opposition of some be removed. But the New Testament nowhere makes sincerity the test of fellowship. If that is to be taken into account, Peter made a mistake in baptizing Cornelius. He should have assured this centurion that, since an angel had told him his prayers and aims were recorded in heaven, he should permit the church at Cæsarea to put. his name on—would he say "the roll" or "a roll"?
If sincerity is the test, the Quaker with his Spirit baptism is surely as eligible as the sprinkled man. Likewise the Unitarian. So also the Mormon, Christian Scientist, Progressive Jew.
All these express a willingness to "follow Jesus"—when He goes their way. In short, there is no stopping-place when we once begin lowering the bars. As well take all away at once.
I am willing to help remove every bar erected by men, but will fight in defense of every bar placed by an inspired man.
If the church is a divine institution, woe to him who alters its terms of membership. Consistency demands that we make every New Testament command obligatory, or all, of whatever character, optional.
The newest offering is a certain Chicago-China product. Conceived in Chicago, but carried to a heathen land for birth. Nobody is quite sure of what it is like. It seems to be an infant born into the world without a cry, its nurses evidently fearing to let it be heard. Its birth is now proclaimed as premature by its god fathers, and it appears to be losing vitality.
It was pronounced a beautiful child by its parents, till less partial beholders called
16
