Newspaper Page Text
„ THE CHRISTIAN INDEX,
PUBLISHED EVERY WEDNESDAY MORNING
AT MACON, GEORGIA,
BY A COMM I TTEE OF BRETHREN,
FOR THE
.’jftriwMA BAPTIST CONVENTION.
TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION,
Two Dollars in advance: or paid within the year.
If suffered to overrun the Dollars and
one-half will be charged in all cases.
SAMUEL BOYKIN, Emtor.
VOLUME XXXIX.
Introductory Remarks
of Dr. J. S. Baker to the Headers of
. the Index , prefatory to his articles
on th j Rights of the Ch urches.
Dear Brethren and Friends :
I have sent herewith to the Editor
of the Index the first of the series of
articles on the “Rights of Churches,”
Sc c., which I have engaged tojvrite, in
compliance with his special request. I
ask permission to preface that series
a few-worda to you, and I wish
of you to consider my re
-marks as addressed to you individual
ly ; and
1. Allow trie to assure you that my
object is not to sustain any existing
party, either in our own denomination
or out of it. Neither is it my design
or desire to build up a new party to
rush in and bear away the spoils over
which existing parties are squabbling.
The existence of parties, in either
church or State, is most sincerely to
be deprecated. Disguise it as we may,
there is ever something wrong in eith
er the head or the hearts of those who
originate or help to carry on a partizan
warfare. The man who can see no er
ror in those with whom he co-operates
is not to be trusted , he is deficient in
intellect. lie who sees the errors of
his friends, but, for party purposes,
labors to conceal or excuse them, is not
to be trusted ; he is deficient in chris
tian virtue—in moral honesty.
The maxim of one of old, “ Amicus
Socrates , amicus Plato, sed magis arn
ica veritas" —(“Socrates is my friend,
Plato is my friend, but truth is a friend
I prize more highly than either,”)
should be adopted as his motto by ev
ery one who engages in religious dis
cussions. I shall endeavor to act in
accordance with it,in the investigations
in which I have engaged. Think not,
therefore, dear readier, should I contest
the truth of any views that you have
formed or promulgated, that I have
therefore become your enemy, or ceas
ed to respect you as a friend and Chris
tian brother. Think only this, that my
love for truth is more ardent than
•my love for you. Would you have it
■otherwise? If you would, then a fig
for your friendship! I deem your en
mity more to be desired than your
friendship.
2. I am fully sensible of my liability
to err. 1 claim no superiority to you
in any respect. I ask of no one to a
dopt any views that I may exhibit un
less, alter due examination, he finds
them to be correct. If he linds them
to be correct, and is a Christian broth
er, I shall expect him to adopt them
cordially, however different they may
be from views which he had previous
ly entertained. If he finds them to be
erroneous, I shall expect him not only
to reject them, but to expose whatev
er is erroneous in them. I shall be
thankful to either friend or foe to point
out any thing that may appear to him
defective in my premises, or illogi
cal in my deductions. And Ido not
ask him to defer to do so until I have
completed my series. If I fall into er
ror it cannot be pointed out too soon.
A prompt exposure of it may save me
from much unprofitable labor and last
ing mortification. It may also prevent
its diffusion to any considerable extent.
Were you to discover that the founda
tion on which I was essaying to rear a
costly fabric was unsound, and failed
to notify me of the fact until I had
completed that fabric, I certainly could
not consider you as a faithful friend,
but as a latent foe. What greater in
jury could an enemy do me?
Point out my errors, point them out
promptly, point them out publicly, if
you please; but do not go about and
secretly defame your brother, impugn
his motives, and seek to depreciate
what you cannot disprove. Beware —
do it not, “for a bird of the air shall
carry the voice and that which hath
wings shall tell the matter so says
the word of God. Your sin will be
found out sooner or later.
