Newspaper Page Text
CHRISTIAN INDEX AND SOUTH-WESTERN BAPTIST.
VOL 49-m 41.
A RELIGIOUS AND FAMILY PAPER.
PUBLISHED WEEKLY IN ATLANTA.. OA
AT $3.00 PER ANNUM,
Invariably in Advance.
r. T. COO v. Proprietor.
CHRISTIAN WORK.
Thy Work, 0 God, is Mine.
To live and work for Thee,
Me Thou dost send
Amidst earth’s ruins. May I be,
Unto the end,
A living sacrifice. Mt store
Is Thine—not mine-forevermore.
Thy work, 0 God, is mine
Daily to do;
My work. O tlod, is Thine
While I pursue
The path in which my Saviour trod,
In sunshine, or beuealh Thy rod.
With Thee to guide aright
I fear no foe;
Nor, in the darkest night,
Refrain to go
Where'er Tbv voice is heard to call,
For Thou encirclest, rulest all.
What though mv passions rage,
And urge retreat,
The warfare which I wage
Knows no defeat.
The conquering power is on my side,
While I in Jesus love abide.
If, till I reach the end
Os life’s short day,
I must the truth defend
’(iainst error’s sway,
O! let tby Spirit on my sight
Pour forth His beams of heavenly light.
Then, when death’s icy hand
Shall touch my heart,
And from life’s weary strand
I must depart,
Let the dismissal, Lord, to me
Be but the entrance hour with Thee.
—Robert I‘argiter.
Work.
Anrwherc, everywhere, something to do!
Something for me, and something for you I
Work for the hand and work for the head,
Work for the winning of daily bread.
Never a day dawns but brings its own task ;
What, only for you and for me is to ask ; _
Some are chosen to sweep and others to spin,
Some to sow, some to reap, while seme gather in.
Some must build ships, and some guide the helm,
Some fashion our garments, and some rule the realm ;
Some must fell forests, some the broad field must till,
Some paint, and some carve, some grind at the mill.
Some must buy and some sell, some traverse the sea;
Some God’s preachers, and judges, and singers must be;
Let each to his task-work list tor the call
Christ worked, and the Father works high over all!
Snme work in the shadow and some im the sun,
Some in joy, some in pain ; but the Master is one, 3
Calling all to their tasks, portioning each his reward,
As he ceases his toil at the word of his Lord.
Work while the day lasts, work with a will;
Soon will the night come, when all will be still;
Sweet will it be, at set of the sun,
To hear from the Master the welcome, ‘ Well done!
—Little Corporal.
The Master Hath Need of the Reapers.
The Master hath need of the reapers,
And, mourner, he calleth to thee:
Come out from the valley of sorrow,
Look up to the hill tops and see
How the fields with the harvest are whitening,
How golden and full is the grain.
O, what are thy wants to the summons!
And what are thy griefs aud thy pain!
The Master hath need of the reapers,
And, idler, He calleth to thee;
Come out from the mansions of pleasure,
From the halls where the careless may be,
Soon the shadows of eve will be falling
With the mists, and the dtws, and the rain;
O, what is the world and its follies
To the mould and the rust of the grain!
The Master hath need of the reapers,
And, worker, He calleth to thee:
0, what are thy dreams of ambition
To the joys that hereafter shall be!
There are tokens of storms that are coming,
And summer is fast on the wane;
Then alas ! for the hopes of the harvest,
And alas l for the beautiful grain.
The Master hath need of the reapers,
And He calls for thee and for me:
0, haste while the winds of the morning
Are blooming so freshly and free ;
Let the sound of the scythe and the sickle
Re-echo o’er hill top and plain.
And gather the sheaves in the garner,
For golden and ripe is the grain.
—Mrs. Annie Howe Thomson.
Work On.
Work ! in the wild waste places,
Though none thy love may own;
God guides the down of the thistle
The wandering wind hath sown.
Will Jesus chide thy weakness,
Or call thy labor vain?
The word that for Him thou bearest
Shall return to Him again.
On ! with thine heart in heaven,
Thy strength in thy Master’s might,
Till the wild waste places blossom
In the warmth of a Saviour’s light.
Help, Lord.
My Lord, I dare not say,
“ Help me!” No work my inert soul is doing;
Thine aid I dare not pray,
My heart no g eat and noble ajra pursuiug,
Nor say, “Lord, work with me!”
While "my hands idle be.
