Newspaper Page Text
ihFch^tTaYikdex,
T A COMMITTEE OE BRETHREN,
IM BAPTIST O&aViMTION.
Mj| TEEMS OT SUBSCMPTION,
Tr DftttAts in.adrtnc: or pals%ithin the year.
T r Mfe{e4 to ore mm the yec, Tko Dollar■
*i —f *—y win be clnrgedlnl.ll cases. -
JOHEPB WALKEU, Editor.
\ OLE ME SePIES ‘S’ 0Ti.,27.
■ ! !.’ I IOTS
Baptismal Discussion.
Hie brevitv of John's ministry, it is
a:* “ue l. precludes the possibility of
: eimmersion of those whom John bap
ti, • To this it will be a sufficient re
**!r, that none can tell how long the
.ulr >tv of John continued. I)r. C’anip
-:,y> it inay have been ten months
or ten years.
: T •• want of physical ability to im
tnerse so many is ur.-ed against the
reliability that John performed the
ri _• h ; by immersion. How could he,
.iv <>ar exponents, have endured the
e • : l*aptiziug so many by im-
I answer, that there is no
f .fi record that there ever were a |
rix-xi manv persons with John at one j
baptized numbers in
t&efUlrse of 2iis mTfnstft*, is doul&less 1
t ae; l*nt that many were immersed at
is not in evidence. He
& e him strength for the work.
A objeetioa sometimes advanced,
•* the deserts where John bap
!. M<>uld not atford sufficient water
• - immersion. This the word of God
.'.•ra iiets. In Dent. S:7, we have
this language —* Kr the Lord thy
• !r!ti£i*th thee into a good land, a
a\.J of brooks of water, of fountains,
and ha that spring out of valleys
h Ha. Water most have been la
as plentiful in that land, as it was
r.t. a where John was baptizing.
’ .*. rrj .n the advocates of jjprink
the three thousand on the day of
. a -, -t. conld certainly *;ot have
.• creed in oiie day. That three j
• : were Immersed on that day, j
a,., maintain; but that as many
hare been immersed, Is certain
the fact, that the task has been j
ih 1 in that time. It is a mat j
that Chrysostom iin
. Aoril lUh. 104, at Con
.pie. Remegius, in one day,
merged Clovis. the French King,
tliree thousand of his subjects. —
T twelve Apostles conld have im
, . < the three thousand on tlie day
: -enter st. in three hours, and with
e aid of the seventy disciples, the
thousand Qfttfld ha\e been
forty-live minutes.
Ocea iumßfaed in the time sped-1
ibg objection, would be equally j
- jiWiimt against sprinkling. It takes as
r. riakJe. as it does t< immerse.
I can immerse more subjects in a giv
* ~jj time, than a Pedobaptist minister
. if he repeat the usual bere
-1 i!hwj. *
The jailer, it is supposed must have
■ been .-nrinkled, as he was baptized
the prison. To this I reply,
jailer was baptflsed neither in the
r in hi# own house. Os this
V i.e may convince himself by tur
:.ii _r to the place where an account of
h-, bap; h-m is recorded. Hut he might
ii-.ve been immersed in the jail, as it
’•tkv. like every Eastern prison,
t- rovided with baths in which the
rd'nance- might have been admiuis-
I mer>in. however, it is alleged,
i- uivenient and dangerous. It
rtuimv is Ess trouble to sprinkle a
v. than to immerse an adult, but
1 hristians at liberty to compromise
- - the sake of ease, when thereby they
ate a command of Godt As for
- • Anger, I have heard of some sick
<l, i;> recovering after immersion,
■, • never of any who were made sick
S :ne object on the ground that im
iul rsi u is indecent. Thus they charge
r 1. rd and Master with haying in
er.tlv fulfilled all righteousness by
- immersion in the Jordan! But
ji-obj -etion recoils upon those who
. ike it. f*r the Methodists in particu
ir. v. ill under very peculiar circom
i-.a administer the rite by immer-
Thus they consent occasionally
■ become indecent, and indecently go
n into the water, and indecently
immerse those who will not consent to
receive baptism at their hands in a
i re • nteel way! Did yon ever sus
,,t that Methodist ministers would do
an indecent act i If immersing is in
,f, they have done so often. These
objections do not always succeed in
keeping all Pedobaptists out of the wa
•■r therefore a stronger one must be
TRUTH.