3. In our investigations of religious
truth we are all of us prone to allow
ourpreposessions and prejudices and
past practices and apparent interests to
bias our minds. I shall seek to guard
against these, and hope you will do the
same. If we sacrifice truth—the least
particle of Gospel truth—for any
worldly or temporary purposes, we
shall inflict a great injury on ourselves
and on others. The benefits derived
from error are transient; the injuries
it inflicts are abiding. They will be
felt by unborn generations. The re
verse is true of truth. We shall soon
pass away; but the influence of the
principles to which we give our sanc
tion, be they good or bad, will contin
ue forever —it will be felt through eter
nity. Solemn thought! It should
make us tremble with apprehension
lest we mistake error for truth. Truth
enlightens, error blinds; truth sancti
fies, error defiles; truth saves, error
kills. May the Spirit of truth guide us
into all truth. J. S. B.
Curiosities of the Census. —Among the cu
riosities discovered by the census-takers, is a
pretty little girl of fifteen, in the southern part
of Mars >n, New York, who has a husband one
hundred and seven years of age.
$38,003. —The Treasurer of the State, has
received the sum of £38,000 from the Treasu
rer of the State Road, from the earning of the
Road for th<? month of September.
Serious Accident. —Yesterday morning as
the six o’clock frieght train on the State Road
was leaving this place, a wood passer was in
the act of getting off the tender to adjust some
thing about the engine, when his foot slipped
and he was precipitated on the track. The
wheels passed over his thigh severing it com
pbtely. The physician who attends him has
no hopes of his recover}’. We understand
tbs t ti e name of the unfortunate man 3
M6rri&
#rgan Conknfion: hfoofefc to Htissmns, Itligmn, anil % Interests of % baptist Denomination.
THE RIGHTS OF CHURCHES AS
sociated and unassociated: a dis
passionate discussion conducted on
Scriptural principles , in which will
he noticed the contending views of
various writers , and which will en
deavor to establish the correct sys
tem of Church Polity.
BY J)R. J. 8. BAKER.
Article 1.
SCRIPTURAL APPLICATION OF
THE WORD CHURCH.
Before proceeding to discuss the
rights of churches, it is important to
ascertain the scriptural application of
the term “church,” and to form a de
finite idea of that which is designated
by the term. In recent discussions,
some good brethren have fallen into
error by using the term church in dif
ferent senses in the same argument.—
They haveused it in one sense in their
premises, and in altogether a different
sense in their conclusions. This was
done, I presume, inadvertently. The
consequences of such inadvertency,
however, are fatal. They who are guil
ty of it are confirmed in their error,
and they unintentionally lead others
to commit the same. There are three
senses in which it is admitted, by all
parties, that the term church is used :
1. To designate any assembly of per
sons gathered together, without refer
ence to the object for which they are
convened. Thus it is applied to the
people of Israel congregated in the
wilderness: “This is he that was in the
church, (ecclesia,) in the wilderness,”
Ac., Acts vii: 38. It is also applied
to the rabble that was excited against
Paul by Demetrus, the silversmith.
“Some therefore cried one thing, and
some another : for the assembly (ec
clesia) was confused.” Acts xix : 32.
2. The term is applied to the re
deemed both in heaven and earth.—
“Husbands love your wives, even as
Christ also loved the church, and gave
himself for it, that might sanctify
and cleanse it with the washing of wa
ter, by the word; that he might pre
sent it to himself a glorious church,
not having spot,” &c., Eph. v: 25-27.
“But ye are come * * * to the general
assembly and church of the first born,
which are written in heaven,” Ac.
Heb. xii: 22—33. Other passages
might be cited in which the same ap
plication of the term church is mad
but the foregoing is deemed sufficient
both for proof and illustration.
3. The term is applied to a congre
gation of baptized believers worship
ping in one place.* Thus we read of
the church at Jerusalem; Acts viii: 1;
the church at Antioch ; Acts xiii: 1 ;
the church at Babylon; (supposed to
be Rome:) 1 Pet. v: 13; the church
at each of the following places: Ephe
sus, Smyrna, Pergamos, Thyatira, Sar
dis, Philadelphia and Laodicea. Rev.
ii: 1,8, 12, IS; iii: 1,7, 14; 1 Cor.
1, 2 ; Col. iv: 16. We also read of
churches in the houses respectively of
Priscilla and Aquila; Rom. xvi: 5
1 Cor. xvi: 19; ofNymphas; Col. iv:
15 ; of Philemon ; Philem 2.
