Newspaper Page Text
CHRISTIAN IN DM AND SOUTH-WESTERN BAPTIST.
V OL. 48-NO. 41.
A RELIGIOUS AND FAMILY PAPER.
PUBLISHED WEEKLY IE ATLANTA. GA
TERMS.—CIubs of Four, ($3.00 each) per annum...sl2 00
Clubs of Three, ($3.33 each) per annum... 10.00
Clubs of Two, (3.50 each) per annum 7.00
Single Subscriber 4-00
J. J. TOON", Proprietor.
Au Old Hymn.
In the Life of Rev. Andrew Fuller, the following
hymn is referred to, aa being a favorite of that eminent
man during the latter penaive years of his life; and
especially as being often repeated while pacing his room
in the agonies of his last illness. Is this gem of mod
ern origin, say within the last two hundred years; or
is it, like “Jerusalem, my Happy Home,” a translation
of one of the Latin hymns of the early Church 7
I sojourn in a vale of tears,
Alas I how can I sing?
My harp doth on the willows hang,
'Distuned in every string.
My music is a captive’s chain ;
Harsh sounds my ears do fill;
How shall I sing sweet Sion’s song,
On this side Sion’s hillT
Yet lo! I hear a joyful sound;
“Surely I quickly come!”
Each word much sweetness doth distill,
Like a full honeycomb.
And dost Tbou come, my dearest Lord ?
And dost Thou surely come ?
And dost Thou surely, quickly come?
Methinks I am at home.
Come, then, my dearest, dearest Lord,
My sweetest, surest friend ;
Come, for I loathe these Kedar tents ; ,
Thy fiery chariots send.
What have I here? My thoughts and joys
Are all packed up and gone;
My eager soul would follow them
To thine eternal throne.
What have I in this barren land ?
My Jesus is not here;
Mine eyes will ne'er be blessed until
My Jesus doth appear.
My jesus is gone up to heaven.
To get a place for me;
For ’tis His' will that where He is
There should His servants be.
Canaan I view from Pisgah’s top,
Os Canaan’s grapes I taste ;
My Lord, who sends unto me here,
'Will send for me at last.
I have a God that changeth not,
Why should I be perplexed?
Mv God that owns me in this world,
'Will own me in the next.
Go fearless, then, my soul, with God,
Into another room;
Thou, wlio hast walked with Him here,
Go see thy God at home.
View death'with a believing eye ;
It hath an angel’s face:
And this kind angel will prefer
Thee to an angel’s place.
The grave seems but a ’fining pot
Unto believing eyes;
For there the flesh shall lose its dross,
And like the sun shall rise.
The world, which I have known so well,
Hath mocked me with its lies ;
How gladly could 1 leave behind
- Its vexing vanities!
My dearest friends, they dwell above ;
Them will I go and see;
And all my friends in Christ below
» Will soon come after me.
Fear not the trump’s earth-rending sound,
Dread not the day of doom;
For he that, is to be thy Judge,
Thy Saviour is become.
Blest be my God, that gives me light,
Who in the dark did grope;
Blest be my God, the God of love,
Who causeth me ttfhope.
Here the words are signet, comfort, staff’
And here is grace’s chain ;
By these, thy pledges, Lord, I know
My hopes are not in vain.
Authorized Baptism.
In the Index of October 7, Inquirer asks, in
-.•Lstaiice,
towards a member received by letter from another
Baptist church, on ascertaining that this member,
having "years ago joihed a Campbellite church,
was never baptized by the authority of a Baptist
church? The respected Editor answers: “Our
opinion is, that the member in question should
be baptized, or, if this is refused, should be sep
arated from church fellowship—irregularity in
external order suffering the forfeit of external
privilege.”
The “irregularity” in baptism which, when
discovered, would justify the separation of a
member from church fellowship, must certainly
be such as would render the baptism invalid , be
cause unscriptural. Is, then, a baptism invalid
unless authorized by a Baptist church f It is
generally, and perhaps universally, admitted in
Baptist churches, that while membership can be
obtained only by an authoritative vote of the
church, every pastor, or other ordained minister
of the gospel, is at liberty to administer baptism
to all such as give evidence satisfactory to him, of
having with the heart believed unto righteous
ness, and with the mouth made confession unto
salvation. Philip baptized the Eunuch on his
own individual responsibility. His authority is
derived from the great Master who called him to
the work of an ambassador. In peculiar circum
stances a pastor may do this, even when a church
■refuses to authorize the baptism. Now, in such
a case, the baptism would be without the author
ity of a Baptist church, and yet, according to
Baptist usage, a certificate of baptism by the ad
ministrator would secure the admission of the
baptized without re-baptism, into any church sat
isfied with the applicant’s Christian experience.
The authorization of a Baptist church, then, is
not essential to valid Christian baptism—(l)
But in the case supposed by Inquirer, the ad
ministrator is the pastor of a “Campbellite
church,” with which regular Baptist churches
have no fellowship. Does this fact render the
baptism invalid and unscriptural ? It would
seem that the only question at this point should
be, Was the person baptized on a profession of
his faith in Jesus ? If so, the person baptized
answered the whole requirement, so far as his
duty was concerned. He believed and was bap
tizedf—(2) Where, in the “law and the testi
mony,” is it authoritatively decided that an ir
regularity or deficiency on the part of the admin
istrator invalidates the baptism of a person who
believes, at the time, that everything is being
done in proper order?—(3) Suppose that a pas
tor who has baptized hundreds, proves, eventu
ally, to be an apostate and a reprobate, showing
that he never had the grace of God in his heart,
would his previous administrations be invalid and
unscriptural?—(4) If not, then it would seem
that the essential point is, the regenerate state of
the baptized, and the reality of his profession of
faith in Christ. If these two points are satis
factorily established, can % church rightfully dis
fellowship a member on account of an irregulari
ty such as Inquirer supposes?—(s)
A Bible Baptist.