Soc Prof. Sears’ Review cf Burge-"-
To get to Pike's Peak, go to work
a ud save your fnoney till you get three
or tour hundred dollars; then buy a
piece of land, and stay at home and
mind your own business.
The -noonday prayer- meetings are
regularly kept up in Pittsburg.
attendance is about from one hundred
hundred persons.
|| Tiio city of Baltimore pay^241,300
a ygar for the support of its common
* tooh ’ . vl
J - T■j ■ J J , y j J> HR , sp|j, IHR , I shl \ jsii ! Hill 1 jpfji 1 jjHri
j^eviWof 1 )r fietter*.
i Dr. Crawford’s final objection to the
nSgtttjfoern Baptist Convention is, that
Wen ineffectual .” And
for,the truth of this assertion he seems,
mainly to rely on the statements of Dr.
Wayland’s late pamphlet, fliat “the
system lias been a failure with our
‘Northern brethren.” Does it then in-
I evitably follow that when a system of
I benevolence lias failed at the North, it
must also as a natural sequence fail at
the South; and because Dr. Wayland
has announced the failure pfa system,
must it be regarded as in truth
uvet Such would seem to be the inH
piession of Dr. Crawford, and tlie ten
! deucy of his logic. If any considera
ble number o* other Southern Baptists
should regard the question in the same
light,. Dr. Wavhjud. notwithstanding,,
‘| his ultra :its,
a more potent influence oyer Southern
minds than he does over Northerrt.
But is it not “begging the question”
to charge the failure to the system? —
This looks very much like blaming the
ship for grounding instead of the offi
cers who navigate the ship. J)r. Craw
lord assigns as a reason that the system
must be defective, “the discord and
strife'* between the missionaries of the
Northern boards among themselves,
and between themselves and the boards
jat home. But if it can be shown that
these same brethren baye quarreled
under different systems, might they
not have quarreled under any system,
and can a'Wstein be properly called a
failure because those who work by, it
have “wrangling and strjfo” \Vas
| tlierg not wrangling even arribftg
j the Apostl ( es i The Editor of Zi
on's Advocate, who was tong an
influential member of the Execu
tive Committee of the Union, admits
i the truth of all that JJr. Way land has
fcaid of difficulties, but asks;
“But may not this be traced to oth
er causes, rather than to any radical
defect in our organization? There lias
been a combination of circumstances
and events tending to produce these
results, which might not occur again
in a century.”
Now, if our system, as Dr. Craw
ford says, is the same as that of the
Triennial Convention, and we can show
that the latter had worked well for
i thirty years before
cords” embarrassed its operations,* and j
I find causes sos said strifes’
in the introduction of extraneous and
exciting questions; it will .go far to
wards showing the excellency of the
present system, and its security against
failures, since no such agitating ques
tions can ever arise in the Southern
Baptist Convention.
Well, in the of t American
Baptist AfissionS,” iw work published
by Prof. Wm, Gaminell, of Brown
University, and recommended by Dr.
Spencer 11. Cone, Dr. Daniel Sharp,
and Dr. Ira Chase, we And the follow
ing in reference to the late Dr. Bolles,
Corresponding Secretary of the Trien
nial Convention, on the condition of
the missionary enterprise down to the
year of eighteen hundred and forty
two:
“Under his judicious management
the enterprise'of foreign missions had
steadily advanced, until it had now be
come the most important charity of
the Baptist denomination in America.”
There was harmony and peace, then,
down to ISJ2, and by consequence,
no failure. Thirty years ought to be
sufficient length of time to show that
men can work peacefully under onr
system if they will. Moreover, we
think, this trial of three decades of
years should give it the preference over
mere local associations with their
scores of contracted and inefficient it
not dangerous circumferences. It
proves conclusively j to our mind,-, that
churches and benevofent'soeieties scat
tered all over the land, can work with
more certainty, safety, and harmony,
through on Board, than they
could by individual, independent ac
tion, by which they must necessarily
conflict witj each other, and thu3 des
troy both their harmony and effici
ency.
The year above named, however,was
the dividing line between lights and
shadows; it was the end of peace, and
the beginning of sorrows; it marked
the end of unbounded success under
harmonious co-operation, and the com
mencement of fatal retrogression un
der bickering and discord.
