Newspaper Page Text
July 17,1912] T H E 1
it as the basis of editorial treatment of the home
missions situation. Fresh information is to be
furnished pastors for missionary addresses.
"Educational and inspirational" leaflets are to
be got out. Home Mission "study classes" are
to be organized, magazines, religious journals,
etc., are to be used. All cities of over 2,500 inhabitants
are to 'be specially organized and worked,
and are to be made the points from which to
press tiie work in surrounding districts.
We are asked to give our opinion of the whole
matter. Here it is:
As ardent friends of 'Home Missions, believing
it to be as much a work of the church as Foreign
.Missions, believing that it has more need for the
eai nest study and prayer and quickened interest
of the entire church, believing that there is vast
room for improvement in the church's grasp of
this great problem and of her own duty in reference
to it, and having given ourselves with whole
lu art to the work and the cause, we are willing
to risk the criticism which we are sure we shall
receive when we say that all the above named
scheme of the New York office is in our judgment
injudicious and not calculated to accomplish the
cnu uusirea. ine whole project is
method, method, method, rather than spirit. It
is a great blow-hard, advertising scheme, a catering
to false notions and conceptions of work, an
improper and unwise use of the world's ways.
It looks like the concoction of a brain wild with
the notions of publicity, pictures, and posters,
of one who has not grasped the fundamental idea
of missions, and who would simply galvanize the
church into a little ephemeral activity or show of
life.
The Whole scheme is squarely against the fundamental
principle of the church as a body organized
to do effectively the work assigned to
God's people in the propagation of the faith and
the witnessing to the truth. Consecration, witness-bearing,
personal activity, the diligent use
of the Word, the sacraments, and prayer, are
God's way. Central agencies, except so far as
necessity and reason Show to be proper, and then
only in a minimum way, organization, federation,
campaigns, whoop-and-hurrah methods,
posters, advertising, and the like. decrraHp tfcp
church in the eyes of the masses of the people.
The church is suffering far more today from her
u?e or tolerance of these things than she is gaining
by them. Directly the world will laugh at
her. Indeed, it has already begun to do so, very
much. The church's greatest need just now, and
both she and the world no less than herself know
it, is to start the fire under the boiler, not to put
in more fuel or water or to add more wheels.
We would not discourage giving. Let this be
greater than ever before, and let the people of
the church put thousands into the work where
they now put hundreds. But let the offerings be
put into men, not into advertising, posters, central
office salaries, and the like. At this very
moment information is given that one of our
noblest and most useful men, in connection with
the Colored Evangelistic work, who has been
compelled to retire on account of ill health, is not
to be replaced, because the Committee has not
the money to employ another to take the large
nlnno L?
nuivu lie Ullt'U.
The way in which many reformers and movement
people of different kinds fall back upon
the church and the pulpit was singularly illustrated,
the other day, in a resolution adopted
by an organization which is trying to hring about
the wearing of a uniform by all the High School
pupils of one of our cities. "It was finally decided
that nothing else could be done about this
just now except to ask the city ministry to talk
<>n the subject." Shall a day be set apart, to be
called "High School Uniform SundayT"
PRESBYTERIAN OF THE S<
ARMINIANISM HAS NO TENDENCY
TO UNIVERSALISM.
It Is not fair to judge Arwinianisin by the illconsidered
utterances of one or two of the writers
in the Methodist church. This is what the editor
of The Presbyterian of the South does
when alluding to a discussion between two Methodists
he says: ''The discussion is of interest
as showing how strongly Arminianism looks in
the direction of universalism." Issue July 3.
This is as unjust as any judgment of a sister de?
u ?ii ? ' -
uuuuuawu cuuiu wcii ue. ivrminianisui ^ol tlie
Methodists), which emphasizes the human aspect
of salvation, magnifying free agency and the
renovation of the human will, and urges the personal
acceptance of salvation, is just as far removed
from Universalism as any system can
be. And to hold them responsible for universalism
on account of peculiarities in the effort to
explain infant salvation is unjust and uncalled
for. They are no more subject to critisism than
many Calvinists for mistakes in the effort to
justify and explain infant baptism, together with
its supposed effects. If Methodists lean in this
matter towards baptismal regeneration (that is,
some of them), the Dutch Calvinists with their
theory of the "seed of faith" are in the same
A A ?J il- > 1
uuau m? mucn lauaea ADranam ivuyper
is even worse than any Arminian ever dared to
be in teaching the doctrine of "Justification
from eternity." The writer has dealt with both
these errors at length in two unpublished
treatises, the first entitled, "The Covenants and
the Seals," and the second in his "Review of
Watson's Institutes," the two together comprising
fifteen hundred pages of manuscript. It
is time for Calvinists to learn something about
Arminianism and quit misrepresenting the
Methodists.
