the baptists; and she was sometimes visited by a baptist preacher, and finally persuaded to attend his meeting. A continual dia in her ears disturbed her nerves and affected her mind.

She came to me with a request to be dismissed from this church. She seemed to entertain an idea, that her covenant vows were binding; but our dismission of her would release her from them.

I told her, that her covenant with God and his people was sacred, her vows had been recorded in heaven, and we could not dissolve them. If she should violate them, the guilt must lie on herself. I observed to her, that there could be no dismission, but by excommunication for obstinate wickedness, or by recommendation to some regular church-that if on good reasons she desired a recommendation to such church, doubtless we should grant it.

She said, if she could not be dismissed, she wished to be recommended to such a baptist church, in a neighboring town. asked, if that church would receive her on our recommendation. She said, no-she must be baptized anew in their way, and she did not know but their way was as good as ours.

I endeavored to convince her of the validity of her infant baptism, and the sacredness of her covenant-obligations, and of the guilt and danger of renouncing them. Her reason seemed to be convinced; but her feelings remained the same. She gave me this summary answer; "I hope it is right to join the baptists, for I feel as if I must go." I advised her to delay, and look well to her goings. But no delay was allowed. The next sabbath she was plunged. In two or three years the family removed to anothShe returned not to the church; but it was manifest, she was not perfectly satisfied with the step she had taken, and a little delay would probably have prevented it. She acted under the influence of a charm.

er town.

1781, Autumn. Travelling for my health, I called at a tavern for refreshment. The landlord soon introduced to me a gentleman, who, he told me, was a universalist. I supposed his aim was to bring forward a dispute on the subject of future punishment. After customary civilities, I told the gentleman my health was not good; I conversed but little, and wholly declined disputes; I should, however, be gratified, if he would give me his opinion on the controverted question. He was very courteous, and readily answered me in this manner: "I will state my opinion by reference to the story of the deliverance of the Hebrews from Egypt. The people came to the red sea, saw the Egyptians on their rear, found themselves entangled between mountains, and fell into murmuring and despair. Moses told them there was no danger, the sea would open a way for their escape. They did not believe it; but Moses believed it. The sea opened and they arrived to the other shore. (He should have remembered that the Egyptians, pursuing them, were all drowned.) The people were now as safe as Moses. But Moses by his faith had the comfort of the deliverance beforehand. To apply this to the question before us. Believers and unbelievers will be equally safe and happy in the other world. All the difference is, that believers have the comfort of salvation in this world, which unbelievers have not."

I answered him; Sir, I understand your system. I will trouble you only to give me an explanation of one passage of scripture; "These shall go away into everlasting punishment." "The explanation," said he, "is very easy. Christ says, I was hungry, and ye gave me no meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink, &c. These, i. e. these sins, these unkind dispositions shall go away into everlasting destruction; shall cease, and be no more known." Very well, I replied; now as an honest interpreter of scripture, you will adhere to your own rule. The judge says to

them on his right hand, I was hungry, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink, &c. The righteous, i. e. according to your interpretation, these righteous dispositions; these kind, hospitable virtues, shall go into life eternal. You have disposed of the vices of the wicked, and of the virtues of the righteous. Now be so good as to tell me, what becomes of the persons themselves. He gave no direct answer, but diverted to observations foreign to the question.

Men attached to a particular scheme will bend to it every text, which can be made to yield to their violence. Texts too stubborn for their strength they will throw aside. An honest and impartial mind is necessary in our inquiries after truth. "The meek God will guide in judgment, and the meek he will teach his way."

In the course of my ministry I have often encouraged special meetings for devotion, and sometimes evening meetings. I have chosen to attend them myself, when I could with convenience; and I have preached, when my ability would permit. If I have not preached, I have usually made a short address to the people, and especially to the youth, on some religious subject, suggested either by a recent providence, or by what has been read. I have seen some good effects of these meetings, and have experienced benefit from them myself. But, when I could not attend them, I have desired, that they might be under the direction of some discreet elderly christians. I have endeavored to guard my people against an error too common, where religious conferences are much attended; I mean, substituting these in the place of divine institutions, and making them a kind of thermometer, by which to prove the degree of heat and cold in religious zeal. When we hear of a revival of religion in any place, the unusual frequency and the general attendance of lectures and conferences by day and by night are adduced as decisive evidences of it. When these meetings become less frequent, or less full, it is said, "Religion appears

to be on the decline." We ought always to place religion where the scripture has placed it, in holiness of heart and life; and to regard devotional duties as instrumental to this end. We are never to place the essence of religion in things which are but the means of it.

A serious man from a neighboring parish, being one evening at my house on secular business, took occasion to inform me, that there was a great revival of religion in his vicinity. I expressed my satisfaction in the intelligence; but asked him, wherein the happy revival discovered itself: Whether the people appeared to be more humble, more condescending, more meek and peaceable, more kind and charitable, better united in their social relations, more virtuous in their manners, &c. He could not answer particularly with respect to these things; but said, "People were much engaged in attending religious meetings; they had private lectures as often as any transient preacher could be obtained; and they had conferences very frequently—almost every evening." I observed to him, that an attendance on the word preached was highly important, and a hopeful indication; but asked him, how it was on the Lord's day; whether they attended on the instituted worship of that day better than they used to do: (for I knew they had been shamefully negligent of that duty.) "Why-no-" said he, "we don't go to meeting on the sabbath." What, I inquired, do you neglect God's institutions to observe your own? The prophet marks this as a token of the decay of religion among the Jews. He answered, "We do not like our parish minister very well." I observed to him, that if they had a minister, who did not preach the gospel, this was a reason why he should leave the pulpit; not why they should leave the meeting-house; and they ought to take regular measures for his removal, and the introduction of a better man. "O," said he, "I don't pretend, but that he preaches the gospel; but there are some subjects, on which he

does not preach." Perhaps he preaches on them, when you are absent. He continued, "I don't like his manner of preaching. He is not so fervent, so engaged, as I wish; he uses his notes too much," &c. Friend, said I, you well remember, that Paul, Apollos and Cephas all preached in Corinth. They preached the same gospel; but had different voices, and different modes of speaking. And among their hearers, one said, I am of Paul; another, I am of Apollos; and a third, I am of Cephas. Now on this occasion, Paul told them, they were carnal. Apply this to yourself. On the authority of Paul, I tell you, that you are carnal. He answered, "I do not see, but that it is so." He had the hon. esty to confess his fault; whether he had the virtue to reform, I do not know.

Occasional meetings and private conferences may be very useful, if properly conducted; but they are matters of christian discretion, not of divine institution. I know of no apostolic precept or example, which elevates these to a place among the institutions of God. When Paul came to Troas, where was a christian church, and doubtless some stated place for publick worship, he waited seven days for the return of the first day of the week, on which day the disciples were wont to come together for social worship. Then he spake to them, and continued his speech to an unusual length.

When he preached in Ephesus, where a church was not formed, “he taught publickly and from house to house." As the christians had no stated place in which they could claim the privilege of assembling, they convened where they could. Paul first taught in the Jewish synagogue; meeting with opposition there, he removed to the school of Tyrannus, and here he continued for a length of time, teaching daily.

His teaching, though from house to house, from the synagogue to the school, where he could obtain leave, was publick; not pri

E