Yet, Lord, work in me! wake
My drowsy spirit from its guilty sleeping,
Let me thy hand-plough take
Where worthier souls may follow sowing, reaping,
The will to work I ask,
E’en in the lowest task.
—Mary E. Atkinson.
Communion Invitations.
The Congregationalisl speaks sound sense
in the following: A subscriber inquires:
What would be a proper invitation to the com
munion table of a Congregational church?
As one of the fundamental ideas on which
the Congregational churches were founded,
was that of separation from a State cnurch
which welcomed people against whom no
charge of gross immorality could be sustained,
whether professing faith in Christ or not, to
its communion table; and the establishment
of associate bodies of believers; it is very
clear that the only invitation to the Lord’s
supper which can be genuinely Congrega
tional is that which, for substance, has be
come historic: “alt members in good stand
ing in sister churches.” This necessarily ex
cludes those who are not church members,
whatever their hopes, or faith, about them
selves. If they love Christ, let them obey
llis command and unite with Ilischurch,and
then they will be entitled to all the privileges
of His people.
Episcopacy and Logic. —Dean Alford, in
the Contemporary Review, says: “There is
no denying that, prima facie, the Noncon
formist occupies, as compared with the An
glican, vantage ground for the consideration
of church questions. Anglicanism may be
good or bad, right or wrong, but at all events
it is the result of a compromise, and has an
awkward position to defend. The first step
for an Anglican apologist must ever be the
abandonment of logic.”
The Ministry. — Rev. R. L. Dabney, D.D.,
in his recent work, “ Sacred Rhetoric,” la
bors to produce two convictions —“that it is
grace which makes the preacher, and that
nothing is preaching which is not expository
of the Scriptures.”
Perversion. A correspondent of the
Morninq Star says that, until within the past
ten years, there were scarcely any churches
in the (English) General Baptist Connection
which would tolerate loose communion prin
ciples, but now nearly all the large and influ
ential churches will.
{s3 00 A YEAR. I FRANKLIN PRINTING HOUSE, ATLANTA., GA„ THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 1870. is3 00 1 YEAR.}
A New Design of Baptism.
As editors are supposed to know everything
and to be able to answer all questions that
anybody may choose to propose, I take the
liberty of asking one for information. I see
constantly in our religious papers the expres
sion, “ baptized into the fellowship” of a
church. Every revival notice, or almost every
one, informs us that a* the result of the meet
ing, ten, fifteen, tw T enty or more persons, as it
may be, were “ baptized into the fellowship”
of the church. Now, what does • that
mean? I think I know what “ baptized into
Christ” and “ baptized into Ilis death” mean;
but what does “ baptized into the fellowship
of a church” mean ? Does it mean that the
design of their baptism is to bring them into
fellowship with the church, so that their bap
tism was admiuisteied and received for that
purpose? If so, is that a Scriptural, valid
baptism ? Or does it mean that the result of
their baptism is to bring them into fellowship
with the church, so that it was administered
and received with a view to bring about this
result ? If so, is that true, and is that a Scrip
tural baptism 1 Or does it mean that they
were baptized in order to publicly express,
in a symbolic way, the fellowship they have
with the church and the church with them •
If so, is that the design our Lord had in view
in instituting the ordinance of baptism ?
What does it mean, and in what light are we
to regard that baptism which is a “ baptism
Into l,he fellowship” of a church, instead of a
“baptism into Christ?” I read with interest
some articles, some time ago, by my esteemed
friend, brother Teague, on church polity,
though I did not agree with him altogether.
Perhaps he can tell me what it means, or my
honored and loved teacher of by-gone years,
Dr. Hillyer. The matter seems to me to
have some importance, if it be important to
use correct expressions and to call things by
llieir right names. If neither you, nor they,
nor any of your learned correspondents can
tell me its Scriptural meaning, would it not
be better to lay aside a useless expression
which either means nothing or means what is
erroneous? In our revival intelligence we
can say so many persons were baptized ; or, if
we want to add anything to that sufficiently
comprehensive word, we can say, were bap
tized into Christ. Inquirer.
Reply to Brother Shaffer.
I feel constrained by love for what I think
to be truth, as also for brother Shaffer, to re
ply to some of the positions assumed by him.
This I will do by stating facts, and reasoning
from the facts to the cause, or causes for the
facts. Ido not discard reason in studying the
Scriptures, as brotherS. seems to think, but
when 1 find declared truths whibh reason can
not compass, reason is ordered to remain
silent, rather than cavil, and let faith accept
because God has said it.
