Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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!”