(1) —lt is not necessary to consider how far the
views of our correspondent in this paragraph are
or are not correct. Even if we grant the sound
ness of his position, there is, in the baptisms of
which he speaks, “ the authority of a Baptist
church" (in the sense, as we suppose, of “In
quirer;”)—unless, indeed, when Romanists have
gone to one extreme, in using the term church
for the “ clergy " to the exclusion of the “laity,"
Baptists are to go to the other, and use the term,
to th exclusion of the ministry, for the member
ship alone. Niy; on this supposition—that
authority is still present; for the church acts
through the ministry it ordains ; and the acts of
the ministry, except where they are expressly
repudiated and the ordination is revoked, are
with the sanction and in the name of the church.
(2) —ls the person baptized ‘can answer the
whole requirement, so far as his duty is con
cerned,’ without enquiry into the qualifications
of the administrator, it follows that ihe ordinance
is not vitiated if he receives it from—say, his
mother, or his wife, —from a Romanist, a Unita
rian, a Mormon, a mere Moralist outside of all
church connections, etc. This consequence is
fatal to the hypothesis to which it inseparably
cleaves. The duty of the person baptized, then,
includes an enquiry into the qualifications of the
administrator of the ordinance. And—since it
can never be a matter of indifference whether
true or false judgments are formed on questions
of duty—an erroneous decision with regard to
the qualifications of the administrator, must af-
FRANKLIN PRINTING HOUSE, ATLANTA, GA., THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21, 1869:
feet the character of the act on the part of the
person who is baptized under this error. How
far the character of his act is affected in the sight
of God, is a point with which we have no con
cern : the point to be settled by us is, How far
the church is empowered to endorse, or required
to disown the act, in view of the error that
taints it.
(3)—ln settling this point, our correspondent
improperly demands a divine prohibition of bap
tisms where there is “irregularity or deficiency
on the part of the administrators.” He overlooks
a very obvious and very important fact in the
structure of the New Testament Scriptures.
They set up no express prohibitions in the posi
tive department of Christianity. For example:
there is no prohibition of the baptism of the in
fant or the unregenerate adult; none, of the
church membership and communion of the un
baptized; none, of entrance on the ministerial
office without the concurrence of the brotherhood
and amenability to discipline, etc. The precept, or
precedent, that binds us, is recorded ; and what
ever is not included in exact conformity to this,
is, for that reason, unlawful and disorderly. To
reject this ground, is to hold that the positive de
partment of Christianity is absolutely without
prohibitions; or, in other words, that Christiani
ty has no positive department! In the case, be
fore us, then, the question is, What baptisms has
the church the right to accept and endorse ? And
our correspondent must show a precept, or prece
dent, for the endorsement and acceptance of bap
tisms, in spite of irregularity or deficiency on
the part of the administrators. The burden of
proof rests on him ; and he must carry it or be
crushed by it. We stand simply on this princi
ple : the right of the church to accept and en
dorse baptisms is restricted within the limits of
the Scriptural precedents, or precepts. Here we
must stand; for, surrender that position, and it
follows that no limits restrict the right, and will
worship becomes as valid and obligatory as the
word of God!
But, while our correspondent can adduce no
precedent for the course he advocates, we can
furnish what is, at least constructively, a prece
dent against it. We refer to Paul’s repudiation
of the baptism of the twelve disciples whom he
met at Ephesus. As the ground of that repudi
ation, he says not a word impeaching their disci
pleship, or implying that they did not regard
everything, at the time, as being done in proper
order. If we understand the matter, he assailed
the baptism as defective in point of design ; and
the view he advanced involved a charge of irreg
ularity or deficiency on the part of the administra
tor. But this is a point still subject to controver
sy ; and, as the case is not necessary to our cause,
we forbear to urge it.
(4) —Certainly not. During the time of these
administrations, he had what the Elder Edwards
styles “visible (as distinguished from real) re
generation”—that is, such a profession of the
new nature as seemed genuine “ in the eye of the
church’s Christian judgment;”—and it is this
that confers eligibility to membership and the
ministerial office, so far as respects the right of
man to determine. It is only at the tribunal of
who searches the heart, that the titje to the
ministerial office and to membership turns on
real (as distinguished from visible) regeneration.
But that lies beyond the sphere of human knowl
edge, and can never become the rule or measure
of human discipline.
(5) —To change the design of an act, is to
change the act: it ceases to be itself —it becomes
another. Christian baptism is Christian by vir
tue of its design; and without that design it is
Christian no longer. Now, baptism to procure
the remission of sins—baptism as an indispensa
ble condition of’justification, without which men
are abandoned to the uncovenanted mercies of
God, —is, not only non-Christian, but anfi-Chris
tian. This is more than the alteration of the de
sign of the ordinance: it is a wresting, if not a
subversion, of the gospel. If a church cannot
“rightfully disfellowship a man” for clinging to
such an “ irregularity ” and heresy as this, what
is there, false in fact and mischievous in influence,
which may not claim a home within its pale? Is
any space, or any foundation, for external order
left, if holders of unscriptural error, deposed from
the ministry and ejected from the membership of
a church which holds the truth, can retain the
office nevertheless, and gather into it others after
their own kind, and require that church to ac
cept and endorse t he validity of the acts performed
by themselves and their associates —acts, too,
which, at their core and heart, have an insepara
ble conjunction with—a fresh and ever-renewed
testimony to —an explicit perpetuation of—the
very error that necessitated the deposing and
ejecting ?