The facts existing, and from which I would
reason to the causes, are these: There is a
world adorned with beauty and goodness ; in
this world is man, who has dominion over it,
and who lias marred it, as well as himself, by
sin ; there is in progress of development upon
it a plan for the redemption of it, and a part
of the human family dwelling upon it.
I will admit the facts stated. Then let us
proceed to the argument, first, by some perti
nent questions. Since the world does exist,
Did God make if, or did it oorpe, by chance ?
If God made it, did He make it to answer a
definite purpose, or not? If He had a defi
nite purpose before His mind, was He abie to
make such a world as would enable Him to
carry out that purpose, or not? If He was
able to make one in which Ilis purposes could
be met, did He make such a one, ot one of an
other kind? If He made such a one as suited
Him, and we find sin in it, must it not be
because it was determined to permit sin to
enter in order to accomplish the purpose? It
we find a plan in operation for the redemption
of the world and man from the curse of sin,
is the redemption of man limited to a part,
or does it embrace the whole human family ?
If limited to a part, was it the original pur
pose so to limit it, or was it an after thought ?
Again. If limited to a part, was it because
God purposed to limit it of His own pleasure,
or because He was not able to do otherwise ?
Does Christ quicken men into spiritual life,
or is it the work of man ? If Christ, quickens
men, does he quicken a part, or all? If only
a part are quickened, is it because He will
not, or cannot quicken the rest? Has God
left a code of laws for the government of
man? If He has, does not man disobey them ?
If he disobeys, is it not because he will not
render obedience? Does not his disposition
to disobey proceed from a hatred to the laws
and their Author ?
In answer to all these questions, I will take
the affirmative, aud where two points are em
braced in the same question, the affirmative
of the first,.
That God made the world is evident, for
nothing can make itself, and nothing of which
we have any knowledge, except God, of whom
we have a declared knowledge, can create any
thing. Man can shape things, or make some
things out of other things, but cannot create
anything. Even his thoughts bubble up with
out his bidding. Since the earth, sun, moon,
stars, and all around, are obedient to laws,
some of which are well determined, there
must be a power that gave these things and
all uxm them, existence —placed them under
laws, and executed these laws upon them. As
we have no knowledge of any power that can
do these things but the God of the Bible, who
says He did do it, and tells us how He did,
and why He did; and since 1 must believe
some being did, I accept His statement and
believe He did. Since 1 can find no answer
as to who performed the work except by
taking His statement. I must also take the
same authority as to how and why He made
it. Since God created the world and man,
with all else upon it, He had a purpose in it.
That purpose He defines in Rev. iv: 11.
“Thou art worthy, O Lord, to receive glory,
and honor, and power: for thou has created
all things; and for thy pleasure they are and
were created.” Then, it was for the pleasure
of God that these things exist. I assume that,
being infinitely wise, and being able to declare
the end from the beginning, He knew what
would please Himself. Therefore, the Psalm
ist says, “The heavens declare the glory of
God, and the firmament showeth His handy
work. Day unto day uttereth speech, and
night unto night showeth knowledge. Tnere
is no speech nor language where their voice
is not heard.” Knowing what would please
Himself, and being all powerful, able to do
whatsoever He liked, He made just such a
world as would suit the development of Him
self in creation and grace. He was not con
fined to any particular form of world when
He drew the plan of His architectural skill,
for the very particles of which His creation
was to be made must have their existence out
of His creative genius. All possible worlds
were before Him as well as that which exists,
and He chose this one fur Himself. It just
suited His purposes; for, surveying it atter
it was finished, “ He saw everything that He
had made: aud be-hold, it was very good.”
It was -good, not only as it then stood, fresh
from His hand, but foi the things yet to be
witnessed upon it, and the encomium is pros
pective as well a3 present; for the worship
pers <>f heaven say, “ For thy pleasure they
are (that is, in tne present time,) and were
(that is, in the past.) created.” In confirma
tion hear Him: “As 1 have thought, so shall
it come to pass : and as I have purposed, so
shall it stand. For the Lord of hosts hath
purposed, and who shall disannul it ?” It ws
impossible for Him to be deceived in what
He had done, and impossible for Him to fail
in the accomplishment, unless He is defective
both in wisdom and power. Who will blas
phemously declare this ?