‘Prof. Gammell shall assign reasons
for embarrassments. and failure?,which
he does in libft. following language :
“This embarrassment arose in part
from the financial pressure which at
that time spread over the -whole coun
try, and of course curtailed the chari
ties of all classes of the people; but,
also, and it is to be feared, to a still
greater extent, from, the dissensions
which had sprung up indifferent parts
of the Union respecting the institution
of slavery in the omithem States.”
In this, Dr. Crawford will be able to
see—xvhat we thought ihe kftdft before
—a cause for the “fierce contests”
among our Northern brethren, with
out ascribing them to any defect in the
system under which they acted. But
’ *if he needs more definite information,
Prof. Gaitnmell may enlighten him in
the following.words:
“Many individuals and a few church
es in the North had already refused to
contribute to the treasury of the con
vention, alleging as the reason their
unwillingness to mingle their funds
with those’ derived from the holders of
slaves.”
. This state of things at the North
brought out the Alabama resolutions,
which being rejected by the “ Acting
Board' 1 ’ at Boston, caused the secession
of tlie Southern Baptists. While wri
ting, we receivexl the Western Watch
-M-r
Board” am^bnary
who held slayes, from which we make
the subjoined extract: ✓
“If that. Convention had done its du
ty, it would have withstood that “Act
ing Board” to the face, as Paul did
Peter. They had done, that which
they had neither the constitutional nor
moral right to do, We said so'then,
we say so now. We said so in Boston,
we say so in St. Louis. In- ten years—
vve, the Baptists of- the North —have
learned that too wrongs do not make a
right. - If‘we have failed twice under
indifferent organizations, 7 does, it fol
low that there is anything in the Bap
tist church polity that forbids apy gen
eral foreign missionary
or that we have not the of the
morgl courage te conduqt one aright?
Was tliebliiuderi-of something worse
—of five men in Boston, a good and
sufficient reason for such a revolution,,
the folly of which has become so pa
tent in the short space of ten years I”"-
In perfect harmony with the above
is the’united voice of our exchanges,
with but one exception. Even the New
York vve allowed in the
last issue, is for a modified centralizing
plan. But enough, and con
tests,” in this case, do not prove the
existence of detects -in our Baptist
church .polity, nor the inability of Bap
tists to prosecute missionary enterpri
ses by centralizing organizations.
Butpr. Crawford’s inference fr
iRe same ample cropof I
bitter fruit,” that matured under the
management of onr Northern brethren,
is not legitimate, since their bitterest
“strifes and contests” took place under
a system totally different from ours
He says, that “the system which pro
duced those wranglings and jealousies,
is the same a9 our own,” but vvopave
ehowu that the system did not pro
duce them at all, and we now say, that
the system under which the fiercest
contests occurred is not the same as our
own. lie knows surely, that the pres
ent “Missionary Union” is not ’the
same system as that of the Triennial
Convention. lie must know, that an
organization on the basis of a life mem
bership, with an Executive Committee
added to its board, and four sets of
agents traversing the same field of its
operations, is not the same with a sys
tem of society representation that may
be changed every two years. There is
surely a less distance between the con
tributors and the actors by our sys
tem, than there is in the Aiissionary
Union.
Well then*, if the’ Northern strifes
were fiercest nnder'a system radically
defective in principle,*and totally un
like our own, to maintain that similar
strifes must follow among us is a plain
non sequitur —an inference not war
ranted by the premises..*
But in this latter oase of
and discord,& the agitation was occa
sioned, as linger the convention, by the
slavery question, which led to a di
vision among Northern Baptists, and
inaugurated the “Free Mission Socie
ty.- ’ This Society will not even re
ceive the of slaveholders
for These events, - however,
are so fresh in the memories of Bap
tists generally, that further remark is
unnecessary... ,
We have argued thus far on the
ground that there might have been a
failure under the Triennial Convention
system, with the view of proving that
the failure need be chargeable to
the system itself, and if resulting from
the systems of the North, the same
consequences need not necessarily fol
lewja the South. How have suc
ceeded, the reader m%st judge.