Glimpses of the Times.
The very pleasant occupation of our columns,
for several weeks past, by the favors of cor
respondents, especially by revival intelligence, has
precluded the usual variety of items, disclosing
the aspects, here and there, of “ the Christian
world —real and nominal." We have concluded
to devote our first page, in this issue, chiefly to
the materials accumulating during the interval,
as entering into that history of the times which
it becomes a religious journal to chronicle. The
reader will find much food for thought in them.
BAPTIST.
Communion. The Warren Association,
Rhode Island, at its lake session, adopted this
resolution: “That the Warren Association,
while recognizing the entire independence of
the churches and disclaiming the right to
legislate for them, does not sympathize with
the practice of open communion in Baptist
churches.” Rev. C. H. Malcom, of course,
opposed it, saying that if the resolution pre
vailed, he did not see how he could again be
a member of the body, or how his church,
the Second, Newport, could again be repre
sented in it. The Association ought to have
cut off the church, albeit a minister of the
former, through the Watchman dc Reflector,
says that this would be to “persecute,”
Mild as the resolution is, the Independent
speaks of it as “ the Baptist whipping post.”
What will it say of the Fourth Baptist church,
Philadelphia, which recently refused to re
ceive Prof. Malcom (brother of C. H.) on a
letter of dismission from the Newport Se
cond ?
A Ray of Light. —The Spare Hour, the
loose communion Baptist monthly of San
Francisco, says: “To ask a Baptist to fellow
ship a Pedobaptist in his baptismal error, is
simply presumption.” The Evangel well
replies: “ Yet what else is this demand for
open communion on the part of Pedobaptists ?
Do not they ask and demand that we recog
nize their baptism (sprinkling)? And what
is this allowing by a Baptist to come to the
communion on one ground, (as unbaptized,)
and acceptance of it by a Pedobaptist on
another, (as baptized,) but mere quibbling?
Are such parties walking together wherein
they are agreed ?”
A Venerable Church. —“ The Baptist So
ciety founded in London, near Devonshire
Square, in 1638, by the well-known William
Kiffin, is still iti existence.”
Unstable Pastorates. —Only seven Epis
copal rectors in Ohio have now the charges
they had twelve years ago; and the Journal
& Messenger does not know a single Baptist
pastor in the State who twelve years ago
was in his present charge.
Baptists. Rev. J. W. Hinton writes,
from the Savannah District, to the Southern
Christian Advocate: The heresy of baptismal
regeneration is attempted to be revived in
some sections of this territory. This is
among the oldest heresies in the history of
the church, one characteristic of the papal
system, and yet some Protestants are preach
ing, as if it was anew discovery, a sort of
panacea, a veritable spiritual nostrum to cure
all our woes. And believe me, it is about
as efficacious as most of the patent humbugs
for the cure of physical ills. It has been
well called “ baptized infidelity.” The Bap
tist church I freely acquit of this pernicious
dogma; for as unduly as they may stress
“ dipping,” they still hold the very conserva
tive tenet that regeneration is an antecedent
qualification for baptism. lam glad to say
that some extensive revivals among the Bap
tists are reported in this section. They have
long been a very useful Christian order.
Bible Union. —A correspondent of the
Examiner dk Chronicle says: “ I think the
impression here in New England among Bap
tists is quite general, if not universal, that in
the controversy between Jewett and the Bible
Union, the latter has come off very decidedly
second best, to say the least.”
Aged Ministers. —The Examiner <£ Chron
icle speaks of a well-known Doctor of Di
vinity, as holding that a man’s call to the
ministry may run out? Many seem to think
that it does run out when he grows old : Rev.
H. Fitz, at the Worcester Association, stated
that, so far as he knew, of the thirty or more
pastorless Baptist churches in Massachusetts,
only one is seeking and willing to have any
but young men for pastors.
Lay Preaching. —“ During the entire va
cation of the pastor of the Clinton Avenue
Baptist church, New York, (Rev. Dr. His
eox,) the Sabbath services were conducted
altogether by lay brethren of that church.
Deacons T. W. Valentine, superintendent J.
V. Harriott and brother John B. Ketchum,
discoursed alternately in an interesting man
ner, and to the entire satisfaction of the large
congregations.”
Queer Faith. —A writer in the Canadian
Baptist says: “A minister in speaking to
persuade a young mother to get her infant
christened, said, it would do the child good,
if she had only faith in the water. Now I
have heard of different kinds of faith, but
never before of watery faith, or a faith that
must pass through the water to benefit the
child—indeed I was puzzled.”
Is it so?—Bishop Purcell claimed uot long
since to have received into the Romish church,
in Cincinnati, two Baptist ministers with their
families. The Journal dk Messenger, Cincin
nati, says : If two Baptist ministers and their
families were received into the Catholic
church in this city, they were unquestionably
very obscure men, of no standing, whose
movements excited no interest, and elicited
no remark in either secular or religious news
paper. They may have been Campbellites,
who would probably be classified by the
Archbishop as Baptists. We have never
heard of such a case.
PRESBYTERIAN.
An Unusual Sight. — A Romanist, who
visited the Romish church at Huntsville, Ala.,
writes to the Freeman's Journal: “ I was
surprised at seeing an elderly man, with two
youths, reciting the Profession of Faith of
Pius IV. I learned that these were Rev.
John Henry Irwin, a minister, lately of the
Cumberland Presbyterian sect, and his two
sons.”
Infant Baptism. —The Presbyterian thinks
there is, in its denomination, no wide spread
neglect, and no decline of (what it calls) “ this
sacrament which is so dear to the Christian
parent’s heart.”