Asa part of the purpose, then, it must have
been determined to permit sin to enter, and
this as a part of the original plan. That sin
did enter is an undeniable fact. That He
permitted it to enter is self-evident, unless
we strip Him of His power and say He could
not prevent it; or charge Him with indiffer
ence and say He did not care, and thus with
out any purpose has allowed the world to be
cursed —the ears of men, angels, and Himself
to be pierced with all the sighs, groans, and
wails of a sin-cursed world, and eternity to
roar with the wailings and unavailing cries of
the damned. If He permitted it to enter in
time, does it militate any more against His
p-rfeetions to believe that He determined,
even in planning the world, to permit it to
enter? That He did so determine is proved
by His word. In speaking of Chri-t, the
apostle says, “ All things were made by Him,
aud for Him.” Christ is the anointed prophet,
priest, and king. The world was made for
Him as Christ; that is, that he might be
come God manifest in the flesh to declare the
purposes of God as prophet—that He might
take away sin by the sacrifice of Himself, —
“God in Christ reconciling the world unto
Himself;” and finally, that He might subdue
it unto Ilimself, reigning over it, its rightful
Sovereign. Again, it is said He was “ the
Lamb slain from the foundation of the world,”
(this was not after its completion.) Another
says, speaking of God, “ He hath chosen us in
Him (Christ) before the foundation of the
world." If chosen in Christ before the founda
tion of the world, it was because sin was to
be permitted to enter, that Christ might be
come the anointed priest, making sacrifice for
sins.
That the earth is to be redeemed to God
through Christ, is proved by various plain
declarations of Scripture. Among them are
to be found the promises that “ the meek
shall inherit the earth,” though in time they
are only pilgrims and strangers in it, having
no continuing city, but are looking for one
which is to come, whose maker and "builder
is God. “ And I saw anew heavens and anew
earth, for the first heavens and earth had
passed away,” (like the old world passed
away in the flood, and came forth new, under
new regulations.) Then, after the great con
fl.igra'ion, shall the New Jerusalem “ come
down from God out of heaven, and be inher
ited by those “ who sojourned in the land of
promise, as in a strange country, dwel'ing in
tabernacles, (temporary residences.) looking
for a city which hath foundations, whose
maker and builder is God ;” and “as without
us they should not be made perfect,” all the
redeemed then shall enter together. Again,
it is said, “ We shall live and reign -with Him
(Christ) upon the earth.”
All the inhabitants of the eart.i are not to
be redeemed ; for Christ says, in speaking of
entering into the joys of the world to come,
“Many, i say unto you, shall seek to enter
in, and shall imi lie able; for strait is the gate
and narrow is the way that leads to life, and
few there be that find it.” “All that are in
the, graves shall hear the voice of the Son of
God, and shall come forth : They that have
done good, to the resurrection of life; they
that have done evil, to the resurrection of
damnation.” “ And whosoever was not found
written in the book of life was cast into the
lake of fire.” If a part only are to be saved,
it is because it was not a part of the purpose
of God to save all, or, purposing it, He was
not able to do it. Will any say He is not
able? It would be blasphemy. That He does
hot, is established by His word. That He
could do it, if He would, we must believe, if
it is true, as He says, none can disannul His
purpose. You that believe He does not save
all, but that He could if He willed it, but
confine His determination to passing time, in
what respect do you maintain His character
above what we do who believe Ilis declara
tion, ihat. none enter into eternal life but those
whose names are written in the book of life,
and that those names were written there be
fore the foundation of the world ? Recollect,
these are the statements of God himself. If
any plant themselves against these declara
tions, 1 have nothing to do with them, for they
fight against God, not me.
Those who do not come to Christ—do not
do so “ because they love darkness rather
than light, because their deeds are evil.”
Their sinful natures constitute the barrier
which keeps them from God. If any come
to God through Christ, it is because their na
tures are changed by the quickening, regen
erating power of Christ, by which they be
come new creatures in Hun. Do' you ask
why God makes this difference? I answer,
“ Who art thou that repliest against God, O
man ? Shall the thing formed say to Him
that formed it, why ha-a thou made me thus?”
Others may ask the question of God, 1 will
not; for 1 am willing that He should do with
His own as He will, knowing He will do all
things well. 1 further know that He has a
great house in the creation, and needs all
manner of vessels—some of gold, some of
brass, some of iron, and some of wood ; some
large and some small; some to honor and
some to dishonor ; some upon which to make
known His wrath, and some upon which to
make known His mercy. Since I, a finite,
being, living upon the bounty of another, do
as l please with that committed to my keep
ing, making it answer my purposes, shall I
say to God, you must not serve your own
pleasure with that which is absolutely yours?
