160 THE EABNEST CHRISTIAN.\'i1no <strong>Methodist</strong> minister could do otherwisewithout violating the fundamental law ofthe Ciiurch.The Bev. George L. Taylor rebuked thetendency to looseness and. laxity of doctrineand discipline, manifested by someof the preceding speakers, and insistedthat if such heterodox doctrines were permittedto be set fortli, there would not bea dividing line at all between the Ciiurchand the world. The question went deeperthan the mere question whether the Disciplinewas right or wrong in making thetest it does make. It reaches down to theorganization of the visible Cliujch, andthence back to the intellectual thoughtsand ideas upon which such visible organizationis based. It presents j ust the differencebetween an enclosed field and acommon ; and if these principles were carriedout to their logical and legitimate conclusion,we should have no <strong>Church</strong> at allby and by. Dr. Curry said the discussionreminded him of the fisherman of the Hudson,into whose little skifl' a big sturgeonliad jumped. He did not kuow what to dowith it. He did not want to throw it overboard,and it was a little too big for hiscraft. Quickenings of the <strong>Church</strong>, he said,had always been preceded by the preachingof dogmatic theology. He rebuked theL.'LXITY OF DOCTRINESset fortli by some of the speakers, and were, he Festus and the essayist Paul, he wouldbe inclined to use the expression aboutmuch learning which is attributed to theformer toward the latter. Dr. Goodwin, ofIndianapolis, spoke for the greater liberalityin <strong>Church</strong> fellowship. In the West,he said, they receive Arians and Deist.sand anybody into the <strong>Church</strong>; but theyvery soou get those isms out of tliem. Hedid not think it hurt the <strong>Church</strong> to admitsuch persons to membership, though hewould not permit them to teach those doctrines.Dr. Cattelle and Eev. W. P. Corbittalso spoke on the subject, and therewas a very strong sentiment manifestedtoward what some would call heterodoxy.It is quite probable that the next GeneralConference will be asked to modify the Disciplinein this, as in other particulars.[Prom ilie N. Y. Herald of April 9.]THE SIETHODIST PEEACHERS.Modern. Progress versus Old Fogyism —Wlint shall Constitute the I'est of <strong>Church</strong>Membership.Eight years ago, the General Conferenceof the <strong>Methodist</strong> Episcopal <strong>Church</strong> madesome changes in their ritual, and addedsome questions in the Discipline, to whichyoung converts'are required to give an affirmativeanswer before they can be receivedinto full connection with the <strong>Church</strong>.Many good men in the <strong>Church</strong> look uponthose questions as savoring too much ofAnglo-episcopacy, and they are not strenu.ous in requiring assent to the subjects containedin them by catechumens. Theyounger ministers are utterly opposed tothem in spirit if not in practice; and twoweeks ago, a young preacher in ihis cityread an essay before the Preachers' Meeting,in which he deprecated placing anyotherKESTRICTIONS UPON CONV^ERTSintending to unite with the visible <strong>Church</strong>of Christ, other than those required byChrist and His Apostles. A partial discussionof the subject has been had already,and yestei-day it came up again for debate.The Eev. W. McAlister opened in a spiritof conciliation, and called npon the defendersof the essay to restate their position.The Bev. Mr. Dickinson took the fioor indenunciation of the impertinence, us Letermed it,of any manor set of men placing^ny test whatever between the converted.soul and Christ, or the <strong>Church</strong> which Heestablished on the earth. AH' that he(Dickinson) would require, was assent tothe cardinal and universally received doctrinesof Christianity. How dare any ministerexclude any believer in Jesus Cbrist,because he did not step into the old shipjust as the minister did'? If a man's lifeis holy and good, he could not see whatliarni a belief in Universalism, or in election,or in close communion, could do, notwherein oue was better or worse than theother.Dr. True was also opposed toTHE PRESENT TEST OF MEMBERSHIPin the <strong>Methodist</strong> Episcopal Ciiurch, anddeclared that many of the ministers arenot sound in regard to the canon of Scripture.A great many, for instance, do notthink Solomon's Song ought to be there,and to ask children and adults to assent toall that the Scriptures contain, and to thetwenty-five articles of religion, is preposterous.Wesley, selected those twenty-fivearticles out of the thirty-nine held by the<strong>Church</strong> of England, in which he was aPresbyter, and Dr True had no doubt thatif Wesley lived now, he would strike oattwenty of the twenty-five articles, and perhapsall of them, as he (True) was in farorof doing.Bev. Mr. James was annoyed at the progressiveideas presented by some of thespeakers. He was an " old fogy," and infavor of sending a few old fogy delegatesto the General Conference, who would settleand strengthen the faith and disciplineof Uie Cburch, rather than alter and mendthem to suit the liberal and broad <strong>Church</strong>ideas which some of his youuger brethrenentertain.
