whether new or old, I think ought to be discountenanced everywhere, as contrary to scripture, and subversive of the order which infinite wisdom has established in the kingdom of Christ. "Every thing is beautiful" in its proper place, as well as "in its season." There is nothing which woman cannot do in her own appropriate sphere; but out of it, the sweet attraction ceases at once.

One other highly objectionable measure, which I feel bound to testify against, is, hasty admissions into the church. I refer to cases where, in the height of a revival, persons, who at the beginning of the week were perfectly careless, perhaps quite immoral, are awakened, converted, examined, received into the church and on the next Sabbath admitted to the Lord's Supper. I confess there is nothing which shocks my feelings like this, in the whole catalogue of measures, whether new or old. Not because I have any doubt that many of these persons are truly converted, but because there is every reason to fear, that many of them are not; and no time is allowed any of them to "examine themselves, whether they are in the faith." Under this system the churches may be enlarged, but they cannot be strengthened. Numbers will find, when the excitement is over, that they have no religion, and will regret that they ever made a profession. Others will "return, like the dog to his vomit, and like a sow that was washed, to her wallowing in the mire ;" and others, mistaking "the form of godliness for the power," will settle down upon a false hope. I believe that if this system were to be generally adopted, there would, in two

or three generations, be very little besides the "form" left in the churches. I know very well, that the advocates of the measure strive to justify it by appealing to apostolic example. But the cases are so dissimilar that there is no safety in arguing from one to the other.

"Often," says Dr. Alexander, in the Appendix to Sprague's Lectures, p. 2., "often the impressions produced at a public meeting, where strong excitements are applied to awaken the feelings, are as evanescent as the morning cloud or early dew. And many of those who become truly pious, entertain for a while hopes, which they are afterwards convinced to be unfounded; and to pronounce such persons converted at once, and hurry their admission to the Lord's table, would be the most effectual method of preventing their saving conversion. There may be an error on the other side, of too long a delay, but the error is on the safest side. As for apostolical precedent, it is just as strong for a community of goods; and after all there is no undoubted case of any convert being immediately received to the Lord's Supper. They were baptized instantly on their profession; but this, in our view, is a different thing; for we admit infants to baptism,but not to the other sacrament.

"It is a great error," says Dr. Hawes, p. 59, "to admit converts to the church, before time has been allowed to try the sincerity of their hope. This is an error into which I was betrayed during the first revival among my people, and it cost me bitter repentance. And yet none were admitted under two months after they had indulged a hope."

"I am aware," says Dr. Milledoler, p. 106, "that apostolic example is offered as a plea for this hurried operation. But it appears to me, the two cases are extremely dissimilar. To mention no other point of difference, the persons who embraced christianity at that period, did so in opposition to all their former prejudices and habits, and at the sacrifice of all their worldly comforts and prospects. Unless, therefore, ministers and ruling elders will run the risk of filling the church with mere nominal professors, at the expense of diminishing its actual strength and purity, they ought to take time to know their converts, or at least, to give the converts time to know something of themselves, and of God's truth."

These views seem to me sound and judicious. To hurry persons of ardent temperament into the church and to the communion table, in a day or two, or even a week or two after their supposed conversion, for the sake of counting numbers, to prevent them from being drawn into some rival communion, or for fear that if they do not join at once, they never will, is assuming a responsibility which I should not dare to take. I cannot regard it in any other light than as trifling with gospel institutions, and endangering the souls of men. What if multitudes should be deceived and lost by means of this haste? Who will have to answer for it? Will their spiritual advisers be found innocent? I am persuaded, moreover, that there are hundreds, if not thousands, at this moment in churches thus constituted, who are convinced they have experienced no radical change, and regret that they ever made a profession. But they are in the

church, and what can they do? The evangelist insisted upon their being admitted, and the pastors yielded.

We are sometimes told, that there are not more open apostasies among those who are thus hastily admitted, and where the whole machinery of "new measures" has been employed, than where "old measures have been used, and the candidates have been required to undergo a probation of several months. I think this must be a mistake. But supposing it correct, it does not prove that as great a a proportion of the former give evidence of true and saving conversion as of the latter. It would be strange indeed, if those who were strictly moral before they joined the church, were to forfeit their standing by falling into gross and open sins afterwards. Probably cases of discipline for scandalous offences were not more frequent in the churches of Massachusetts, when none but church members were eligible to civil office, or even allowed to vote for rulers, than there are now? But who can question, that the system must have brought in a multitude of false professors? And so of these hasty admissions under high excitement. The tendency is to fill the churches with spurious converts.

I know there is an opposite extreme, and I should be sorry to have you fall into it. When persons of adult years have been on probation long enough, to give credible evidence of a spiritual and radical change of heart, they ought to be admitted to the Lord's Supper. It will necessarily require more time for some to furnish this evidence than others, accord

acters.

ing to their previous opportunities, habits, and charA Sandwich Islander ought to be put off longer than a respectable member of a christian congregation, and a converted inebriate cannot safely be admitted so soon as if he had always been perfectly sober. There is less danger in too long a delay, than in too much haste, though the former extreme should be guarded against, as well as the latter. From three to six, and in some cases twelve months probation, cannot be regarded as unreasonably protracted.

I am very affectionately, &c.