Rutland weekly herald. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1859-1877, 1873-11-06
The Evangelical Alliance.

Editor Ratldnd Herald The morn
ing being dark and stormy, I sat down
in my ''close communion" chair, wrap
ped myself up in my well-worn ''ex-
clusiveness," and composed myself to
read and inwardly digest the unusually
large portion of intellectual food fur
nished in the columns of the HERALD of
this date. -
My eye first fell upon and my hungry
mind soon gobbled up the most excellent,
logical. but somewhat exclusive" ser
mon of Rey DR.. Harris, and as I fin
ished the precious morsel with a smack
of approval, I felt glad for him that he
was. simply an 'Episcopalian - for if he
had been a Baptist, and had given eX-
preston to such views, and allowed
them the publicity of the daily press,
why, he would have caught s'Hail. Col
umbia." But, nevertheless, | viii ven
ture to assert that ahis positions were
sound and his conclusions just, with a
qualification.
But as | turned ia nay marrow" chair
and turned over your paper, Judge OF my
surprise to find a most apd acious rejoin-
der to Rev. J. G. Johnson's article of
last week, by Dwight Spencer, of Fair
haven; in which he makes bold effort
to break the weapons by which poor
startled Baptists have been beaten,
bruised, and driven to the wall for gen
erations; and not content with this, he,
with righteous indignation, sends. Mother
Cary 8 chickens home to roost. Now as
l am little older, not to, say wiser, than
Brother Spencer, and live fourteen miles
nearer the hub of the universe, / desire
to give him q little advice, viz r4'.Let
us have peace. ? What if the 10Th. arti-
Gle of the Presbyterian Testimony does
read: <..s. ..st...
eve declare that the church should
not extend communion in sealing ordi.
nances to those qoh0 refuse qcI56r61pce to
her pqetSssiofo, or suGject5o1s to her g00-
e17laa6nt and discipline, or who refuse to
forsake a communion which is incohsis-
tent with the keeping of those ordi-
nances. pure and entire, or so as to give
countenance to any. .corrnptions of the
doctrines and institutions of Christ.
What if the Aneertca1s PreS6gterian,
as the recognized organ of a great and
very respectable denomination, does say
that: s,:.5 z. :.
'.0pen communion. is an absurdity
when it means. communion with the .un-
baptized. / would not for a moment
consider a proposition. to admit an aln-
baptized person to the communion; and
can ask a Baptist 50 to stultify himself
and ignore his own doctrine, as to invite
me to commune with him e6ltjEe he be-
heges 1 am ua15aptiSed2 / want no sham
union and no sham unity. and If ! held
the Baptist notion about immersion, i
would no more receive a Presbyterian to
the. communion than now would. re-
ceivea Quaker. = i.
ssLet us have unity, indeed, @ttt net at
tie eapefse 0f pfiiaciGEe, and let us not
ask the Baptist to, ignore or to. be incoh-
sistent with his own doctrine. Let us
not, either, make an outcry at his close
communion, so7tict is but taitJt,ftt5ia6SS to
principle, until we are prepared to be
open communists ourselves from which
stupidity may we be forever preserved !!
What if DR.. Dwight did write that
at is an indispensable qualification for
this ordinance that the candidate for
communion be q member. Of the 0isibGe
Church Of Christ IN full standing. By
this intend that he should be person
of piety; that he should have made a
public profession of religion, and that he
should hGUe been baptized.
What If Rev. 81. w. Beecher did
write in similar strain? Who is Henry
Ward Beecher9
What if the general conference of the
NJ E. church at its last session did pass
the following:
"Resoloed, That it is not the practice