God being rny helper, I never will.
As to the secret purposes of God, His pro
phetical word declares the general scope of
them. We see that wickedness is a neces
sary part of the work that leads to theaccom
plishmenl of them. It is also seen that those
who do the wickedness, will trample upon
the plain commands of God in doing so, and
that of their own free will, as every mail has
heretofore. Every man that has bowed down
to an image of his own making has done it
without compulsory force. The man that
swears, has borne false witness, stolen, mur
deied, coveted, lusted, or done any other
wicked act., knows he did it of choice, in the
face of God’s commandments, conscious he
was doing a wrong. Jacob, by driving a
hard baigain with Esau, and deceiving his
father, carried out the purpose of God in that
“ the elder should serve the younger.'’ Did
Jacob feel himself guiltless, or did God ap
prove the wickedness? Let his fear before
bis brother answer the one, and his eonstaut
punishment by like deceptions practiced upon
himself, answer the other. It was determined
from the first that Christ should be born of a
virgin, in the royal line of David, that line
coming through Uriah’s wife. Did not
David’s wickedness in that affair meet two
promise-d purposes? Look at his own self
abasement and tell me if he felt he was justi
fied in his wickedness because it met a pur
pose : and look to the bloodshed, ravishment
and treachery among his own children, and
tell me if God held him guiltless. Look at
the unwarranted hatred of the Jews against
Christ, culminating in crucifixion at Calvary.
It was according “ truffle determinate coun
sel and foreknowledge of God,” yet they “by
wicked hands slew Christ.’ A
hiss and by-word, a* they are scattered, is
thpir punishment. '
If it works in these events that men of their
own volition did which carried
out the purposes of God, so all the events of
the world’s history arc equally controlled by
God for like purposes, tor “ all things work
together for good to tlpise who love God, to
those who are the cabed according to His
purpose.”
Now, my brother, do you not see it is my
duty to point out thtv’error into which my
brethren have fallen in the Home Mission
affair, or any other affair? for the same God
who has ordained the end has ordained the
means to the end. ATi*3 while those who will
enter heaven had their names written in the
book of life before fie foundation of the
world, “ it pleased God by the foolishness of
preaching to save sudnas believe.” It is my
and your duty to faithiuily warn, exhort, re
buke and admonish with all long suffering.
“ Let us hear the cs#ciusion ot the whole
matter: fear God, and keep His command
ments: for this is the whole duty of man.”
“ And whoever does 4|eH, will he not be ac
cepted ? and if he dcojk'- .i-, '■ n iietb at the
door.” '•gEo. E. Brewer.
Rockford, Ala., Sept. 15,
The Faith Practically Denied.
The church is Christ*k witness on the earth.
It is to be as a city s a hill, which cannot
be hid—a light upon candle-stick, to give
light to ail, and is to “hold forth the word
of life.”
As the church is composed (or ought to be)
only of those who have come out from the
world and are separate therefrom, there will
necessarily be occasion? when decided antag
onism of views and actions between the
church and the world cannot be avoided with
out a surrender of principles and a betrayal
of the faith delivered tjp the saints. The Sa
viour foreshadowed this in His declaration,
“ I have not come to send peace on earth, but
a sword;” and Paul reaffirmed the statement
in his epistle to the-a Philippians, declaring,
“ For it is given unto you in the behalf
Chri-t, not only to believe on Him, but to'
suffer for His sake.”
The Great Master not expect the
church to be ever, as.it were, picking quar
rels with the world, and entering upon Quix
otic enterprises meretyJor prestige and glo
ry. The warfare to which the church is called
is not a war of words, «fit a war of principles.
And these principles are to be not only tuith
fu ly practice I, but tivccl oat and practically
applied. And, justat this point the antagonism
of which we speak, occurs. The world will
bear with the preaching of the gospel while
it is o .ly preached, but when the preaching
is enforced by the “logic of the life," not
onlv on the part of the ministry, but of the
entire membership of yhe church, and carried
out by the church in -\ts organized capacity,
then the cry is, “»w4 with it, away with
it.” And if this livjig and acting out of
Christian principles- persisted in, there
will inevitably be a Rupture, the lines will
begin to be distinctly Arawn, the deep inuc
terings of dissatisfsejß be. heard, and
threats openly and d<2L:lv L? given. And
these will come, notlnly from the actual
outside world, who dixloard even the form of
godliness, but as well from those who attend
upon the services of the sanctuary. A crisis
then, has come. The disciples are not called
upon to yield their profession of Christ, to
solemnly and publicly abjure the faith. No:
tins they would not do to save their lives.