We examine, in the some
proofs of failure in the South, which
Dr. Crawford states as follows :
But from these evils, present
and to come, our system has failed to
develop the resources of the churches
either in spirituality, pecuniary con
tributions, or missionary laborers.—
Our missionary operations are very lit
tle, if at all, brought to bear on the
spirituality of the churches. The con
MACON, WEfltoAY, MARCH 31, 1859.
- ■ ---- . 7
” - 1 s
stant cry of and
Agents, attests of con
tributions, and tbe cr istcorifirme'd by
the Treasurer’s Peprts. And ft hen
where are the missiliaries ? In vain
the exile in China ali Africa calls to
his native land in yain
our committees advdtise for mission
aries for Africa andjke Indian. \
We must say, tha Dr. Crawforeji is
the most unmercifu man on a system
of whom we have ei ir-read. The sys
tem must cjp everytl ng, and tyear the
blame for all that is left updone. Jt
must spiritualize ths>hurches, increase
pecuniary contributing, and multiply
laborers; and theft T “the exiles in
China and Africa their native
land in vain for recrulfi, and commit
tees advertise for. with
out getting them, must be
soundly berated inefficiency.—
Now, did
system:—■
We should as-sfjwav^expected a
wagdn to haul wnmpt lio/ses and a
driver, as a system without in
telligent, energetiq a£ehtß. The fact
is, we have been actustomed to regard
a system rather as rule to act by, than
the actor itself. JjPd we should hard
ly have vpntured 9 intimate that it
could develop the {spirituality” of the
churches in the liefiring of “hardshell”
Baptists. In \xe have all along
believed that of the
churches is the frnltjk the Holy Spir
it; and it that D r - Craw
ford thinks so another part
of his article lie language:
We do indeed nßa a much larger
endowment ofSMwirit of the gospel;
but*that is not to be re
ceived througkflßi ventions, boards or
agencies. W
The spirit qf the
gospel is not to. B received through
conventions, boarwrpr agencies* But
these are three elJuents of onr system,
and yet you system had failed
to develop thespijetuality of the church
es 1 Why blamp the system for failing
to do that *WhiclV you say it lias no
power to do ? Isfeot this a’ little un
generous { r* ;
He also thoi
Ta not
niary > and-j#
,^ L -. manfullyU|^^^ aS j^J
ber thoughtA’ asiwe when the/
fear struck him -that the convention
men might claim credit to the conven
vention for all that had been dqne in a
missionary way : A
.It liberality exists any where on the
subject of missions, it is the fruit of the
Holy Spirit: our organizations only
furnish a it to flow in. ,
Again we askf*if liberality is “the
fruit of the Holyippirit,” why censure
the system for ft “the pe
cuniary contribvifens” of the church
es? Why dry upM“fe channel” through
which contributpM “flow,” and turn
it into a deyelowi£ agent \ _
But our changed his views
wh-h respect to’The
scriptural w r ay obtain an increase of
laborers. At first he 9colds the system
for not developing “missionary labor
ere,” hut subsequently concluded that
laborers might perhaps be more cer
tainly procured in this manner;
Let us loftk to the Holy Spirit for the
spirit of the gospel;*let ns pray for la
borers; let us devote ourselves through
grace to the work to which w T e are call
ed, and we shall need no such ma
chinery as we have beep using.
We have here a second edition of
paradoxes. .The Dr.-asserts thqt the
system by which Southern baptists
pro.secute missions, has failed todevel
op the spirituality^ f the
cuniary contributes or missionary
laborers, on it, that
all such developments are the effects of
the. Holy Spirit—that we must look to
him for spirituality and lo
hovers! He eyen pastors for
allowing agents of the boards to in
struct their churSfjs, and then scolds
the convention sy/j(tem for-not having
done what he would not allow it to do!
Just read the following:
For my own part, I expeot never to
find a pastor properly imbued with
the spirit of the gospel, who delivers
over to an agent of the
Board the dutyll nstructing or ex
horting, or stimuting his people un
der the commission to “teach all na
tions ;” nor under the same circum
stances do I expect to see a church
either recognizeqrdo its duty.
- Were we notJßhthi saying, that
Dr. Crawford i^KllW^krttierciful man
on a systeiifef ds it last hand
and foot and it to workL
He forbids it that
which to the Holy
Spirit, and thenMlLd rend it in pieces
for its brother ought
not to have “imperfectly”
on a question o,fdßmuch importance,
but as he has hoth sides of
the subject, we will allow Crawford to <
T nenali£#’’
another point.