Candidates for the Ministry. —The Ban
ner of Peace says: “Never, perhaps, since
the organization of the Cumberland Presby
terian Church, were there so many young
men aspiring to the sacred ministry.”
Church Meanness.— -A correspondent of
the Southern Presbyterian asks: “ What
would you think of a church that would in
vite a minister to leave home for several days
to preach to them, and then let him return
minus just so many dollars out of his pocket,
travelling expenses?” The editor replies:
“ We are not willing to believe, if we can
help it, that any of our congregations are so
wretchedly mean as to determine deliberate
ly to allow a minister to spend his money
(of which he usually has so little) in coming
to preach to them—to give them not only his
time and his labor, but his money as well.”
Irish Presbyterianism. —An Irish Pres
byterian says: “While according to the
principle of the church the laity ought to be
fully represented in church courts and on com
mittees of the Assembly, according to the
practice of the church the laity have been
treated very much as if they had no exis
tence, except as contributors to the church’s
funds.”
Ungodly Membersexp. —The tendency of
Pedobaptism to hold the reconverted as mem
bers of the church, by virtue of their bap
tism in infancy, is illustrated by the feet that
the recent Old School General Assembly “en
joined upon the sessions of our churches, on
the removal *of any members beyond the
boundaries of their own organization, to fur
nish such members, whether in full commun
ion, or members by baptism only, with testi
monials of their standing, which testimonials
it shall be the duty of such persons at once
to present to some church of our connection,
and the session shall earnestly counsel these
members to transfer their relation immedi
ately, if practicable, or at the earliest oppor
tunity.”
Responsive Reading. —According to the
General Assembly,Old School, “the practice
of responsive reading of the Scriptures in the
public worship of the sanctuary is unwise in
itself, and especially dangerous in these times,
when it becomes the church to withstand the
tendency, so strongly manifested in many
places, to a liturgical and ritualistic ser
vice.”
Collisions of Pedobaptists. —The Rich
mond Herald makes the following extracts,
with comments, from a recent pamphlet, en
titled “ A Defence of Presbyterian Baptism,”
by Rev. H. B. Pratt, of Hillsboro, N. C.:
“ Please to observe,” he says, “ that the valid
ity of infant baptism is based exclusively an
the essential integrity and perpetuity of the
Abrahamic covenant. I say exclusively, for
the Romish church, the Anglican church, and
some others, [he might have said all others,
except the various branches of the Presby
terian family,] base it on other grounds. They
assume that as Christ received little children
indifferently into his arms, and blessed them,
so the church has a right to receive them in
differently into her bosom, and baptize them ;
that, the church in fact becomes the mother of
all the baptized, old and young; and is will
ing to receive and baptize all the children in
the world. But our Lord, doubtless, did
many things which he does not enjoin on us
to do. I mention the opinion only to repu
diate it. None but the children of believers
have a right to bdpfitfti-i and none but the
children of such as prpfess faith in Christ and
obedience to him ought, in fact, to be bap
tized. Otherwise”—raark this, ye members
of the Anglican, Methodist, and other
churches—“it become;, a degrading supersti
tion, a cabalistic charn■. an ignorant profana
tion or a wicked prostitution of things most
holy. I repeat, that it is based ex
clusively on the integrity and perpetuity of
the Abrahamic covenant.”
CONGREGATION AL.
Charity in DiFFiem tv. —A correspondent
of the with the sympathy
of the editor, complains of the lax invitations
prompted by the spiril of loose communion :
“ Within the past yeaE~the pastor of a church
in this commonweath. in administering the
Lord’s supper to a ne.jSts'boring church with
out a pastor, gave so’ wilmited an invitation
to all who thought *ves Christians, to
commune with that At least one
excommunicated mernt^v—-evidently looking
for the opportunity— availed himself
of it, and boldly combined' with the church,
as though he were noi under any censure.
The act was felt to be a<i imposition upon the
church, by many of r*. members, but what
could they do, so long as the invitation to the
ordinance did not excude the excommuni
cated one? Again; church excommuni
cates one of her members, is it right for a
neighboring church to permit Jhe invitation
to their communion to be so framed as to en
courage such a member 4o come and commune
with them, as though ie was still held in full
fellowship ?” It is only in the haven of strict
communion that suehxbross currents do not
and can not flow !
Reproof of LaxitYT —ln allusion to the
fact that Baptists and Methodists were invited
and present by delegation as regular members
of the Council which Installed Rev. H. A.
Shorey, as pastor of the First Congregational
church, Camden, Maine; the Congregational
ist, says: “Such a procedure has a kindly
look in the direction of Christian union, but
it is worthy of serious consideration whether
3uch an innovation the ordinary proce
dures of Congregationalism does not threaten
more of harm in othei directions than it can
possibly offer of good j i this. Asa matter
of course a council so constituted cannot ex
amine (with due courtly to all its members)
the candidate upon the mode or subjects of
baptism, or the doctrine of election and the
other doctrines which our Methodist brethren
view differently from ourselves. And has the
time come when Congregationalists are ready,
as a body, to sanction the abandonment of
some of the truths of She Bible which they
hold as most precious, v ithout even the effort
to ascertain whether the y are held by its can
didates for ordination? We trow not.”
The Name, in Baptrim. —A correspondent
of the Congregaticmait - asks: “In adminis
tering the rite of infanuoaptism, is it custom
ary and proper for the*<ficiating minister to
pronounce the full nans of the child, or only
the Christian name, of lifting the surname?
