and "have charity" also-it profiteth me nothing! Unless I give to a man, that he may devote his whole time to the work, I must be turned out of the church as covetous! Truly, we may be thankful that J. H.'s power is not commensurate with his will-that his word is not law ! But after all, should any church so far lose all sense of propriety, and yield up so far her allegiance to her Head, as to allow any such to take his seat in the temple of God, assume the prerogative of God, and, Diotrephes like, cast out of the church whomsoever he pleases, there have greater calamities befallen the children of God than to be expelled from her pale. There are men who are as far from being covetous as J. H. is, and who would give as much of what they possess for purposes approved of by God and man as he would do, but who would not give to a pastor that he might devote himself wholly to the work. Whether such men can be justly called covetous, because they will not give their “ means to every one who asks them, for purposes which they consider unscriptural and injurious, let the covetous and the liberal judge.

That Paul "set his example before all the brotherhood" is a statement with which I cordially agree; and the "mistake of applying what he says to preachers alone," is generally committed by those who contend for the payment of pastors, and who would fain have us believe, that unless those whom the apostle exhorted to follow his example had the same or similar claims to support as himself, his exhortation loses its force.

That Paul did receive support, and that he had a right to be supported, are truths which no one calls in question. But if J. H. refers me to 1 Cor. ix. and especially the conclusion of the argument, "Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they who preach the gospel should live of the gospel," as proof that the Lord hath ordained that the pastors of a congregation should live of the congregation, he may give the right hand of fellowship to N. L. Rice, and listen to a mild reproof which A. C. tendered to that gentleman, but which will be equally applicable to both. When the above gentleman quoted the commission given to the apostles, as proof that only a bishop ought to baptize, A. C. says, “He quoted a verse containing a commission to apostles, but mentioning neither bishop, elder, nor deacon: consequently, not pointing out any of their duties. The gentleman's logic in this case resembles that of a captain who, when asked for his commission, refers to that of a general. By what kind of logic does a captain's commission prove that he has to do the duties of a general ?" So I ask, by what kind of logic does an apostle's right to support, prove a bishop's right to support? In the same manner do others refer to Rom. x. 15, "And how shall they preach except they be sent," as proof that no one has a right to preach the gospel except those who

are specially sent by God to do so. Who does not see that it is nothing else than mere trifling with the subject, when the practice of "paying pastors" is called in question, to refer us to the right of apostles to be supported I can inform J. H. that J. M. is not one of the many whom he has known "fighting against this ordinance of God." Had J. H. used names more restricted in their import than "minister," " preacher," &c. it would have been much easier dealing with his reply. A. Campbell says, that "Few of the leaders of religious assemblies seem to know, or are able to decide, whether they should be called evangelists, preachers, elders, bishops, or ambassadors; but the term minister, or divine, seems to embrace them all." And again, on page 147 of the Christian Baptist, he says, "The term minister, a general or unappropriated title, designates any servant, and belongs to every obedient disciple of Jesus Christ. In the general sense of the term it belongs to Sister Phoebe, as well as to any apostle or bishop. And, indeed, the widow who cast in her two mites, was a much greater minister or servant of God than any of the Westminster clergy, who were servants of God and the Long Parliament. To call the clergy the ministers of Christ is, therefore, a pious robbery of the obedient disciples of Christ, who are ministers of God as well as they, to speak in the most humble terms." What, then, are we to understand by the "support of the ministry ?" I also agree with the following from Dr. Carson, as quoted with approbation by A. Campbell:

Every Christian has a right to preach the gospel, and according to his opportunities and his abilities, it is his duty to preach it." And again, “If he knows the truth so as to be saved by it, he may declare it to others so as to save them." And I further agree with him that, "The deadly heresy which confines the preaching of the gospel to office conveyed by a certain succession (or whether conveyed by certain succession or no) is an infernal machine for destroying the souls of men. It is one of the great artifices of Satan to spike the cannon on the gospel batteries.” But if a church desire a brother to devote his time and talents to preach the gospel in the regions around, they are by every law of reason and Scripture to sustain him in the work. But surely we have got beyond the common notion, that the disciples are to meet together on the first day of the week, to hear the gopel preached, and that they are to pay a man to preach it to them. They are to meet together on that day to worship God according to the directions given in his Word; and it is not only a duty binding, but a great privilege granted by the Head of the Church to the brethren, to "teach and exhort one another." And no one who has the ability to teach and exhort, is at liberty to transfer that duty to another, however willing he may be to pay another for doing that

which is binding upon himself, as such a system would inevitably put an end to the plurality of elders, which is so universally recognized throughout the New Testament, and would cause to cease the mutual teaching and exhorting of the brethren.

