainly would be no vi
Mt latlon or contravention of their rights
tn conscience Should his labor result
ere failure to convince them Of what he s.,
ri posed to be their error, and he shou
on thereupon withdrawfellowship from the
saying, chow can two walk together {
en- cept they be agrecdl' still there is no v
n a lation ofthe rights circumstances. And
to rtee Uersa. 1t is difficult to conceive
~; any violation Of the rights of conscier