For example, to Henry Smith,’
of simply t Low is it in
case of the baptism of an adult ?” The editor
replies: “Strictly speaking, only the‘Chris
tian’ or ‘given’ name should be pronounced;
but we have known it to be the practice of
some pastors, in baptizing adults, to give the
whole name, for purposes of designation, and
we see no objection to such a course.” As
Baptists, of course, we have no “ Christian
name” of individuals; the phrase is a rebet
of the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, and
we repudiate it. For years, in baptizing
persons, we have, for purposes of designation,
“pronounced the full name;” and the effect
has been good.
REFORMED.
A Christian Constitution. —An advocate
of the movement for incorporating the recog
nition of Christianity into the Constitution of
the United States, says, in the Reformed
Presbyterian and Covenanter: “1. In its
Constitution must be asserted the doctrine of
a Trinity in Unity. 2. The cardinal doctrine
of the headship of the 'Lord Jesus Christ in
His mediatory character over all persons and
things; over men in every relation in life,
and all those doctrine which ramify and
branch out therefrom in their various rela
tions and applications. 3. In this Constitu
tion must be asserted the Scriptural truths
which will solemnly abjure and repudiate
Infidelity, Popery, Paganism, Mohammedan
ism, Mormonistn, Deism, Judaism, Unitari
anism, Universal ism, Ariauism, Socinianism,
Quakerism, Rationalism Swendenborgianism,
and Arminianism, with every species of secret
societies.”
Baptism and Life. The German Re
formed “Address to persons who have been
baptized in infancy and who are about to be
received into full communion” says: “You
have, in the name of the Father, and of the Son,
and of the Holy
have thus had, by the Holy Ghost, the princi
pl» of the life of Jesus* Christ conceived in
your soul.” There is in such teaching, rather,
a principle of death.
A Difference. —The - nurch Intelligencer,
on the subject of says: The
whole difference bet*.— ;h Roman and the
Reformed order 's vF ■« a nutshell.
The Romish view is, to .% cism infants
are made members of ihe i.i-rch; the Re
formed view is that in naptism the covenant
relation of children as members of the church
is recognized. The one represents baptism
as the gate of spiritual life, and the other as
the ordinance recognizing their right to the
initiatory sacrament of the Christian church,
by virtue of their relation to believing parents.
They are heirs of the blessings of the cove
nant, and therefore they are entitled to the
ordinance of baptism which signifies and seals
those blessings. The Reformed view recog
nizes them as members of the visible church,
and by baptism declares that they are heirs
of the spiritual promises of the covenant;
the Roman view regards baptism as the or
dinance which makes them members of the
invisible church by changing their corrupt
nature. Hence baptism is called the gate of
spiritual life.
DISCIPLE (“CAMPBELLITE”).
Baptismal Remission. —ln pointiug out
the differences between Baptists and “ Disci
pies” (or “ Campbcllites,”) the American
Christian Review says : “ Baptists hold that
the penitent is pardoned and has the evidence
of'pardon before baptism. We do not be
lieve the penitent has the evidence of pardon,
or that he is pardoned, till he is baptized.”—
In a recent debate at Perry, Kansas, Rev. J.
B. McCletry, (Disciple,) affirmed: “The
Scriptures teach that the immersion in water
of a Scriptural subject by u Scriptural ad
ministrator, is for or in order to the remis
sion of sins.”—ln a discussion at Mt. Car
mel, 111., the Disciples’ advocate, Rev. W. B.
F. Treat maintained : “ Christian baptism is
an essential condition of pardon to the peni
tent sinner.”—Rev. Mr. McGarvey, one of
the editors of the Apostolic Times, says:
“We think that God has commanded all
men to be immersed for the remission of
sins, and that no man can scripturally claim
that his sins have been forgiven unless he has
been immersed. Whether God will see fit,
under some circumstances, to forgive men
who do not comply with the prescribed con
ditions of forgiveness, he has not informed
us. All such persons will have to rely, as
brother Campbell expressed it, upon ‘the
nncovenanted mercies of God.’ ”
Internal Discord. —In an account of the
“Campbellites” in Texas, a correspondent of
the American Christian Review, says: “In
one church of some sixty or more members,
some are opposed to having any preacher
supposing they can get along very well with
out one. Others are anxious to have one.
Some of the members are opposed to having
any officers. They do not believe in officers.
Others again think all are officers; that every
member has a right to preach, and to admin
ister baptism, and preside at the Lord’s table.
While others think it wrong for the church
to elect bishops and deacons; that persons
natarally grow up into their proper positions
in the church, and when they do so, they
should, without any action of the church, be
( icitly recognized as officers without any act
of ordination.” "And again : “ One preacher
believes there is some act of setting apart
officers, but he calls imposition of hands
‘Popery,’ and those thus ordained ‘Little
Popes.’ He ordains by prayer. A church
received into their fellowship a young man
who had been licensed to preach by the church
of which he was formerly a member. This
young preacher was called on to marry a
couple. The laws of the State authorize ‘ or
dained preachers’ to celebrate the rites of
matrimony. A meeting of the church was
called, a few met and decided to recognize his
license to preach by the other church as ordi
nation ! ! So the young man went on to cel
ebrate the marriage rites as an ordained
preacher! Another preacher who has him
self been ordained by fasting, prayer and irn
position of hands, and believes this to be the
scriptural method, now takes the position
that the church, being the highest ecclesiasti
cal authority, has the right to say what consti
tutes ordination, and says, are bound to
recognize her acts whether we belipve them
to be scriptural or not!” ’
EPISCOPAL. *
Infant Baptism. —The HartforS Church
man decides that: “ Baptized children are
members of the church because of their
baptism. We know of no other ordinance
or sacrament which makes them members of
that visible body which Christ established on
earth. For if they are baptized because they
are members o f the church, such baptism
must be either a mere ceremony, a. useless
form, or else a most solemn transaction, ad
mitting those children into some realm more
sacred than, and far above, that kingdom in
which we become ‘members of His flesh and
of His bones.’ ” It thinks any other idea
ridiculous.