Drs. Dagg and Mell, and other
learned brethren, contend that the
above are the only applications made
of the term church in the New Testa
ment. With the most profound res
pect for the brethren named, and with
due deference to the Opinions of all
from whom I may chance to differ, I
will venture to express my own views
in reference to this matter.
It appears to me that there is a fourth
scriptural application of the term
church, viz: To the faithful on earth
generally—to the disciples cf Christ
as a separate and peculiar people, in
contradfttinction to the people of the
world, who were not professed follow
ers of Christ.
It appears clear to my mind that the
term is used repeatedly in the sacred
writings, without s direct reference to
any particular organization. I will
give a few examples: “concerning
zeal, persecuting the church.” Phil,
iii: 6. “Feed the church o&God
which he hath purchased with his own
blood.” Acts xxii: 28. “For I am
at least of the apostles, that am not
meet to be called an apostle, because I
persecuted the church of God.” 1 Cor.
xv: 9.
To ascertain the signification of the
term in these passages, we have simply
to inquire, “Whom did Paul persecute?
Before we answer this question, let us
refer to the commission under which
he acted. That commission is not
now’ extant, but Ananias, through
whom his sight was restored, and by
whom he was baptized, testifies, that
it gave him “authority * * *to bind
all that call upon thy name.” Actsix:
14. Is additional testimony called
for? We have it. The cotemporaries
of Paul—they who witnessed his acts
and attended on his ministry—testify,
that he “destroyed them which called
on this name, (the name of Jesus) in
Jerusalem, M and that he went to Da
mascus with the same “intent, that he
might bring them, (those who called
on the name of Jesus,) bound unto the
chief priests.” v : 21.
From this testimony it is evident
that it was not an amorphous rabble
like that referred to in the first defini
tion of the term church; nor a regular
ly organized body, with definite limits,
like those referred to in the second and
third specifications, that Paul persecu
ted ; but individual men and women,
frotessed disciples of Christ. To them,
repeat, and not to any organic body
is the term church applied, in the pas
sages cited to prove a fourth applica
tion of the term.
MACON, GA., WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1860.
Paul could not have designed by the
use of the term church to designate a
rabble, for he acted with the rabble
and not against it.
He could not have designed to de
signate “the church of the first born,
wliich are written in heavenfor that
church has no local habitation on’
earth, and Paul’s operations were car
ried on against tenants of earth. A
majority of “the church of the first
born are in heaven; and where he ma
jority is assembled there is the church.
A persecution of individual members
of this church could with no more pro
priety be said to be a persecution of
the church itself, than a persecution of
indivi iual members of Congress, resi-
r o /
dent in “Georgia, or in any, or all of the
States, could be said to be a persecu
tion of Congress.
It follows, then, as an unavoidable
conclusion, either that the term church,
as used in scripture, admits of more
than three applications, or that the
apostle Paul, in the passages cited from
him, refers to a particular local church.
But it is evident that the apostle
Paul could not have had a special ref
erence to any particular local church ;
for he persecuted the disciples of
Christ not only at Jerusalem, but else
where —wherever he fouud any that
“called on this name”—the name of
Jesus.
The logical inference is, that the
apostle Paul used the term church in
a sense different from either of the
three senses before specified, to which
some of our able writers and excellent
brethren would restrict it.
I will only add that these able and
excellent brethren often knock into
f i their theories by their own practice,
n the r common conversation, and in
their writings on general subjects, they
often use the term church in perfect
conformity with what I have represen
ted as a fourth scriptural application
of it. They speak and write of “the
church and the world,” designing to
designate thereby professors and non
professors, as met with in their daily
ministrations.*
Allow me to say, in conclusion, that
I do not consider the position I have
taken, in reference to a fourth applica
tion of the term church, one of most
practical importance ; I shall not there
fore consume much time in defending
it, if assailed. I wish to devote the lit
tle time I have at my command to the
discussion of more important points.—
In my next article I shall write on a
more interesting subject. Tbe organ
ization of gospel churches, ‘j l . 8. B.
Note.*
“Alas! to think how people’s creed’s
Are contradicted by people’s deeds.”
[Tom Hood.
JUDSON: THE MODERN APOS
TLE.
A SKETCH OF HIS LIFE, LABORS AND CHARACTER.
BY J. M. CLARK.
Article First.
