Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

„ 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