American Ritualism. —Rev. Dr. Butler,
in the New York Observer, says: “There is
scarcely a diocess in the land, in which there
are not now, in some churches, practices in
troduced which are utterly without law, or
directly against law, which, twenty years ago,
would have raised an universal outcry
throughout the Churohand, he adds,
“ some of the bishops iove these things;
others, who do not like them, prefer them to
what they call Puritanism, or Methodism,
even when what is so called is scrupulously
rubrical and law-abiding.” He asserts that
by reason of this connivance of the bishops,
“ there are no prosecutions, nor will there be
any,” for these Ritualistic heresies.
Heresy and Schism. —The (Romish) Tablet
speaks as follows, of the “petty Episcopalian
sect:” “The Church of England, like all other
Protestant Churches, dates only from the six
teenth century, and is in no ecclesiastical
sense the continuation of the Church in Eng
landjbefbre that time. The Church of Eng
land is national, not Catholic, and holds from
the Crown, not from Christ. It is both schis
matic and heretical, and as the • Protestant
Episcopal Church holds from it, it is both
schismatical and heretical, and, therefore, no
part or branch of the Catholic Church.”
Why not? —An English Ritualist gives
this reason why those who hold with him can
not go to the church of Rome : “ Not that we
do not esteem her as a Catholic church; not
that we do not regard her saoraments as
equally valid with our own; not that we do
not feel that we owe her a debt of gratitude
for what she has done for us in by-gone days;
but as English Catholics, we believe that the
Church of England is, by God’s appointment,
England's own Catholic Church; and that it
is our duty to stand by her in all times of
oppression and persecution, as well as in the
time of prosperity and peace.”
The Voluntary System. —The English
Bishop of Peterborough says : “The volun
tary system would make a clergyman the
slave of the fanaticism, passions and igno
rance of his flock, while the endowed system
gave him a standing ground which lifted him
above such evil influences and enabled hirn to
be the fearless pastor of his people. To sum
it up in one word, upon the endowed princi
ple, it was Felix who sometimes trembled
before Paul, upon the voluntary system it
was Paul that was forever trembling before
Felix.”
The Prayer Book.— “ The Protestant
Churchman says: ‘ltis an invincible objec
tion to our Prayer book that converted Ro
manists cannot safely use it. We sent brother
Holden to South America, and his converts
told him they found these Romish errors in
our formularies. We forbade him to vary
from them, and he was obliged to leave our
Church.’ ”
Romanizing. —Dr. Close, Dean of Carlisle,
England, says: “ Except the recognition of
the Pope as the head of the Church, there is
not a single doctrine that we call Popish, or
that is held by Papists, but may be traced
and made out in the writings of these persons,
who are still clergymen of the Church of
England.”—Rev. Mr. Leffingwell, Episcopal,
of Gardiner, Maine, lately preached a ser
mon defending the Popish doctrine that the
church and the Bible are of co equal author
ity.
Development. —The New York Indepen
dent states that two-thirds of the students in
the general Episcopal Theological Seminary
in that city have just gone over to the Roman
Catholics. No wonder: the institution is un
der decided High Church control.—Rev.
James Kent Stone, late President of Kenyon
College,and still later the President of Hobart
College, has followed out the legitimate course
of High Church Theology, and has given in
his adhesion to the Church of Rome.
Dancing.—A correspondent of the South
ern Christian Advocate tells of a Georgia
dancing-master, a “frequenter of agrogery,”
who delivers “lectures upon manners and
morals,.Sunday school duties and obligations,
to his class of juveniles at the end of their
practice on Saturday nights;” and of an
Episcopal preacher in the same city who “ pat
ronises all the balls, hops and dances that he
can get admittance to ;” while another clergy
man “ of the samechuroh, rides twenty miles
to that city to attend a dance, and goes from
place to place publishing his own shame !”
Revision. —Rev. H. W. Lee, D.D., Epis
copal Bishop in lowa, writes in favor of a re
vision of the Prayer Book, to suit “ some of
the most valuable clergymen and laymen,”
whose opposition to baptismal regeneration
phraseology will otherwise carry them into
other ecclesiastical connections. He thinks,
too, that they would, if thus released, be more
anxious than now lo administer baptism to
infants.” Bishop Mellvaine, of Ohio, opposes
it, holding that “if an evangelical clergyman
has difficulties in interpreting the (baptismal)
language of the prayer-book, he has also in
interpreting the words of Scripture bearing
on the same subject.” By the*way, a writer
in the Church, journal asserts that the latter
is becoming more and more conservative,and
ventures the prediction that he will make the
“tallest High Churchman in the land.”
“Catholic” SacramEntai.ism. Bishop
Whitehouse, of the Episcopal diocess of Illi
nois, in it recent sermon, defending his allega
tion of the harmony between the English and
American Episcopal churches and the. Russo-
Greek church, says : “ldo not hold or affirm
that there is a concurrence in dogmatic truth
or opinion between the churches named, but
I do affirm that there is throughout Catholic
Christendom a virtual concurrence in the facts
that they have the order of bishops; that they
have substantially the same creeds; that they
have the sacraments of baptism and the
Lord’s supper; that they receive these sa
craments as outward signs of inward and
spiritual graces given ; that the gift in baptism
is regeneration ; that in the Holy Eucharist
there is the presence of Christ’s body and
blood ; and that these are expressed in every
formula, every catechism, every symbol of
the whole Catholic Church.”
