munications."-But his Pedobaptist friends are not satisfied with these reasons. They see not how they could have induced his present belief. It is admitted that he has advanced nothing materially new, in support of the Baptist cause. The statements he has made have been made before. The reasonings he has employed have been employed before. And in the course of his theological education, it would seem he must have known this. The arguments he has now advanced and pronounced conclusive, he must have previously examined and pronounced unsound. The representations he has now made, with apparently the utmost confidence, he must have previously considered, and pronounced incorrect.

It is somewhat remarkable in the case of Mr. JUDSON, that he should be changed to precisely such a point. Having begun to waver, why did he waver just so far, and no farther? Without communicating his "exercises to any of the Baptist denomination," why did he at length fasten on those very topicks which constitute the peculiarities of the Baptist faith? At a period when his own circumstances were greatly perplexed, and when liable to imagine that some new expedient might improve them; how came he to fall in so exactly with those Missionaries among whom Providence had for a few days thrown him, and who were now prosperously established, and engaged in their benevolent work?-We very well know what reply his friends will make to the preceding queries and observations ; but we shall be happy to acknowledge ourselves mistaken, if they succeed in rendering the matter perfectly clear.

Another remarkable circumstance respecting Mr. JUD. SON's change, is the concealment of his views from his missionary brethren. He certainly could not have renounced Pedobaptist principles without a struggle. He could not have been honestly brought to decide, that those ministers with whom he had ever associated were not regular ministers of Christ; that those churches with which he was connected, on which he was dependent, and to which he was under solemn obligations, were not regularly constituted churches of Christ; that his reverend father and most intimate Christian friends had never been baptized in the name of the Trinity, or rightly professed the Christian faith; yea, that he himself had constantly fostered that, which

(pursued to what he deems its direct consequences) is "the most pernicious practice which ever infested and laid waste the vineyard of the Lord"-he could not possibly have been brought to such a decision, without a deep inward conflict. How strange, then, that the conflict never became visible ! that it was neither observed by, nor revealed to, his missionary companions! Here is a band of brothers, going forth with the gospel to a land of idols, not only under peculiar obligations, but, it should seem, peculiarly disposed, to maintain an intercourse the most frank and open; and yet one of them passes through a scene of the utmost mental trouble; dissents from the church order of his ancestors, supporters, and associates; and is at length on the point of a complete separation from them, and has never made to them the slightest intimations of what had passed, and was passing in his mind!!*

It would be well if the mystery of this event were now fully disclosed. It would be well if the truth would suffer us to stop here. Gladly would I be released from that most unpleasant task which lies before me. Impelled, however, by a high sense of duty and of my sacred obligations to the cause of truth, I must proceed to a disclosure of facts, which, for the honour of the Christian ministry and the Christian name, it is with reluctance I become the instrument of spreading before the world.

It will be recollected by many, that soon after the intelligence of Mr. JUDSON'S change had reached America, it

* In confirmation of this statement, we refer the reader to the report of the Prudential Committee of the A. B. C. F. M. for 1813; inserted in the Panoplist for September of the same year. It appears from this report, that Messrs. NEWELL and JUDSON, with their wives, left this country on board the same ship, and arrived at Calcutta, June 17, 1812. Messrs. HALL, NOTT, and RICE, with the wife of Mr. Norr, left the country soon after, on board another ship, and arrived at Calcutta the eighth of August of the same year. Before the arrival of this latter ship, Messrs. NEWELL and JUDSON had been ordered away; and Mr. NEWELL with his wife had actually sailed for the Isle of France. He left Mr. JuDSON, say the Prudential Committee, "without any knowledge of his change.”— Four days after Mr. NEWELL's departure, the other brethren arrived at Calcutta. They were there in company with Mr. JUDSON, nearly three weeks, when, on the 27th of August, he left them to go to Serampore, for the purpose of being immersed. His brethren, even at this last moment, were totally "unapprized of the object of his visit" to Serampore," and received their first intelligence on the subject, two day's afterwards, from Dr. MARSHMAN."!!!- -We cannot forbear adding a word or two more. A letter was written, about twenty days after Mr. JUDSON's immersion, and signed by Mr. RICE, wherein mention is made of what had happened, as a "trying event." Yet within less than four weeks of the date of this letter Mr. RICE had followed him !!

was hinted, in certain circles, that this had been induced by resentment. He had received, previously to his leav ing the country, a solemn reprimand or admonition from the Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions; and the affront occasioned by it had induced him to desert them. Rumours like these at length found their way into the East, and reached the ears of Mr. JUDSON. In answer to them, he addressed a letter to the Rev. Dr. BALDWIN, from which the following is faithfully extracted.-—“ I would simply state, that the American Board of Commissioners NEVER GAVE ME A REPRIMAND. In proof of this, I can appeal to any of the members. Furthermore, I NEVER HAD THE MOST DISTANT IDEA THAT THE BOARD THOUGHT ME DESERVING OF A REPRIMAND. When I left my native land, it afforded me much comfort, that I came out under the patronage of such men.”*. Let the publick compare these solemn and unequivocal as sertions with the following official statement of facts, com municated in a letter to the author, by the Corresponding Secretary of the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions.

REV. AND DEAR SIR,

Salem, March 17, 1818.