If J. H. intend to convey the idea, that it is now more necessary that he or others should be entirely relieved from all worldly employments, than it was that the Apostles should be relieved from serving tables, which seems evidently to be the case, surely the proposition is too preposterous to require to be exploded. What more necessary now, for any person or persons to be freed from worldly employments, than it was for the apostles, when there were not to be found under the whole heavens any others that could fill their places and their commission requiring them to carry their message to all nations! Mention it not in Gath! If J. H. or any one else think that it is as important that he should be relieved from working as it was for any of the apostles, I cannot help thinking that a little modesty would be a becoming trait of character to add to his other excellencies.

J. H. complains of the "liberty " which I and others take with the Word; but it is my conviction that he has completely failed to make it apparent that I have either "done violence" to Scripture, or taken an unwarrantable "liberty" therewith. He says that Acts xx. 34-35, refuse to sustain the deduction which I have drawn from them; and asks, "Is it not singular that J. M. should think Paul refers to that only (viz. his hands ministering to his necessities) when he says, I have showed you all things, how that so laboring ye ought to support the weak," &c. Did I say he referred to that only? If not, how does J. H. know that I think he refers to that only? How stand the facts ? Did Paul labor in the word and teaching?Yes, he did. Did he minister to his own necessities by laboring with his hands ?—He did. Did he minister to the necessities of any others? He did: he ministered to the necessities of those that were with him. Did he say to the elders of the church in Ephesus, "I have showed you all things, how that so laboring ye ought to support the weak ?"—He did. Does this passage, then, sustain the deduction which J. H. draws from it, "That the elders ought to devote themselves entirely to the work of the Lord ?" It does not, unless J. H. mean, by “the work of the Lord," not only laboring in the word and teaching, but also being "diligent in business, fervent in spirit, serving the Lord." And does this passage not sustain the deductions which I have drawn from it, that according to the apostle, the elders ought to labor with their hands as he did? Most unquestionably it does, if the apostle mean what he says, which I believe he does. Yes, Paul! your farewell address to the elders of the church in Ephesus can be understood

without the aid of an expositor, manufactured in a theological seminary. You taught "publicly and from house to house, warning every one night and day with tears;" and although every way entitled to be amply sustained in your arduous work, still, as your desire was not to obtain silver, gold, or apparel to yourself, but to gain men and women to the Lord-and as you wished to cut off occasion from them that desired occasion, and to set an example to others your own hands ministered to your necessities. The wolves which you so much feared, against which you so earnestly warned, and which you so faithfully depicted, can yet be detected by your directions; for although they make their appearance carefully disguised in the sheep's covering, they invariably reveal the deception by their howl.

The last passage I shall notice at present is 1st Tim. v. 17, to which J. H. refers thus: 'If a bishop receive support, it is because he labors in the word and teaching; and Paul says that such are worthy of double honor or support." Now is it not singular, that when Paul is present with the elders of Ephesus, and speaking of his own hands ministering to bis necessities and to those who were with him, and immediately adds, "I have showed you all things, how that so laboring ye ought to support the weak," J. H. will have it to be " uphold the weak by teaching them," &c? And when Paul leaves Timothy in Ephesus, and afterward writes to him to "Count the elders that rule well worthy of double honor," he will have it to be "double support ?" Whether J. M. or J. H. take the greatest "liberty with the word," the readers can judge for themselves. In verse 1st, Paul says to Timothy, "Rebuke not an elder (an old man) but entreat him as a father, and the younger men as brethren; the elder women as mothers, and the younger as sisters;" from which it is evident, that the apostle in this contemplates the church in the capacity of a family, with the same duties devolving upon its members toward each other. as devolve upon the members of a family toward each other: and while all children are commanded to honor their parents, it would be absurd to say that they cannot do so without giving them gold, silver, food, or raiment. But should parents be in need of any of these things, and children have the means of supplying their wants, it would be impossible to honor them without giving those things that are required. And although honor is due to all parents, yet the man who has his children in subjection, by ruling judiciously in his own house, thereby showing the pleasant spectacle of "brethren dwelling together in unity," is worthy of more or "double honor." So it is in the church. The aged are to be entreated as fathers, they are therefore to be honored. But the man who, in addition to this, rules judiciously in the church, thereby averting evils that might otherwise ensue, is worthy of