All that is required is that they shall be sat
i.-fied with professing and preaching the gospel
and cease to press it by the force of a consis
tent. practical exemplification of the religion
of Christ. And to this requirement the
church of the living Gud too often yields/o
the sake of peace. And thus the church pruc
tically denies the faith.
A Bible Baptist.
Domestic Missions in Georgia: Difference
of Opinion; Shall the Majority Rule ?
To one who has been identified with the
Baptists of Georgia for about forty years, the
cause of Domestic Missions in the State pos
sesses an absorbing interest. In writing on
this subject, l am not conscious of striving
for the mastery. But, being cut off, provi
dentially, from active participation in our de
nominational affairs, it is some satisfaction to
confer with my brethren through the medium
of the press. I make no pretensions to “in
fallibility,” and shall not impugn the motives
of brethren who may not ad pt my views.
In a late article on this subject, l asserted
it to be a fact, that “Domestic Missions in
this State are not prosecuted with as much
energy aud success, as they were from thirty
to forty years ago, when the denomination
was not half so strong as it is now.” I sup
pose it is intended as a reply to this, that
“An Old Baptist” says of the Dorn. Miss.
Board, “ Tnat B >ard is doing ten-fold more
towards the support of missions in our own
bounds than our State Convention ever did
while it undertook to supply the destitution
around us.” In a note appended to liis arti
cle, he states that said “oard “has now an
Agent, who preaches Christ wherever he
goes, and nine or ten missionaries under ap
pointment. If our St:te Convention ever
employed more than two or three in any one
year, it has wholly escaped my memory.”
My chief object in a!i“ I have said on this
subject has been to induce my Georgia breth
ren to adopt the policy of nearly all the States
connected with the So. Bap. Convention, by
appointing a State Mission Board. For sev
eral years atter the organization of the So. Bap.
Convention, the Ga. Convention employed
four missionaries annually, besides those em
ployed by the District Associations. lam
confident that previous to that time, the num
ber employed was greater —though I have
not the Minutes at hand. “An Old Baptist”
is mistaken in the opinion that said Conven
tion never had “more than two or three”
employed in any one year. As he is mista
ten in one matter, he may be in others. For
instance, when he claims for the Dom. Board
that it “is doing ten-fold more” than the
Convention ever did, he ought to have shown
one of two things—either, that the Board has
forty missionaries in Georgia, or that each
one of its missionaries is doing as much
as four missionaries ol the Convention were
accustomed to do. I have no doubt that all
the appointees of the Board are good minis
ters ol Jesus Christ, and 1 tru*t are doing
much good. But it is too much to claim for
any one of them, that he is prosecuting his
work with as much energy and success as
four such men as James Reeves, John Wood,
Eldridge, and Lewis Everingham, some
of the pioneer missionaries of the Conven
tion.
I have not assumed, however, that the Con
vention employed a larger force of mis iona
ries than the Board. “An Old Baptist” will
not pretend that the success of a cause is to
be measured by the number employed ; and
he will pardon me, I trust, for di>senting from
his opinion that the Board is doing tenfold
more for Dom. Missions than our State Con
vention ever did.
Though I cannot agree with my old brother
on this point, however, I am well pleased to
shake hands with him on another. He in
quires, “ Whether in cases where a difference
of - sentiment exists, in reference to measures
proposed to be used to advance the cause of
Christ, it is not more in accordance with the
teachings of reason and revelation that the
majority should defer their judgment to that
of the minority than that the minority should
defer to the judgment of the majority ]”
This is just the principle I am trying to per
suade the Baptists of Georgia to adopt. The
“judgment” of an overwhelming majority of
Southern Baptists is in favor of conducting
Dorn. Missions mainly through the agency
of State Mission Boards. 1 think they are
right—and it is to encourage my Georgia
brethren to adopt this plan that these papers
are written. Not that 1 would have them
withdraw all support from the Marion Board.