Conformity —The Bishop of Illinois urged
Rev. Mr. Cheney, of Chicago, to use the word
“regenerate” in the service for baptism, and
then interpret it as he pleased !
Waning “ Episcopal” Influence. —The
Protestant Churchman says: A clerical
brother, of whom we expected better things,
whose organ of veneration must be sadly de
ficient, says that whenever he considers the
late doings of some of our Bishops, he feels
like using a prayer once offered by the vener
able Dr. Lyman Beecher to this effect,
rt *Grant, O Lord, that we may not think con
temptuously of our rulers, and furthermore,
Grant, we beseech thee, that they may not act
so that we cannot help it!”
Pretentious. —Bishop Coxe, of Western
New York, on the eve of his recent departure
for Europe, spoke of his church as “ the Or
thodox Camilic Church of America.” Apro
pos to this, is the following which we find in
an exchange : Bishop Coxe, of Buffalo, has
a father, Samuel Hanson Cox, D.D., a schol
arly man, a genius, and » Presbyterian well
known to fame. It happened once that this
reverend father visited his son, the Bishop,
and the following dialogue ensued on Sunday
morning. The Bishop said : “ Father, *you
know that 1 would like to have you preach
for me, but, then, you know our church does
not recognize your ordination, and 1 must
keep to the order.” The Dr. replied : “ May
God forgive me for being the father of a fool.”
Wesley. —The Church Times, Ritualistic,
proposes to found a religious society within
the Church, something like the great Roman
Catholic orders, and to call it “The Wesley
an Confraternity,” or the “ Society of John
Wesley.” The very existence, it says, “of
such a body in the Church of England would
would lead many to learn, for the first time,
what Wesley’s religion really was, and would
thus tend to re union; while, on the other
hand, it might lead to the rescue of his hon
ored name from all connection with the per
versions of his pretended follower-.”
METHODIST.
Self-Baptism. —A Methodist preaoher in
Texas, according to a correspondent of the
Texas Baptist Herald , reported himself as re
ceiving into the church, as lawfully and suffi
ciently baptized, a man who jumped into a
stream and in that way baptized himself!
Probabilities. —A writer in the St. Louis
Christian Advocate , (Southern Methodist,)
says: “We do not say that infant baptism
renders the salvation of a child that dies in
infancy more certain, but we do say that it
renders the salvation of those who become
adults more probable. Not that God saves
irrespective of personal moral character, but
infant baptism is a part of a system of means
calculated, if faithfully observed and improv
ed, to secure such personal character as heav
en will approve.”
Baptism. —The St. Louis (Southern Meth
odist) Conference reports 760 infant and 1,208
adult baptisms.
Ecclesiastical Rigor. —“ The Wesleyan
Conference, in England, has just asserted, in
a determined manner, that there shall be no
modification of the distinctive principles of
Methodism; and more, that its ministers
have no right to hold or express views on its
ecclesiastical discipline contrary to those pro
vided by Wesley and accepted by the
church.”
Dress at Chcrch. —The Southern Christ
ian Advocate says : A gentleman from one
of the largest cities in the Middle States, vis
iting our Southern city congregations, re
marked that he had never seen anywhere such
a display of fashionable dress among the la
dies, as in our section —that where he was
accustomed to worship, it would be consider
ed bad taste, to say nothing about its unsuit
ableness to the house of God.
Carnal Enmity. —A writer in the Texas
Baptist Herald, speaks of a Methodist preach
er, who not long since said : If Calvinism be
true, God might stay in his hated heaven
alone; he would go with the rest of his fel
low men down to hell. He would sooner
dwell in hell, than with such a God as that in
heaven. If he were with such a God in
heaver, he would hate him there.
LUTHERAN.
Licentiates. —“ The Synod of North Car
olina has passed a resolution abolishing the
practice of licensing men to preach the Gos
pel, on the ground that it has no warrant in
Scripture, and has the effect of introducing
imperfectly prepared men into the ministry.”
Infant Baptism. —The London correspon
dent of the Presbyterian, says: At Novaves,
a village near Potsdam, a weaver presented
his child for baptism. The clergyman refused
to perform the ceremony unless the father at
■once repeated the Creed. He had, he added,
special reasons for doubting the soundness of
the father’s belief, and would not admit the
infant within the pale of Christianity, to be
afterwards brought up as a heretic. The fa
ther, bold and blasphemous, declared that “as
a rational being, he could not be expected to
repeat the Creed.” Only think of a state of
opinion in America or Great Britain where
baptism would be demanded by professed in
fidels for their children, not that they cared
for it, save as a sign of admission to civil
privileges!
Non-intercommunion. —The European Lu
therans, if we may judge from incidental re
marks in our exchanges, very extensively act
on the rule of non-intercommunion with the
Reformed (Presbyterian) churches.
WHOLE NO. 2461.
ROMANIST.
Education. —“jOn a recent trial in Ireland,
a priest testified that he had positive orders
from Archbishop Mac Hale to refuse all the
sacraments, even at the hour of death, to
those who send their children to the free
schools.”—“ The Roman Catholic priest of
Ann Arbor, Mich., in a recent warning to his
people to avoid the free public sohools and
the books therein used, told them that if they
persisted in sending their children he would
not administer the sacrament to them, even at
death, nor grant them absolution, either in
life or death. —“ Cardinal Cullen has issued
a pastoral, in which he declares that he will
deprive of the sacraments any parents who
send their children to the National Model
Schools in Dublin.”—The Boston Pilot says :
“ The Catholic church all over the world lays
claim to the education, the exclusive educa
tion, of its children. To this claim of the
church all good, practical and sincere Catho
lics readily and emphatically assent. Secular
education is an unmixed evil, and wherever
a exists, most surely the greatest dangers are
inevitable. Secular education exists in Amer
ica, abd here we have its effects most bitterly
felt, welcome before the eyes of the
Purcell, of Cincinnati,
says: “ThK^ntiregovernment of the public
schools in whicft. Catholic youth, are educated
cannot be given t<?-.£jv.iL...
as Catholics, cannot approve of that system of
education for youth which is apart from in
struction in the Catholic faith and the teach
ing of the Church.”—The Cincinnati Catholic
Telegraph says: “ Either divide the school
fund or cease taxing for school purposes. A
hundred thousand Catholics of this city do
not beg but demand it. Six millions of Cath
olics throughout the country have but one
voice on this matter. They must be heard.”