any thing of the advantages which a church derives from a good ruler, will give the exhortation his cordial amen. But the man who says that the apostle here means only "double pecuniary support," in my opinion "does violence to reason and scripture," which can only be atoned for by retracting the sentiment and saying so no more. For it ought to be observed here, that the apostle does not say that he is to be accounted worthy of double honor, because his duties are more numerous or arduous-not because his time is more completely employed -but simply because he "rules well." Now I think it is quite possible for children to honor their parents, although they should never see it necessary to give them gold, silver, food, or raiment; and I think it is as possible to give them all these, and not give them that honor which is their due. I think the same things are true with regard to the church; and while many good reasons could be given why elders that rule well should receive double honor, in the sense in which I understand the term, I can see no good reason why an elder should receive double support, simply because he rules well.

In conclusion, I would say to the brethren, "Prove all things, hold fast that which is good. Stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made you free, and let no one usurp unauthorized power over you." Yours in love,

JAMES MILL.

EMIGRATION TO AUSTRALIA. MR. EDITOR,-About the beginning of the year 1850, I sought of you some hints on the subject of emigration, which were much valued by myself and the friends for whom I got them. This family, consisting of father, mother, and ten children, sailed for Port Philip in Australia, early in June last year, and after the pleasures and perils inseparable from so long a voyage, arrived at Adelaide in the September following. The father, who is a Baptist minister," was encouraged to remain here on account of the prosperity of the colony, and an encouraging offer on the part of a "Baptist church" to become its pastor. Five of the family, the mother and four daughters, are on the side of the BIBLE in its integrity; the family is consequently divided - one part taking a popular side, the other standing on the Scriptures "only and entirely." I heard from the excellent mother and one of her lovely daughters about ten days back, who deplored the necessity which took them away from the land of their birth, and what to them was more precious than all the wealth contained in the BURRA BURRA MINES, the ministry of God's word, and "fellowship with kindred minds," subject to "the truth, the whole truth, and

By that

settled in their habitation, which is some dis-
tance from Adelaide, and had not time hardly
to look about them before they wrote, it is evi-
dent that they were strangers to the brethren
in these parts, from whom you have given
your readers in this month's HARBINGER such
deeply interesting communications.
you report of these "saintly heroes," I am en-
couraged to hope that this "mother in Israel"
and her four daughters-" virgins" espoused
to the Lamb, (2 Cor. vii. 2, Rev. xiv. 4) will
find a home, "sweet home," with brethren in
in South Australia.

Your's affectionately and thankfully,
AN OLD CORRESPONDENT.

NORTH WALES, (RHOSLLANERchrugog,) MAY, 1851.-Dear Brethren: Often have I thought of communicating some information concerning the progress of the good cause in Wales to our brethren in England, and now take up my pen for that purpose. In company with my zealous brother Joshua Rogers, I went, a few weeks ago, to visit the brethren in various parts of our Welsh country. We left home on a Friday evening, and reached Corwen town about eight o'clock, and lodged there that night. Next morning we started for the village of Pen-machno, in Caernarvonshire, where, on the same evening we proclaimed the gospel. We remained there next day; and being the first of the week, broke bread with the church in remembrance of our Lord, and preached three times to many hearers. The church in this place consists of twelve members. They have a nice small chapel, with burying ground attached. They are, however, in want of speakers, four brethren who labored in the word among them having died within a short time of one another. We went on Monday to Trawsfynydd, where a few brethren reside, and preached there that evening. Brother Robert