Far from it: Let Georgia do her full share
towards sustaining that Board in its legitimate
work. But that it is fair and reasonable that
we should contribute “about one third ” of
the whole amount that goes into the Treasury
of that Board, while there are fifty missiona
ries, instead of ten, needed in Georgia, and
while the other States are husbandiug their
resources for use within their own bounds, is
what*! cannot believe.
This is my position: If it can be success
fully controverted, let it be done. I aid open
to conviction.
1 took part in the organization of the So.
Bap. Convention. If it was the intention of
that Body, in appointing the Marion Board,
that the conduct of Dom. Missions throughout
the South should he turned over to that Board ,
the churches have certainly failed to carry
out that intention. If Georgia acts wisely in
doing it, the other States would act wisely in
doing the same. They doubtless act upon
the conviction, that State Boards can carry
on Missions in their own bounds more elli
ciently than can one General Board in Ala.
Who will undertake to show they are mista
ken in this view of the subject ?
Georgia needs as many, or more, mission
aries as Va. or Ky. 1 verily believe, if we
had a State Mission Board, the contributions
for such Missions would be greatly increased.
J. H. Campbell.
Thomasville, Oct. 10, 18C0.
The Road to Rome.
The article copied from the Central Pres
byterian into the Index of July 14th, under
the above caption, is very expressive. If,
indeed, (as the Southern Churchman asserts,)
it is true, “that hardly any persons brought
up in the Episcopal Church leave it to join
the Onurch of Rome.” but. “that nearly all
these perverts first left the Presbyterian,
Methodist, Baptist and other churches, tarried
awhile in the Episcopil church, and then
landed in Rome,” then it follows, (as the
Central Presbyterian justly argues,) that
“ the ministers and members of the Episco
pal Church are in duty bound to give Pres
byterians and others solemn warning ot the
danger from their Church.” Instead of this,
they have sometimes invited them to enter
the pale of their denomination.
If I knew that almost every child that came
into my yard would, in all probability, fall
over a precipice in the back part of it, or find
his wav into woods near by and be devoured
by woFves, it se.-ms to me [ sh -u!d be very
sparing in my invitations to children to enter
my yard, and very earnest in rny endeavors
te 'prevent it. To Episcopalians, “the path
of duty is plain,” on their own grounds, and
aecordiny to their own confessions. A ser
mon was published in Charleston, S. C., in
the year 1853, that was preached by Rev. C.
C. Pinckney, an.esteemed minister of the
Episcopal denomination. On page 8, there
is the following note: “We have our own
special grounds of humiliation in our Church
in the United States. One bishop and about
fifteen of our clergy have recently gone over
to Rune. Four of the Roman Catholic pa
pers in this country, are edited by seceders
from the ranks of the Episcopal ministry,
and, like all new converts, their zeal is char
acterized by bitter hostility to their former
professions. But neither, we are glad to
state, were educated in our Church.” The
fact mentioned here, is in keeping with the
idea of the Southern Churchman. The title
of the sermon is, “ The R nneward Tendency
of the Times.” The text is, “And so we
went toward Rome.” Actsxxviii: 14. Tfie
writer, in the introduction to the sermon in
its published form, disclaims all sympathy
with Rome, denies that the Episcopal Church
is tainted with Romanism, and asserts that
the articles, liturgy and homilies are “ thor
oughly Scriptural and thoroughly Protestant .”
Why it is necessary to use the phrase “ thor
oughly Protestant if everything connected
with the Eoiscopal Church is “ thoroughly
Scriptural he does not inform us. Though
denying error as existing in the doctrines, etc.,
of the Church, he admits lhat there is a Roine
ward tendency. “ For fifteen years past, a
strong current has been setting in upon the
Italian shore, which has borne many a barque
too far among the treacherous rocks, and left
them stranded upon the Roman coast, a prey
to the arch pirates of the Vatican. The whole
Church has felt the force of this current, and
many have been drifted from their true posi
tion, until they have been brought within
sight of the Seven Hills.” In the sermon
itseif, he says: “ It is not in those who are
gone, but in those who are following in their
steps, that we see and lament the extent of the
Romish tendency in our midst. If the same
causes must produce the same result—f the
same sympathies must lead in the same di
rection, there are many more who have
already arrived at Appii Forum, and the
Three Taverns, and will soon see Rome.”
He specifies prevalent errors, which he says
naturally and inevitably tend to Rome.
Ist. A belief in baptismal regeneration.