Infallibility. —A Romish priest of West
minster diocess, renouncing Romanism, says :
“ I lift up my voice and protest against the
most appalling, and most presumptuous, and
most blasphemous assumption of infallibility
on the part of the Church of Rome. Is infal
libility promised to any system at all? 1
have searched, and indeed most patiently,
most anxiously searched, too, with a real de
sire to find this doctrine of infallibility in the
Scripture, but have failed utterly. I have
weighed and examined all the passages quoted
from the Fathers and great theologians. I
have been obliged to make a study of many
of these passages as produced by the writers
of smaller hand-books of Divinity cabled Com
pendia, and still I have failed utterly. I re
member well how, when studying these so
called proofs in college, we, i. e., myself and
some of my fellow-students, used to smile
at their very weakness.”
Boastfulness. —“Saida Roman Catholic
priest lately to a Protestant minister of our
acquaintance. ‘We must conquer this mighty
republic and, with her, powerful England, and
that man is very blind indeed who does not
see that these two mighty nations will belong
to the Church of Rome before long. Through
them we will conquer the world. Look at
our innumerable nuneries and colleges. You
do not ignore that they are filled with the
daughters and sons of the most influential
Protestant families of this republic.’”
Not Growing.— “ The Western Catholic ,
speaking of the boast of Father Hecker and
others that the Romish religion is gaining
ground in this country, says 1 There never
was a greater error. True, millions ol Cath
olics, flying from misery in the Old World,
have taken homes in the New, and their mil
lions of offspring now cover all the land. But
this is a loss to the Church, and not a gain ;
for two thirds of them have lost their faith.
There are ten millions, at least, of persons
in these United States, born of Catholio par
ents, who are now heathens ; and will, in all
human probability, die heathens. Many of
them fill the jails and prisons all over the
land. Many others of them are on their way
thither. There are said to be five millions
still faithful to the faith of their fathers. The
natural increase of Catholic population in this
country is more than 100 per cent, in a gen
eration. If the same causes which are at
work now continue, that 100 per cent, will he
lost to the Church as sure as it will come.’ ”
Withdrawal from Rome. —The French
journals announce as a great religious and po
litical event, that Father Hyacinthe, the most
eloquent and influential Romish divine in
Paris, has decided that he cannot longer take
orders from the Papal See, nor acknowledge
the spiritual supremacy of the Pope.
Money. —Rev. G. 11. Doane, a Romish
priest, son of the former Episcopal bishop of
New Jersey, and brother of the present Epis
copal bishopof Albany, has collected $168,000,
for the erection of an American College, at
Rome.
Infallibility. —The Romish Archbishop
Manning, in his “Temporal Mission of the Holy
Ghost,” says that the Ecumenical Council, to
meet at Rome in December, will probably
decree, first, the absolute personal infallibility
of the Pope, “ speaking to many or to few, by
brief, or encyclical, or bulland secondly,
the absolute infallibility of a General Coun
cil ; each, he affirms, equally and completely
infallible in the first, the fifteenth, and the
nineteenth centuries To these decrees} thus
infallible and inspired by the Holy Ghost, we
are to listen as to those of divinely inspired
apostles. These decrees and dogmas we are
to accept as the very word of God.
Romanists made by Education. —The
Romish Tablet has a sentence which we com
mend to Protestant parents, who send their
children to schools kept by Romanists : “It is
not by the catechism only, it is by a Catho
lie life which the child breathes in at every
pore, and with which it is bathed through and
through, by Catholic ways and habitssurround
ing it every moment, by Catholic prayers, and
daily and many times a day with Catholic
companions, by Mass, and Confession, pnd
Communion, by the Crucifix hanging on the
walls, by the Rosary hung around the neck,
by the Madonna in playground and in the
hall, and the holy water at the bedside, by
ten thousand rays of light to which the world
without is blind —that is Catholic education ;
and by this, and this only, can Catholios be
made.”
UNITARIAN.
Insufficient Support. —“A correspondent
of the Liberal Christian says that he does
not know a single ‘popular’ Unitarian min
ister, nor one who occupies even a good place,
that is living on the salary paid him by his
congregation. In every case there is an eking
out by writing or extra labor of some sort.”
“ Birds of a Ebathkb.” —A Jewish Rabbi
and a Unitarian minister exchanged pulpits
in Cincinnati; and a dedicatory prayer was
offered by a Unitarian minister at Quincy,
111., on occasion of laying the corner stone of
a Jewish temple. So, enmity to Christ be
comes a bond of fellowship !
Bigotry and Sectarianism. —The Congre
gationaliit mentions a Unitarian gentleman,
who, opposing the use of the Bible in schools,
said: “The fact is, and it is time everybody
knew it, that the Bible is too sectarian and
‘bigoted’ to be read in schools. It would
be much better for the children, and much
fairer, every way, to have selections from
Dr. Channing’s works read there, instead!”