Rees of Maentwrog visits this place occasionally. Prospects are good, but laborers few.-Next day we visited Maentwrog, in the lovely and fertile vale of Festiniog, and were received by our beloved Brother Rees with great joy. Here brother Joshua staid to preach, while I went to hold a meeting in the town of Harlech, on the coast, in Merionethshire, where Brother Rees lately immersed a family.-On Wednesday Joshua went to Penrhyn, and preached in a Wesleyan chapel there to a good congregation. Brother Rees sometimes holds forth the word of life in this place. That evening I spoke in the Independent chapel by Festiniog slate quarry. We proceeded on Thursday to Portmadoc, a flourishing town on the sea shore; and there addressed an attentive congregation in a very convenient Baptist chapel. Here our talented brother, William Jones of Criccieth, occasionally proclaims the gospel.--On Friday we reached Criccieth, and declared the glad tidings to many hearers. The brethren here have long contended for the faith. They have a good plain chapel, with burying ground, and Brother Jones labors constantly among them. Next day, continuing our journey, we came to Pwllheli, a seaport on the great promontory of Lleyn, Caernarvon. Here we lodged for the night, but held no meeting, for on Satruday evening the people cannot so conveniently come together.Ou Lord's day morning I went to Rhosirwan, and preached there in the forenoon, in a chapel belonging to the Baptists. In the afternoon paid a visit to Carmel, four miles off, and addressed a meeting there, held also in a Baptist chapel. Returned in the evening to Rhosirwæn, and again proclaimed the word there to a good congregation. I was courteously entertained by our Baptist friends in each of these places, many of whom seem desirous to know and observe only the doctrines and ordinances of Christ and his apostles.-This Lord's day was spent by Brother Rees at Nefyn, a small fishing town on Carnarvon bay, where he published the good news three times. On the following day I joined brother Rees at Nefyn, and preached in a large club-room to a good congregation. Here two believers were to be baptised. In this place twelve brethren, who seceded from the old Baptists, resolved to unite on the sure foundation," Jesus is the Christ! and take his faithful word as their sufficient guide. They have two speakers. We returned to Criccieth on Tuesday, and there dilivered addresses to a large congregation. On Wednesday, journeying homewards, we reached the residence of Brother Rees. That night we spent in earnest conversation about the cause in Wales, and by what means it might be most effectually promoted. Leaving my fellowtraveller with Brother Rees, I proceeded to Pen-machno, addressed a good meeting in the chapel there, and then returned to my family. The following Lord's day however, was spent by Brother Joshua at Parke. On Monday he

preached in the important town of Carnarvon, on the Menai Strait; and on the following day visited the brethren in the very ancient city of Bangor, and preached in the Baptist chapel there to a numerous audience. And now, dear brethren, I may say in truth "a great door is open," a favorable opportunity is afforded in Wales for carrying forward the good work. The energetic exertions of competent men only are wanting to gather in and secure an abundant spiritual harvest. Will our worthy brethren in other parts assist us in this work? Our speakers are ready to put forth their efforts both at home and from home; but being poor, and having to labor to support their families, they have not much to spare. We therefore need help, that we may be able now and then to send messengers to preach the truth. We wish all to hear the gospel as delivered at first by Christ's apostles, for this is the very faith which can save sinners.-I leave this, brethren, for your consideration, and may the Lord be with us all.

(Communicated by JOHN GRIFFITH.)

BUCKINGHAM, MAY 13.-You will rejoice to learn that we have had several additions to our number since you were here, and we are expecting others to join. The sceptical party present the Lord's day when you were with us, have not since made their appearance in our meetings. W. D. HARRIS.

NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE, MAY 5.-We have had three additions to the church here since you last heard from us. W. MCDOUGALE.

EDINBURGH, MAY.-We are happy to learn that there has been an addition to the church meeting in Potter's Row, during the last month.

FOREIGN ITEMS.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA, (GREENFIELD) AUGUST 22, 1851.-Beloved brother: Although I have never seen you, yet I am no stranger to your sentiments, having brought with me to South Australia. 10 volumes of the Christian Messenger, The Christian System, The Christian Baptist, Campbell and Owen Debate, Campbell's Debate on Baptism, and his Translation of the New Testament. These works, and twelve volumes of the book of books, the Holy Scriptures, formed our family library. If, therefore, we were not spiritually fed, and not healthy in the faith, the fault must have rested with ourselves. I must now inform you who I am, and my reasons for coming here. I was one of the three elders ordained by our beloved brother, G. C. Reid, of Dundee, over the church at Newmills, Ayrshire, Scotland. In volume 6 of Christian Messenger, page 109, my name appears as John Bird instead of John Aird. My reasons for leaving my native land, and the beloved brethren at Newmills, were, first, that I might better