He next announces the persistency
of agents and secretaries in urging the
churches to liberality as another proof
of the failure of our system, and yet
they have done nothing more thaii Dr.
Crawford expected that the system
would do—namely, tried to develop
the contributions of the churches.—
Paul one of the most indefatigable
agents of his day. We doubt if any
modern agents ever surpassed him in
the fervor and power of his appeals
for money. He had undertaken an
agency whose obj ectwas to carry the suf
fering saints,*t Jerusalem through a
pinching famine, nor did he remit his ’
efforts till the work was accomplished.
The apostolic churches were slow in
the matter of 3 church but
the —that
ties, it improbable, wereiu-JbrCeduced
by the remembered events of tydia’s
baptism, the baptism of the jailer, the
earthquake, and the rough usage which
Paul and Silas received just prior to
the constitution of their church. If
then, agencies were necessary ‘in the
apostolic age, why object to them now?
A writer in the North West, who seems
to have studied the subject very thor
oughly, remarks:
The Agency is the connecting link
between the Societies and the Church
es. Jn our opinion every attempt to
dispense with it will prove an esseutial
impracticability,and leave things worse
than ever,
This, too, is our own matured opin
ion, and now, as Dr. Welsh once said,
as “agents are the best abused men,
and the best men abused that the
churches have ever known,” let us
rather encourage them in their work
and labor of love. It alj. the churches
were impressed with the importance
of missions as Dr. Crawford is,
might do without agents.
He says:
“No department of Christian labor
stirs my heart like that which proposes
to-give the gospel to every creature.”
I How a brother with such views and
feeliiMß can coolly propose a dissolution
before he has _sup
r” with a better system of
is onoof those curious
Problems wi* have no solit-
Jfcon.
Crawford “spys nothing of the
expense of our so
far as to intimate that it exceeds the
good accomplished by its biennial
meetings. But we will let him speak
himself 3 .
I say nothing of the expense of sus
taining our Convention and Boards: 1
ft may well be questioned, however,
whether the meeting of the Conven
tion produces good to compensate; for
the expense. I believe, however, thlat
the Board are economical, careful, and
’trustworthy in their disbursements of
the snips committed to them.
But we submit: is it not a small mat- 4
ter to make so much ado about the
few dollars that each delegate expends
to attend a convention of his brethren
once in two years l We were not at
all surprised to see such reasons pub
lished by others, but we had no right
to expeqt them from Dr. Crawford.
Qur brother next asks a question
which, we think, we shall be able to
answer, ft is in these words:
Are two missionaries made more
efficient because they obtain their com
mission from the same Board, than
they would be if sent independently ?
Their appointment by one controlling
body qertainly has not led to the har
mony of action and feeling which we
might have expected.
We do not know that they would
“be more efficient,” but we believe
they would act more harmoniously if
their’ appointments came from “one
controlling body.” In the whole his
tory of our Southern Convention, we
remember but one case of difficulty
between a missionary and one of our
boards, and that was easily disposed
of, and we should think, in a manner
satisfactory to all lovers of justice, hon
or, and morality. Disputes between
missionaries are much more easily ad
justed when the missionaries on the
same field hold their appointments
from the same Board than from differ
ent Boards. A case occurred last
year which was easily managed
by the Board, and to the satisfaction
of both parties.
The Goshen Association has been ci
ted as a model of independent action.
It is a nofte body, but it could not
work on the foreign mission field ex
cept throtfgtfsome such central agen
cy as our Convention Boards. It
raises about $5,000 a year for missions,
one-fifth of which would have to be ex
expended in machinery but for those
Boards. Dr. Crawford asks: “What
body is more efficient ?” We answer
that the General Association of Vir
ginia, is more efficient, or at least •
equally efficient, and that is organised I
Convention.
But our brother hajS‘”anbther ques
tion to ask, and it indicates his
tion to Board insbnictiooflHH^^^l
The missionary is called by the StSy
SpTfit to Africa or the Indian Territo
ries; what need of a Board to instruct
him?..