Introductory Remarks—lnfidel views
—A Father's sternness and a Moth
er's tears— A Friend's Death-bed —
Change of Heart —Surrender to God
and to his cause.
Too high a tribute cannot well be
paid to the moral, religious and intel
lectual character of such a man as
Judson. It is difficult for us to elevate
ourselves to that stand-point from
which we can properly realize the full
measure of his greatness, or appreciate
the lofty, heavenly motives that in
spired him to action. An age pro
duces but one Judson; and it requires
not prophecy to foretell that history,
will assign him the same, or even a
higher rank among the great and good,
as that so worthily occupied by Wes
ley and Whitfield of the past century,
orßunyan and Baxter of the one pre
ceding. His purposes were lofty, his
ambition noble, his piety the most de
voted and unobtrusive. These high
and exalted qualities uniting in a mind
of great and comprehensive power,
and stimulated by a never flagging
and untiring energy, prepared him
for the accomplishment of great
and daring purposes. These combina
tions of moral, intellectual and physi
cal qualities, so happily and harmo
niously blended, would have elevated
him to the front rank in any depart
ment of law, letters or statesmanship.
He would have shone, conspicuously,
in the Senate, at the Bar, or in the
more retired and classical walks of
science and letters ; and would have
left a history in which success
would have.been written upon every
page. In another field, with fewer of
the plaudits of men, in a life of hard
ship and toil, of self-sacrifice and pri
vation, he has acquired a name and a
renown, that will command respect as
long as there are heathen to save, and
as loDg as Burmah has a place on the
records of nations.
Mr. Judson, in early life, gave evi
dence of decided talent of more than
ordinary character. lie graduated at
near twenty years of age, with the
first honor of his class, and with the
distinction of being the first scholar in
the University. He was peculiarly
noted for his acquisition of the lan
guages; and therein was laid the foun
dation for the great work of construc
tion of a barbarous language, and the
translation of the scriptures into it, to
which a great part of his life was ded
icated.
His youthful religious impressions
were of an unsettled and unsatisfacto
ry character. Association and intima
cy with a college companion of bril-
liant talents, disturbed the settled con
victions of his earlier youth, in favor
of the truth of religion ; and he be
came deeply infected with the popular
infidelity of that day. His father, who
was a minister of the Congregational
church, met the irreligious demonstra
tion with a harshness and sternness,
that failed of their proper effect upon
a young man of such iron will and self
reliant mind. The mother was more
successful. She wept and prayed, and
prayed and wept, until his nature soft
ened and yielded to somewhat of con
viction. A mother’s tears and a moth
er’s prayers effected what a father’s
frowns aud a father’s stern logic could
never have accomplished. However
much vain, arrogant man, may doubt
the truths of religion, he cannot, and
will not doubt the piety of a godly
mother. Her persuasiveness of man-”
ner, her earnestness of supplication,
her affectionate warnings, her pathetic
prayers are so many earnest, heart-felt
arguments that infidelity panoplied in
all its boasted array of science, reason
and logic, never can withstand. The
mothers of the land present to this
great enemy of man’s salvation, a bar
rier as impregnable as Gibralter.
In one of his tours through the
Northern States, Judsou accidently
met with his college friend, at a village
tavern, in a dying state. The peculiar
condition of a devoted friend, dying,
without a ray ot hope to illumine the
darkness of the grave, awakened in his
mind the startling realities of religion,
and the necessity of giving himself to
Christ.
His conversion was marked by no
extraordinarj’’ spiritual phenomena.—
It came not like the “rushing of a
mighty wind;” but it was none the less
clear and satisfactory. Through all his
after-life his doubts were fewer than
falls to the lot ot many professors of re
ligion. He came to the throne of
Grace as a sinner—a lost sinner—lost
in time and eternity, and as such,with
the most pungent convictions of sin,
and the clearest realization of its dread
ful consequences, he made an entire
and full surrender of himself to Christ.