Your letter, requesting "an official statement of facts, respecting a reprimand or admonition which Mr. JUDSON received from the American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions," was duly received, and has been submitted to the Prudential Committee, for advisement.

It is a maxim with the Board, and with the Prudential Committee, to be religiously circumspect and tender in regard to characters connected with the sacred cause of Missions, and to make no unnecessary exposures or animadversions. On this maxim they have acted, and still wish to act, in relation to Mr. JUDSON. As, however, he has seen fit publickly to appeal to the Board, and "to any member," and his appeal has been backed by an earnest and reiterated challenge on the part of his friends, it seems due, in justice to the Board and to truth, that a simple and concise statement of facts should be exhibited.

* Mr. JUDSON's Letter to Dr. BALDWIN, dated Rangoon, Dec. 23, 1815, inserted in the Bap. Miss. Magazine, vol. iv. p. 346.

In the beginning of the year 1811, Mr. JUDSON was sent by the Prudential Committee to England, for purposes distinctly specified in his instructions. In that mission, what he was instructed not to do, he did; and what he was instructed to do, he neglected. On his return, in July of the same year, he kept himself aloof from the Prudential Committee, made no regular report of his doings, and assumed the management of matters in his own way. At the meeting of the Board at Worcester, in the following September, his answers to questions, his conversation, and deportment, were in the same spirit and manner which had marked his previous proceedings.

Great dissatisfaction was expressed by every member present; and it became a very serious question, whether Mr. JUDSON should not be dismissed. After deliberation, however, it was resolved, that he should be in a formal and solemn manner admonished. THE ADMONITION*

WAS ACCORDINGLY ADMINISTERED IN PRESENCE OF

THE BOARD. Mr. JUDSON was much affected-appeared to yield to the admonition-made concessions and gave assurances and was continued under the patronage of the Board.

Yet after all this, and even after a passage had been engaged for him, with others, to India, in the February following, his deportment was such, that it again became a serious and most trying question with the Prudential Committee, whether he should be permitted to go.

And it

was not without great heaviness of heart, many fears, and particular but tender cautions, not to him only, but to the other Missionaries respecting him, that he was finally sent out.†

* An admonition may have respect either to danger, or to actual offence. In the latter case, which is the case here, the term is precisely of the same imports reprimand.In another communication from the Reverend Secretary, he says, “Mr. JUDSON was admonished and reprimanded in solemn form."

"What emotions," says the Baptist Reviewer of Mr. JUDSON's Sermon, "what emotions must he have felt, conscious as he was of having followed the dictates of truth, and that, if ever there was an action performed from one single motive, unblended with any minor considerations, his baptism was an action of that description'! what emotions must he have felt to hear in that distant land, that the prevailing opinion among his Pedobaptist friends in 'America' was, that shortly before he sailed, he received a reprimand from the Board, which so offended him, that he resolved to have nothing more to do with them; and in no way could he escape so honourably as by becoming a Baptist!' So far from having received a reprimand, he declares he had not the most distant idea that the Board

1

1

The sequel is publickly known. The ultimate issue is with Him, to whose sovereign wisdom, and power, and goodness it belongs, to overrule the wayward dispositions and actions of men for the advancement of his own glory and kingdom.

Yours, Rev. and dear Sir, with very affectionate respects,
S. WORCESTER,
Cor. Sec. A. B. C. F. M.

Rev. ENOCH POND.

To this official and unequivocal statement of facts, what will Mr. JUDSON reply? To deny the smallest particular, would be to contradict a body of men, which yields to none in America in point of respectability and worth. To quibble and equivocate on the meaning of certain words, would discover the opposite of an honest, humble spirit; and, instead of exonerating him, would in the estimation of the candid confirm his guilt. To pretend forgetfulness of the fact he has denied, would be perfectly unaccountable, and excite the suspicion of an attempt to impose upon the publick. In short, we see but one course which Mr. J. can dutifully pursue. He must retrace his steps. The credit of Congregationalism does not require that he should return to his former sentiments; but the credit of religion does imperiously require, that he humble himself, and be willing to confess the truth.

pre

It will perhaps be asked--What connexion has the ceding statement with the subject under consideration?" Admitting Mr. J. was reprimanded; what influence could

ever thought him deserving of one; and we are very much mistaken, if Mr. JUDSON did not stand high in the estimation of the Board, both as a scholar and a preacher, when he sailed from America."- -Is this Reviewer mistaken, or not?

"To what motive, then," he continues, "can we attribute the circulation of such a report? If Mr. J. had received a reprimand, he surely must have known it. But he positively asserts that he did not receive one; and 'for the truth of his assertion, appeals to any member of the Board. Is it possible to believe he would have made an assertion which he knew to be false, and which he must have know any member of the Board' could easily prove to be false? If his character had been disgraced in the estimation of his friends, by any conduct before, or any change of sentiment after, his departure from America, he must certainly have known that the denial of a fact so notorious would only involve him in still greater disgrace. We are compelled to believe the report is unfounded. From whatever source it originated, we fear it was designed, by attributing his change to an improper motive, to counteract the impression which that change was likely to make on the minds of the community. Whenever we are satisfied that in this we are mise taken, we shall be ready to acknowledge it." (Amer. Bap. Magazine, vol. i. p、 26.)Is not this Reviewer mistaken again?-We hope the pledged acknowl edgment will not be long delayed.