As the same sentiments were a<J*
advanced by the Tennessee Baptist,
we subjoin Dr. Jeter’s answer to that
objection':
“5. You reiterate your opinion,
that the Board have no right to con
trol this labor of missionaries. The
Boar iriave no right to compel any man
.tc| Serve them, and they claim no such
rights but if they desire to send a mis
sionary to Africa or China, to perform
a specific work, can they not rightful
ly engage a brother to go, andperform
the service, and then he
iball fulfill thrrcnraiaoc:
-oLTrustees employ a minister, as an
ligent to collect funds, can they not
prescribe to him bis fit Id of and
mode of laboring? Or if a church em
ploy a pastor, can they not reasonably
direct him as to the time and place of
his labors? And in such cases do min
isters relinquish their just rights?—
Please say, Messrs. Editors, if the For
eign Mission Board appoint a mission
ary to labor in China, can lie properly
go to Australia, and draw his support
from the Board? Or, if lie preach
Universalism, or Socinianism, must
the Board continue to furnish the means
of his support? The right of controll
ing missionaries must reside in the ap
pointing power.”
Now if the editor of the Tennessee Bap
tist as the agent of Union University,
and Dr. Crawford as the agent for
Mercer University, have no instruc
tions, they are exceptions to the gen
eral rule, and the exceptions are doubt
less based on the unbounded confi
dence which the trustees of those in
stitutions have in their agents. The
fact is, this clamor against Board in
structions will not bear serious exami
nation. Take away this right of
Boards, and we disorganize at once all
our religious and educational enterpri
ses. No man wielded the one man
power with more inflexible rigidity
while at the head of Brown University
than Dr. Way land, and now his pam
phlet is the text book against South
ern Board instructions. Some have
so far as to that the
Boards appoint the delegates to the
Convention , which only shows how lit
tle they know ot the subject oft which
they write.
Having followed Dr. Crawford thro’
the details of his objections, we now
deny bis proposition, that “the system
has been ineffectual And in proof
s os our denial wo,shall first quote from
the History of American Missions, by
Prof. Gammell. He says of mis
sionaries:
“The success they have attained has
been different in different countries,
but with scarcely an exception it has
been proportioned to the directness ol
the efforts which have been made to
press the truths of the gospel upon the
attention of the people.”
In his closing remarks he bears tes
timony as follows:
“They have extended from country
to country, and from continent to con
tinent, until they are now engaged in
promulgating the doctrines of the Bi
ble in the languages of eighteen differ
ent portions of the human race.”
Now, here is the testimony of a dis
tinguished scholar, who was, and may
be now, a Professor in the same Uni
versity of which Dr. Way land was the
President. His testimony is endorsed
by Drs. Sharp, Cone, and Chase —all
men of mark in their day. Is not the
united testimony of these four distin
guished ministers as good, to say the
least of it, as the opinion of Dr. Way
land?.’ “
But “let facts he subnmtedt o a can
did world.” In Burmah, besides thou
sands of converts, Dr. .Hartwell tells
us “the Bible has been translated into
the language of twenty millions of
people.” In Germany, there are scores
of Baptist churches where hut a few
years since there were none. In Chi
na, Hindoostan, and Africa, the work
of evangelization is advancing. In
the Indian Territory, under our own
Domestic Board, there are seven white
preachers with twelve hundred Indian
Baptists and twenty-five native preach
ers. Texas, which promises to be a
noble Baptist State, owes much, yea,
nearly her all to our Converition. We
need not speak of the success of our
English Baptist brethren. Their sta
tistics wofuld iminen^ely‘ swell the ag
gregate of v?e have given
facts enough.
xlnd this, brother Crawford, isjthe
‘failure you speak of! “Then,” as said
a T?ite writer, “is Christianity itself a
failure.”, Then were the seven church
es of Asia a failure. Then were the
scattered Baptists in the Alpine val
leys a failures Then are thousands of
churches in oiir towns and cities a fail
ure. Then is evefy system of evangel-
J p vi ADvERTISING.
.. A s an inedlnm, the unrivalledcireula*
Meta ma * es it one of th * value* -
One Dollar per square
U-w an snSae uent b ‘ cen * s P er *q&are
|§ATjyffS CONTRACT ADVERTISEMENTS,
ggsqfirie of 10 lines per 3 months, 4 oo’
m: > Vo . i “*vv• - 7oo
LlThese lines-are the text, “and* the
Fcharge is for the space occupM such lines u
used in the body of an advertisement. Longer
in same ratio. ■ h.