It was no partial offering, but a full
oblation, without stint or measure as
to time or service. He gave all to the
Savior; time, talents and labor. Self
was forever renounced; and he was
forever united to Christ his living
head by those ties of love and faith,
joy and gratitude, which neither
“death nor life, nor angels, nor princi
palities, nor powers, nor things pres
ent, nor things to come, nor heighth,*
nor depth, nor any other creature,”
were able to sever. Seeing himself a
lost sinner—driven by the wrath of
God into eternal woe, with no power
to avert the impending doom, without
merit to offer, and viewing, with an
eye of faith, the magnificence and
grandeur and unparalelled mercy of
the great sacrifice made for his re
demption, he vowed an eternal service.
Approximating to the ardor of the
great Apostle to the Gentiles, he pros
trated himself at the feet of the Sa
vior, and humbly asked What he
would have him to do. His desire
was not to be released from service, as
is the custom of Christians of this day;
nor to be sent to this or that highly
favored and inviting field of exertion.
Action , service , labor , were his watch
words- His soul panted for the con
flict. He longed to do something for
his Master; to do the greatest good to
the greatest number in the shortest
ttme, “counting his life not dear,” so
so that he might win souls to Christ,
and thereby glorify his Redeemer. —
To rust out, and pine away in the
shade; to become a spiritual and intel
lectual dwarf for the lack of exertion,
and the want of labor to develope the
highetjifype of Christian character, he
regarded as moral suicide. With a
soul expanding beneath the genial rays
of divine truth; and with an enlarged
faith, that could concentrate all his
intellectual and physical energies, he
sought the indications of Providence ;
and when the Holy Spirit pointed out
to him the vineyard, in which he was
to commence his stewardship, he
buckled on his armor, with that he
roism which soldiers of earth never
feel; and hever did he lay off, until
he laid it off to receive that crown of
glory which the Lord, the righteous
Judge gave him at that day.
REVIEW OF DR. S. G. HILLYJSR’S
EXPOSITION.
BY REV. A. T. HOLMES, D. D.
Math. 16, 19 : 18, 18. John 20, 23.
(Concluded.)
Brother Editor :
Allow me to trouble you with one
more article in review of Dr. Hillyer’s
“Exposition.” In my last I urged the
fact that false premises necessarily lead
to false conclusions. In this I propose
to notice the Dr.’s concessions, and the
contradictions which they involve.
There may be cases —so the expo
sition reads—in which the decision of
one church is not binding upon others.
One church may not draw the same
conclusions from the teachings of God’s
“Statute Book” which another does, or,
she may regard an act as “criminal”
which another does not. In such an
event, the decision of one may be dis
regarded by the other. ‘All have’—
that is the churches—‘an equal, origi
nal and concurrent right to the book,
and to interpret its meaning.” Does
j the Dr. intend to teach us, by this, that
! the right to interpret and the right to
| disregard is true in all cases, except
in cases of discipline ? Or does he,
like some others who have written up
on this and kindred subjects, start
back from the startling tendency of his
doctrine and yielding the whole ground
acknowledge that one church is not
bound to countenance th& wrong de
cision of another ? I presume that as
discipline was the one idea in his mind,
and the Nashville difficulty the illus
tration, he means the former and not
the latter construction. In cases of
discipline, whether the decisions are
right or wrong, whether the churches
agree or differ as to the criminality of
the act, all must be b^und—none may
disregard.
It occurs to me, that the admissions
contained in the Bth conclusion are
strangely contradictory of the position
assumed in the 7th, and of the whole
argument on the point involved. Let
facts be submitted. In the 7th conclu
sion we are told that the decision of a
church, in a case of discipline, is bind
ing upon all others, even when that
decision is not a correct verdict upon
the case. In the Bth conclusion,
we are informed, that in certain cases,
no decision of one church is binding
upon others, whether right or wrong.
Again, in the Bth conclusion, we read
that one church may regard an act as
criminal, and decide accordingly, and
that other churches, not concurring in
opinion as to the criminality of the act,
may disregard any decision predicated
upon the difference of opinion involv
ed. I repeat the remark, that there
appears to be a contradiction in all
this, and certainly I cannot be charg
ed with misrepresentation in the fol
lowing construction of the Dr.’s prop
ositions. The church at A considers an
act criminal. It may be dancing, vis
iting the theatre, playing cards or bil
liards for amusement. The church at
B entertains a different opinion in re
lation to the amusements, and her
members indulge at pleasure. Now,
the church at A having received in
formation that one of her members has
attended the theatre, a dancing or card
party, proceeds to trial, and, upon con
viction of the offender, excludes him.