The truth of the matter as regards infant salvation
is, that the world has shown itself unable
properly to explain it. But the Methodists in
their effort to offset the effects of the theological
blunder of the Covenant of Works, the common
heritage of Calvinists and Arminians alike, gave
a more direct and plausible explanation than the
Calvinists. 4
The doctrine of a seed of faith for every baptized
child has no advantage over baptismal regeneration.
They are alike groundless theological
speculations; and the latter is no more
subject to the charge of universalism than the
former, but they are equally far from it, as can
be easily shown.
The latter part of the quotation from Wesley
is almost exactly like Calvin's explanation of
infant salvation, which has been so much quoted
of late years. The only difference is that Calvin
speaks of regeneration without attributing it to
baptism as a cause. Whatever may be said of
Wesley's teaching of infant regeneration, it is
certain that he never thought of teaching universal
infant regeneration.
And if John Fletcher or any other Methodist
employed Rom. 5:18, "the free gift came upon
(should be "to") all men justification
of life"?to teach infant salvation, it must not
be interpreted absolutely, for there is in it no
special reference to infants. To give it a universalistic
interpretation is just as unreasonable
as to put such interpretation upon the classic
passage of univeraalists in 1 Cor. 15: "In Christ
shall all be made alive."
When in discussing infant salvation Dr. R. J.
Cook (as quoted) says: "Another of the benefits
then accruing to infants through the atonement
i? that they are justified," this does not mean
all infants, but as a teaching of the method of
justification of this class it is just exactly what
Presbyterians believe. Again, while it i3 true
)UTH (849) 11
that the Methodist writer is mistaken in contending
that "Methodists have never taught regeneration
in infancy," it is just as wide of the mark
to affirm, as does the editor of The Presbyterian,
that "the Presbyterians are beginning
to teach it." The writer has surely never read
Calvin or he would hardly be able to make such
a statement. And as for the teaching of the
universal regeneration of infants (that is to say,
ull men), it is no more true to affirm it of the
Methodists in the past than of those of today, or
of Calvinists of today.
It is evident that this editor has not yet read
the writer's treatise on "Infant Salvation and
ConfpJisinnsil Rovicirwn " olo? ~ ? ?1 J 1 1 '
?. cue iic nuuia pruuaoiy
never have written the article.
Of course the argument against the regeneration
of dying infants which he puts into the
mouth of Methodists is something which Methodists
never did say, and never thought of saying.
That argument for universal salvation is doubtless
peculiarly the editor's own. As an argument
against the salvation of all who die infants
it is nought.
It is a pity that our church thinks it knows so
much more about infant salvation than the other
churches, for it causes her to be indifferent to
getting hold of any sound knowledge of the sub
ject.
Luther Link.
THE LEAVEN.
In The Earnest Worker for July, page 387,
column 2, in its comment on the lesson, "The
Growth of the Kingdom," is the following:
"The leaven represents the Gospel, the three
measures of meal that part of mankind which
has not yet been brought completely un<ler its
influence. We are taught several lessons: (1)
That the Gospel will transform the lives of men
as the leaven changes flour. (2) That the Gospel
will continue to spread until the whole mass of
mankind is leavened. (3) That this spread of
the Gospel must be by personal contact, as the
leaven must be mixed with the flour in order to
i- ?>
UU A U> ?U1 IV.
This interpretation of the parable of the leaven
has already been sent forth to our thousands of
teachers and scholars without the slightest hint
that any other interpretation is possible, or that
anything else is taught by the ministry of our
church. We think it ought to be said that a
majority of our ministers reject the interpretation
set forth in The Earnest Worker.
A majority of us believe that the leaven
typifies here, as always in Scripture, evil. Elsetwhere
Christ used it of evil. (See Matt. 16.8.)
In the Old Testament without exception it is
used typically of evil. We believe that it means
evil doctrine in the parable. It is the opposite of
the Gospel.
We believe further that the Gospel will not
permeate the whole mass of mankind in this
age and make it a homogeneous mass, that is, a
converted world. This directly contradicts our
Lord s interpretation of the parables of the
wheat and tares, and the drag net. But we do
believe that evil doctrine, that which is antiChrist
in its effect, will permeate the visible
church until it is wholly apostate.
We think that it ought to be known that there
is another view of this parable other than the
one found in The Earnest Worker, a view which
ii consistent with other Scriptures as to the
meaning of leaven, as to the final result of the
preaching of the Gospel in this age, and consistent
with the general teachings of Scripture;
and in addition to this a view that is held by a
majority of our ministers and harmonious with
the facts of history and present experience.
Abbeville, S. C. H. Waddell Pratt.