the circumstances of myself and family; secondly, that I might keep alive in the faith those who accompanied me, and also gather a few brethren together who had gone before me, and who were as sheep without a shepherd. It was a great trial, to leave country, relatives, and brethren; and I was much perplexed as to duty but, being urged by some of the brethren, and more especially by Bro. John Laurie, who was then a bishop in the congregation, I decided upon leaving for this place. Their desire was, that in going out I might do more good to myself, and for the cause of Christ,

than if I remained with them. It was their hope that I might be instrumental in raising a congregation of worshippers unto the Lord in Australia. Accordingly, having received of the brethren at Newmills letters of commendation to the few brethren in Australia, I went on board with my family. On arriving at Adelaide we were kindly greeted by the brethren, who invited us to their homes. We broke bread with the disciples the first Lord's day after our arrival, on the 17th of October, 1847. We then left Adelaide for the bush, when I lost no time in gathering together brethren who were scattered over a thinly-inhabited country, some of whom were a very great distance from each other. On the 31st of October a few of us met and broke bread together, and on the 7th of November we organized ourselves into a congregation, when I was appointed to preside over their meetings. But I could not keep the brethren together in a country like this, and I thought for a time that the hopes of brethren at home were to be disappointed. We were almost constantly changing our places of abode, some going so far distant that they were unable to meet with us, whilst others, loving the things of this world more than the things of Christ, walked no more with us. But a few remained faithful, and by continuing to meet, as well as by patiently and perseveringly walking as becometh the gospel, holding forth the word of life to those in darkness, we are now, in 1850, rapidly increasing. Eleven have been baptized since the formation of the church, ten having put on Christ within the last four months. Our prospects are bright, and we now number 21.

Some of the brethren have commenced exhorting, as we greatly need laborers. The congregations here are much in the same state as the congregation in Crete, when Paul left Titus behind him that he might set things in order. A few remarks from you, bearing upon the subject, might be of great benefit. There are three congregations here: one meeting in Adelaide, another at Kooringa, 100 miles Ñ. of Adelaide, and our meeting-place is in the district of Willungo, 27 miles South of Adelaide, though, for the convenience of the brethren, we meet every alternate Lord's day at Towinga, about seven miles to the South of Adelaide - -a plan which appears to work well in a thinly-inhabited district. I may state, in conclusion, that my wife

ADELAIDE, DECEMBER 7.- The praise of Brother Aird was in the churches of his native

land: in the Southern hemisphere the Lord has not a more devoted servant; he is mighty in the word of truth, and has been eminently successful in calling sinners to repentance. There actual remission of sins is prior to baptism— are some amongst us who believe that the that baptism is, therefore, for what they call a FORMAL remission. I need not enlarge on these views, as you are well acquainted with them. Knowing that these brethren love and serve the Lord Jesus, and that they contend for the one Lord, one faith, one immersion, &c. we can in all good conscience fellowship with them, so long as they do not restrict us in teaching and preaching truth. We make a difference between confessing our faith for the imformation of others, and making that confession a bond of union to others. We cannot, with Brother Campbell and some in the Reformation, receivein some instances unimmersed persons to the table of the Lord; but we feel it our duty to allow the diversity I speak of. By the way, those persons argue that Brother Campbell cannot look upon baptism as for the actual remission of sins, or he would in no instance fellowship with one unimmersed. Again, we do not consider the remission of sins as the only object worth speaking of; indeed we look upon it as being but one of the first principles of the doctrine of Christ. It ought not, therefore, to be the subject of every discourse in the congregation or out of it. We do not consider it the best way to win souls to Christ to be continually abusing the sects; but rather to enlighten our hearers by proclaiming the truth as it is in Jesus, with as little reference to existing prejudices as possible. We find that Paul could not be accused of blaspheming the gods in the famous Demetrian uproar. How much

more should we be careful not to abuse those

who, to say the least, have more of the truth than the Pagan Ephesians. Yours in the brightest of hopes, THOMAS MAGAREY.

P.S. If any of the brethren emigrate to Australia, this province offers considerable advantages; and they would be received with joy and gladness of heart by their brethren in this land. It is seriously proposed to call out for a time a brother qualified to do the work of an We have a wide and evangelist amongst us. an abundant field, but the laborers are indeed few.