The church at B,according to the Dr.’s
views, is bound by that decision, and
at the same time is not bound. ‘ln*
the exercise of a sound discretion,’ she
may disregard it, and, at the same
time, she is bound to abide by it. The
excluded member, knowing the opin
ion and practice of the church at B,
seeks fellowship among her members,
and as she does not consider the act
for which he is excluded, condemned
by the ‘Statute Book,’ she may disre
gard the decision of the church at A,
and may receive him. Again, the
church at A does not admit the crimi
nality of departing from the Saviour’s
directions in dealing with a member
who is accused of having trespassed
against a brother. The church at B
regards such departure as positively
sinful. Now, A neglects the directions
given by her only Law-giver, and ar
raigns, tries, condemns and excludes
the brother accused. As B differs, al
together, as to the criminality of such
a course, she may disregard the decis
ion, and hold the church criminal in
that decision, but as A’s adjudication
is ffnal, and her jurisdiction absolute,
B and all other churches must receive
it as binding upon them. This dilem
ma, brother Editor, is the legitimate
consequence of wresting the word of
God, to meet a particular case.
In the fifth number ofthe ‘Exposit
ion’ it is stated that the decisions of a
church are binding for some other rea
son than because they are right. It is
obvious, I think, from this discussion,
and from what abler pens have recent
ly given t4£he public,that the assump
tion is unauthorized, and certainly,
the New Testament affords no warrant
for it, either in precept or practice.—
But what is that other reason ? The Dr.
shall answer for himself. In reply to
the question, ‘why is the decision of a
church binding ?’ the answer is, in his
own language, ‘for this, and for no
other reason—because she has the au
thority to make it.’ This assertion, un
supported as it is, ; s made in full view
of his argument, that decisions are
binding, right or wrong, and subjects
him to the charge of maintaining the
dangerous theory that a church has
authority to do wrong. It I have read
correctly, he contends that a church
has authority to make a decision—that
the decision may be wrong, and wheth
er from ignorance, misapprehension,
presumption or neglect is not to be
cousidered —that wrong as it is, it is
binding upon all other churches, and
for no other reason than that she has
authority to make it. This is the prin
ciple, says the Dr., that covers the
whole question, and meets every issue.
Truly, that is a hard necessity which
requires that wrong must be consider
ed right, and treated as though it were
right, rather than the doomed victims
of a most unrighteous persecution shall
escape the fate intended for him.
But, brother Editor, the Dr. is not
content to oablish his strange and con
flicting views, but intimates, very se
riously, that those who do not adopt
his views, must cease to be Baptists.
Now, sir, I have been a Baptist, by
profession, for about thirty years—a
very unfaithful one, I know—but I
cannot accept the Dr.’s alternative,
for I expect to continue one while I
live, and that too, without subscribing
to what I regard as palpable and dan
gerous error. But that I may not be
accused of garbling or misrepresenta
tion, I will quote the Dr.’s own lan
guage. ‘But what shall we do with
wrong decisions ? This evil is sought
to be remedied in the churches by de
nying the validity of wrong decisions.
But this presupposes a power, some
where, authorized to declare a decision
wrong. If there be such a power,
where is it ? It is claimed that it is
found in a neighboring church. If it
be so, let the chapter and verse, in the
New Testament, be shown where such
a reference of a case of discipline to
another church is authorized or provi
ded for. If this cannot be done, the
advocates of such a reference must
give it up, or cease to be Baptists.’’ —
Were Dr. Hillyer required to give
chapter and verse for the wild theory
which he and his party are endeavoring
to force upon the denomination—that
the decision of one church, right or
wrong, is binding upon all other chur
ches, it would prove essentially, a ‘non
est inventus ’ case, for “with all their in
genuity and perseverance, the nearest
approximation is the inference from
his own astounding dogma, that heav
en is pledged to ratify the wrong de
cision of a church.
Before I close this article, I wish to
notice, more particularly, two positions
which are incidentally urged in the
‘Exposition.’