Tlie Bv. J. S. Willis took the ToungAmerican side of the case, and was readyto vindicate it. anywhere. He combatedthe idea that they urged, that a change inthis particular would produce laxity ofdoctrine and work injury to tile <strong>Church</strong>;and I demonstrated that the Unitarian defection. from Congregationalism, was owingnot to a laxity of doctrine in the latter,but to the introduction of political tacticsin church elections. The question wasconsidered of such prime importance, andso many persons wanted to speak on it,that it was continued over until the nextmeeting.COBBESPOKDEKCE.ANN ABBOB COBBESPONDENCE.About four weeks ago, I joined the <strong>Free</strong><strong>Methodist</strong> <strong>Church</strong>. I think I had been onefor three years, but was not fully aware ofit. I had heard something about them, audfrom what I learned, they were " a sect ecerytclierespoken against "—especially bythe Old <strong>Church</strong>, to which I belonged.I was so engaged most of the time, thatI knew and cared but little about them. 1had all I could do at home. Here, most ofthe time it was one continued conflict, dinof battle, and shouts of victory personally,and in public, in the name of the Lord,following each other in rapid succession.But iu the order of Providence, I wascompelled to notice them. I made a contractwith a stranger for a quantity ofwood. It was delivered according to agreement,and corded with a conscience—a rareoccurrence. When he called for his mon-«y, his wife came to the city with him.—sie said they were <strong>Free</strong> <strong>Methodist</strong>s. " Isit! possible!". I exclaimed. I never sawbut oue before—a senior student of theDniversity—a " peculiar " young man.—Hiey also told me they were going to have•iQuarterly Meeting in their place (Moreville,)in a few weeks, and gave me notonly a pressing, but a warm invitation toattend. It was fifteen miles away, and beingdestitute of public or private conveyance,I said I would be glad to attend, butfiought it would not be possible. Theyfeadily and cheerfully ofiered to send outajcarriage for me, and bring me back.COBBESPONDENCE. 161I felt my heart strangely drawn out inprayer for them, an3 the contemplatedmeeting for the next four weeks, and abuming desire to participate in the QuarterlyMeeting. I did attend, and heard thepreaching, the singing, the praying, thecries for mercy, the shouts of the redeemed,and the testimony of the saints. I waspleased—and more than this, I was delightedand edified. There was evidentlya strong bond of Christian- fellowshipcoursing through all hearts, and through'all the services. I thought in my heart,nearly loud enough to be heard. Eureka!(I have found it)—surely, their garmentsare off the same piece I have been wearingfor the last three years! Verily, " Methodismis Christianity in eamest," whentranslated into life, and action, and power,•—when unmasked and free. Hallelujah !Glory be to God in the highest! for Hehath visited His people, and not left Himselfwithout witnesses.I discovered that the fact of their being"a sect which was everywhere spokenagainst," was their crowning glory,—oneof the most striking evidences of their divineorigin and apostolic mission.Well, after a three years' drill, such as Ihad undergone in connection with the<strong>Methodist</strong> Episcopal <strong>Church</strong> in the city ofAnn Arbor, is it at all strange that I sliould•" understand and know the joyful sound "'!My duty vvas clear. I did not hesitate andparley, nor even wait to obtain first a letter,but ofiTered myself to the F. M. <strong>Church</strong>,and obtained my letter the next day. Imade the choice which Moses made beforeme—viz., " To sufier afHiction with the peopleof God, rather than enjoy the pleasuresof sin for a season," or be called the son ofthe Pharaohs. I felt called upon to makethis choice publicly, which I did then andthere, for the Lord's sake, 1 feel, whilewriting, to exclaim," Happy day, that fixedmy choice !"As already intimated, I have been passingthrough a remarkable ordeal in thiscity for the last three years, while strugglingfor spiritual freedom and religiousliberty, which .leems almost without a parellel.For nearly thirty consecutive years.