be partakers of other men's sins. 2 Tim. 3:5; 2 John 11.

We need hardly remark how unseemly it is to see brethren absent from the communion, while few or none know the cause of it; and how little this is calculated to exhibit to the world that mutual affection, harmony, and confidence, which a church of Christ ought to present. Nay, it ought to be remembered, how much such a practice may tend to impair the discipline of a church. If we inquire after one who is absent from carelessness, is there not something very wrong, if such a person can find a cloak for his carelessness, by quoting the example of others who are frequently absent likewise, though their absence may arise from another cause? We hope, then, that Christian brethren, who have hitherto proceeded on the supposition, that such a practice was a proper one, (and I have no doubt many have observed it conscientiously,) when they find it unsupported by Scripture, and apt to be accompanied with consequences so pernicious, will feel their obligations unreservedly to relinquish it.

On this subject, it may be proper to add a caution to Christians against indulging a disposition to wander to other places of worship on the Lord's day, at least during the time that the church with which they are connected regularly assembles. The evil of this is manifest. If one may gratify such an idle curiosity, why may not others do the same? and if all did so, the divinely instituted assembly of a church of Christ to observe his ordinances would be destroyed. But while I would caution Christians against the impropriety to which I have alluded, by

pointing out the pernicious effects that would result were it generally committed, I would be understood as confining my remarks to those seasons when the members meet in a church capacity. It would appear to me an unreasonable abridgment of Christian liberty for any church to prevent their members from attending at other times any place of worship where their spiritual improvement may be promoted.

CHAPTER VI.

THE IMPORTANCE OF HAVING OFFENCES AS
SPEEDILY REMOVED AS POSSIBLE.

EVERY Christian ought to be not only willing, but solicitous, as early as possible, to give all the satisfaction he can to any brother, who, through a mistake of his language, a misrepresentation of any part of his conduct, or any other cause, may be offended at him. If he neglect to do this immediately, the offence rankles in the mind of his brother; and the longer it remains, it gets the firmer hold, and of course it becomes the more difficult to root it out. The offended party is apt to brood over it. It is in danger of intruding upon him in his hours of retirement, and when he would wish most completely to banish it from his thoughts. It wounds the love he ought to bear to his brother. It obstructs his spirituality; and instead of proceeding with alacrity

in the Christian life, his hands hang down, and his knees wax feeble. He has literally met with a stumbling block,* which, by being thrown in his way, makes him fall, and retards his progress in running the race set before him.

Now, does not the blame of this party, at least, lie at his door, who was unwilling to give the fullest explanation, that was compatible with duty, in order to get any misunderstanding done away as soon as possible. If Christians were properly aware of the measure of guilt in the temper of others, to which they may become accessory, by withholding such acknowledgments as may tend to remove differences, they would tremble at the thought of it, and, instead of endeavouring to ascertain the degree of explanation they are called in strict justice to give, or which may be consistent with their own supposed dignity, they would have no other limit to their attempt at a reconciliation, but that which a dispassionate consideration of the line of duty, and tender Christian solicitude for the safety and prosperity of the souls of their brethren, would point out.

*The import of the original word used for offence. See Rom. 14:20.

CHAPTER VII.

WHEN AN OFFENCE MAY BE CONSIDERED AS REMOVED.

WHERE an offence has taken place, we should never suppose it removed till love be restored. Never let false delicacy, or a wish to avoid trouble, lead any one, in such a case, to disguise his sentiments. Let the matter be fully examined without delay. Better take a little more time, and trouble too, that the difference, if possible, may be effectually done away, than huddle up the business, by professing satisfaction when it is not real. If a difference be thus superficially patched up, merely for the sake of peace, or to avoid the discipline of the church, or the censure of such of the brethren as may be acquainted with it, it will prove like a wound not properly healed. When it meets with the most trifling injury, it is perpetually apt to break out afresh.

One way in which an old offence is thus sometimes revived, is by referring to it, if any new cause of difference between the parties should afterwards take place. This is exceedingly improper. Wherever a profession of repentance for an offence has been made on the one hand, and accepted on the other, it should never be touched upon afterwards, whatever subsequent difference may happen. I have sometimes found, when a member of a church

had occasion to reprove a brother, though the reproof was allowed to be just, if any thing had ever occurred in the history of the reprover, which served to afford matter of crimination, recourse was had to it, in order to take off the edge of the reproof that was given. This plainly showed that it was not received in a proper spirit. Such a person had no more title thus to recal what was past, than a merchant would have to resort to an old account, which had been settled long ago, in adjusting some new debt. If what is thus mentioned by the reproved party be something of a private nature, which was known to him, but which he never brought forward before, by introducing it now, he condemns himself. If it was really an offence, why did he not bring it forward sooner? He was surely chargeable with a criminal violation of the law of love, in not taking notice of it earlier, and making it the subject of admonition or reproof. We shall only add, that, mentioning any thing of this kind to others, though not to the person himself, by whom the reproof is administered, is equally inconsistent with the spirit of the Gospel.

5