One, is, that the only reason why
the decision of a church is binding, is
found in the fact that she has authority
to make it. The other is, that there is
no power in a neighboring church to
declare a decision wrong. The ampli
fication which is appended to the sec
ond position, to-wit: that chapter and
verse must be cited, in which refer
ence to another church is provided for,
is a change of the issue. It has never
been claimed nor admitted that one
church shall refer her decisions to an
other.
As respects the first position, that
there is but one reason why the decis
ion of one church is binding upon oth
ers, and that is her authority to make
it, my brother and I differ a little. My
position is, that there is not even one.
The Divine administration contempla
tes no such connection between them.
The will of the Lord Jesus is commu
nicated to them, individually, as tho’
but one church existed upon the earth.
What is law for one, is law for every
one, and thejurisdiction of each church
is defined and limited by her own
membership. There may be confer
ence and consultation between them,
conducted in the spirit of Christian
faithfulness and affection, and result
ing happily, to the parties interested ;
but the very principles of their organ
ization forbids that, under any circum
stances, the action of one should de
termine the action of others. The on
ly true basis of concert between f’fem,
is faithful allegiance to their common
Lord, and that allegiance presupposes
and, necessarily, includes rigid and un
compromising adherence to the laws
of his kingdom. The correct, scriptu
ral decision of one church, demands
the sanction and concurrence of all (
others, not because it is her decision,
or because she has authority to make
it, but because it is correct, and accor
ding to the word of God. Every other
church, under the same circumstances,
having proper respect for the authori
ty of her Law-giver, would make the
same decision. But, if any one church,
either from ignorance, or prejudice, or
from any cause should decide contra
ry to the law designed for all; or
should institute a course ot procedure
in disregard of that law; or should a
dopt a policy resulting from misappre
hension ot that law, where is the pre
cept or example—where the chapter
and verse —which makes it the duty of
other churches to conform to that de
cision? Nay, what possible considera
tion could justify such conformity ?
Certainly, the “Statute Book” affords
no sanction for thus upholding error
and injustice, while the plain common
sense conclusion must be obvious to all,
that to sustain a church in error, and
to act in concert with her, in relation
to that error, is to involve ourselves
in the guilt which that error imposes.
“ For if I build again the things
which I destroyed, I make myself a
transgressor.”—Gal. 2 : 18. I do not
hesitate to affirm, as the honest convic
tion of my judgment, that so far from
the churches of the Redeemer being
bound by the wrong decision of any
particular church, they are most sol
emnly bound, in duty to their rightful
Sovereign, and in vindication of the
purity and propriety of his administra
tion, to rebuke the wrong in such man
ner as may seem most consistent with
the relation which they sustain to Him
and each other. Their allegiance leaves
them no alternative.
The second position, therefore, that
there is no power in a neighboring
church to declare a decision wrong,
cannot be sustained. The obligation
to rebuke the wrong implies the pow
er to do it, and the declaration of a
church, in her church capacity, that
the action of another church is con
trary to law, cannot be, consistently,
regarded as an unwarrantable interfer
ence, nor should it be urged as a just
ground for alienation of feeling. The
world is to be subdued by the truth,
and not by error, and the churches are
to be purified through sanctification
of the Spirit and the belief of the truth.
Where then is the ‘usurpation’ of which
the Dr, complains ? I contend there
is none, and whether the declaration is
made by a church, or by an associa
tion of churches, it is but the discharge
of a duty, and, if made in the spirt of
the gospel, will go far to arrest the
evil consequent upon the erroneous
decision which may have been made.
But, brother Editor, I will tax the
patience of your readers no further.—
To brpther Hillyec, I may be permitted
to say, that our want of agreement, in
regard to certain matters, will make
him none the less welcome to my heart
Terms ot MvcrtflSir
Forltll transientadvertitogg OneDrtilwperisquare
of ten Hoes for 50 cents psrHquare for
all ?übsfeqtient._i)ubHeimon£’^oyߣ ! f’
RATTi FOR CU£i TKACT AJDVKRTIBLSC.
lsqnareofp) t 4 oo
“ “to lines “ 6 , “ ft oo
“ “10 lines *’ 1 year 10 00
Thesellnes are the text advertising lines andtli e
charge is for the stack occupied by ten such linen*
as are used in the body of an advertisement. Tldfe.
geradvertisementsin the same ratio
N. S., VOL. 28, NO. 41.
| and to ray house. I believe him to be
a wise and good man but a blind lea
der tails into the ditch, and he whom
he leads, falls with him. Hoping that
God will bring light out of darkness,
and order out of confusion; and that
the spirit ot our divine Master will a
gain reign in our hearts, to the exclu
sion ol all strife and contention, and
jealousy aud evil-speaking, I will, most
respectfully, take my leave ofDr.Hill
yer’s Exposition.