Number 13,1
\ m '.~’
-L Hwl ii | moyi’t?, v.'hich may chance to
reverse*.
L exchange the results
have followed the labors of mis
spoharies under our convention sys
tems,for the Cimmerian darkness which
blooded as the pall of death over hea
then lands before they went thither ?
Would you send twelve hundred Cher
okees-|-who went from our own Geor
gia—hack into barbarianism ?If not,
thea talk no more of failures.
We make one more remark and take
leave of the subject. It is this: the
objections which would dissolve the
Southern Baptist Convention, would
destroy the Georgia Baptist Conven
tion, the Sunday School Union, the
American Bible Union, and all bodies
similarly organized. So then we shall
vfrait with as much patience as we can
jjamipand, for the war of words, the_
i — 1
missions. •
Female Infidelity.
Os all the heart aching sights which
must be witnessed in a lost world, the
spectacle of a woman ridiculing the re
ligion of the Bible, is the most painful.
Os all the shameful things of which
men esn be guilty in a world distin
guished by unmanly and sinful acts,
we think the most humiliating is to
see men, by their presence and appro
bation, encouraging woman to degrade
herself, and defile that softened and
reflected image of her Creator, which
is only loveliest in his praise. What
ever elevates the female sex, socially,
intellectually, or morally, is the result
of religion, and is due to the Bible.—
The age of chivalry was no exception,
and which of our country women would
exchange the refined and dignified po
sition of a Christian lady, for the spark
ling depravity of the drawing rooms
of a Scarron or ‘De L’Enclos; where a
Deity was unknown or derided ; and
where wits like Yoltaire, or moralists
like De la Rochefoucald, led poor,
dy, flaunting women, like sacrifices
adorned with garlands, amid the in-
cense of flattery, and the sound of mu- ( jj
sic, to a shrine of deepest degradation ?
There is, indeed, no morality, no reli
able or permanent social advance, or
intellectual eminence, except—as-eon
nected with the knowledge of thojji
ble, tlje practice of teachings,“aW^—
the worship of the one living and true
God, whom it reveals to ns. And in
all misrule and disorganization, the
weaker suffers first and most, so will
the earliest and heaviest blows fall upon
the female sex, when the laws of God
are trampled under foot by men.—
Home—her sanctuary, is invaded and
destroyed, and she—“ like a wander
iug bird cast out of the nest”—may in
deed gain a momentary applause, or
haply a caress, as her bright plumes
glance in the sunlight; but they will
soon drop and trail in the dust.
Every interest, and every impulse
of a woman is concerned, to sustain, by
her faith and her example, the influ
ence of the Christian Religion. The
sacred ties of home, and the social po
sition to which she has been raised, and
which she adorns, as the companion
and co-laborer of man, depend as much
upon it, as depends the eternal welfare
of her spirit, when it is beyond the
cares, delights, duties, and disabilities
of the present sphere.
These remarks have been suggested
by the report of the speech of a woman
named Ernestine tL. Rose, at the din
ner which was eaten last week in mem
ory of Thomas Paine. Sad spedtacle!
and sadder words.
“ Mrs. Rose said that if we were to
measure Paine’s talents and services
by the fervency of the slanders and
persecutions which have followed him,
we'might call him a great man. He
was permitted to die a natural death ;
and the laws of the country did not al
low decapitation ; but he is not per
mitted to rest in his grave. Pronounce
your own opinions publicly and you
will see whether you will he spared
more than Paine was. [Great ap
plause.] Government has annulled
the divorce between Church and State,
and now Chaplains pray upon Con
pie. [Cries of ‘Oh, oh,’ and laughter:} \
Here, in the Empire City, in the Em
pi re State, the same religious intoler
ance is seen. The Bible, a bookJunfit *
for children, is forced uffon them in
the Public Schools, despite the honest
convictions of many citizens. If the
theatre does not take to the ministers,
the ministers have taken to the theatre;
and since Burton’s has been transform- \
ed into a sanctum sanctorum, it is but
fair, while bad actors have become
good Christians, that good Ministers
should bcome bad actors. [LaughteL]
‘But,’ said Mrs. It., ‘it is the richest
thing for the clergy IS be afraid of
sophistry when they stand at the foun
tain-head whence all sophistry flows.’ ”
Chronicle.