4 SABBATH SCHOOLS.
No. 9.
TEACHING.
ery large truths may be gotten in
to very small minds,when divested of
large, lumbering expressions. Sim
plicity and intelligibility of verbage
will secure accurate conceptions of the
most profound subjects. Suppose it is
desired to make a young mind under
stand its position towards G‘>d ; it is
indispensable to do something more
than to tell it, “you are a sinner.” It
will laugh as cheerfully, romp as vio
lently,.and sleep as quietly as if told it
was an “inheritor of the kingdom of
God.” There is a previous step to be
taken ; it must be informed what sin
is. The language of the Catechism,
though the language of scripture, “sin
is the transgression of the law,” wfll
not give any idea to a very young
child. “Transgress! V’ is too hard a
word, and “iaw” needs defining,
should the instructor stop at the lan
guage ot the Catechism, his labor is
lost. To accomplish his end, he must
simplify. Let him say, sin is not doing
what God says—you have not done
what God says, and
Any
Bfl
■ i ‘V nwt'ir *’ •
V"U to lon* 1 it to t
died tor our sins.
Very many volumes BBFISr
have been written on Faitlq^Hpi^
attempt has been more succet&funn
giving a proper idea of it, than the
following article. I give the sub
stance : A father coming home one
winter’s night, found his little girl
neatly attired, with a beautiful pearl
necklace on her fair throat, sitting De
fore a blazing coal fire. The pareftt’s
heart was stirred with something
more than
fire ! ‘
face, anand
t * the ilames. No explai^HS| 7 c
then a-ked and m he 1 *
tie daughter _> ecu]>yii•:
Taking from his pocket
bound around her neck a
ment, and corresponding bracelets on
her arms. After beholdiug her wild
delight, and receiving “many, many
thanks,” he reverted to the scene of
the previous evening, and asked her,
how it was she 60 promptly obeyed his
seemingly cruel command. “Because
I trusted your love, sir.” “This is
faith , my dear. Trust the We of
your Savior, as
is
i . av o •
iv*paired t > explain 1
!.• k: and :ati
This .s true of all but
Mere memoriter recitationWßpF
be avoided and just here
be given against the practice f
premiums for the largest nun
verses committed to memory. It
waste of time, a
pupils energies, and the
ot unholy motives for learnnßHwr’
}y the word of <iod.
to stud} 7 but few verses, and
import. Such course will interest,
6truct, and tend to salvation.
Catechetical instruction is as poor a
mode of imparting instruction as can
be pursued. Besides the objection of
presenting information in titbits, it
generally presents facts, not in their
connection with other facts, as a law of
mind demands, but wholly isolated.—
Pupils thus taught are imperfectly in
structed, and are unable to retain wbat
thev have recited even for a few weeks.
It cannot be otherwise.
When the pupil cannot read, oral
instruction should be afforded. There
should be but one text book for all who
can read-, and this book should be the
Bible. Helps there should be, and the
very best for teachers and pupils are
a concordance, Bible Dictionary, Bib
lical antiquities, ancient Atlas, and
Commentary.
In studying subjects, repentance
for example, the concordance should
be mainly used. This directs the stu
dent to all the passages bearing upon
it. “Scripture best explains scrip
ture.” This method frees one from
the crudities written upon this theme,
and gives the unadulterated teachings
of the Holy Spirit. The Commentary
should be employed only in those ca
ses where the rendering of the text is
doubtful, or difficult to be understood.
In acquainting ourselves with the
lives and characters of scriptural per
sonages, the method above recommen
ded, should be rigidly observed. To
understand character, the whole life
must be known. If the attention be
directed principally to a prominent
fault or virtue, men will appear either