He regards this as the root of the whole con
troversy, and considers that Dr. Pusey, Bish
op Ives and others took their first step to
wards Rome by a literal understanding of
the article on this subject. He speaks of
Bishop Wilson and others as authority, to
show that “the absolute regeneration of all
baptized persons,” is not a doctrine of the
Episcopal Church.
2nd. A denial of justification by faith.
This, he says, is very apt to follow a belief
in baptismal regeneration. He admits that
many maintain baptismal regeneration arid
justification bv faith at the same time; hut
he does not see how these two doctrines can
be reconciled. He also remarks, “ this doc
trine was the very point of contest between
Rome and the Refortnerd.”
3rd. A misconception of the office of the
Christian ministry. Many have regarded
their “ priests ” in the Levitical and R miish
sense, instead of in the Scriptural sense, and
that is as teachers or preachers.
4th. Exclusive views of Episcopacy. On
this he remarks: “The Apostolic Succession
and the Episcopal Ministry, we maintain as
apostolic institutions, valuable to the peace,
the unity, the stability of theCnurch ; neces
sary to its perfection , but not its existence.
The life ot God’s church is belief of the truth ;
its outward form, are its limbs and mem
bers.” But, he tells us that ultra views of
the Apostolic succession naturally had to
un-oriptural ehurchmanship, High Chtirch
m unship to Oxt'ordism, and Oxfordism to
Rome.
sth. False views of the true position of
the Episcopal Church. There is an opinion,
he say-, that the Episcopal Church is a “ via
media" —that it holds “an intermediate po
sition between Rome and Geneva,” —“ hot
more inclined to one than the other, and
equally removed from both.” As one proof
that it does not hold this position, he says :
“ Our Reformers took counsel with Melanc
thon, and Calvin, aud Zwingle, and Bucer ;
but when did they ever fraternize with
Rime?”
You have above, a Low Churchman’s view
of the “ Romeward tendency of the times,"
more than fifteen years ago. If, indeed, as
now seems to be the case, some Episcopa
lians virtually acknowledge that their Church
is the “ road to Rome," it certainly is not too
much, to expect them to speak of the “ Rome
ward tendency of their Church," and to tell
us why that tendency exists.
B. VV. Whilden.
Marshallville, Ga.
Baptist Looking Glass.
11. Support of the Ministry.
“ The church in conference assembled. The
deacon arose and said, ‘lt is time, brethren,
to make up something for the support of our
minister,’ (offering a subscription.) Where
upon A saiD, thougbj; it to be a matter of
mere charity, and (as cuarity begin-, at home)’
he was bound to provide for his own ; at any
rate, he thought the minister to be as well olf
as he and many of his brethren were, and
therefore considered himself under no obli
gation. B replied, that it could not be a
matter of charity at all, since the laws of na
ture and of God enforce it; and their own call
ot the brother made it a matter of moral ob
ligation. C alleged, that he had subscribed
liberally to a useful institution, and must be
excused in that case. D said, he had assisted
freely in building the meeting house, and
must have time to recover it. E rejoined, he
had been building houses or mills, and bad
no money left for any purpose. F said, he
nad a sou lately married, and it had called
for ail he could raise. G stated, that he had
made several contracts, and feared he would
not be able to meet them. H arose and said
he was very much astonished at the pleas
urged, as if liberalities to other institutions,
aiding to build meeting houses, erecting cost
ly houses, making sumptuous marriages, or
making contracts to amass wealth, would ex
onerate from a positive duty. I remarked, he
had made a short crop, and had nothing to
spare, to which agreed J, K, L and M. N
said, he was poor, and, though willing, was
unable to do anything; with whom O, P and
Q agreed. R stated, that short crops and
poverty might excuse from doing much, but
could be no ju-t plea for doing nothing, since
it is required according to what one has, and
not according to what he has not. S said, he
never subscribed to any. To whom said TANARUS,
‘ Yes, brother, I am for none of this obliga
tion ; if I get anything to spare, I will give
it and be done wuh it.’ V, VV, X and Y
said, they thought it rather dangerous to give
liberally, lest they should make the minister
proud, and so hinder his usefulness. Z, rising
soberly, said, he had attended to what had
been said on the subject, and was grieved in
spirit to hear so many objections to the dis
charge of a reasonable and just duty ; he
bared that a spirit of pride and covetousness
had disposed tSirm to possess -themselves of
the good things of God without returning
Him one thankful offering. He wondered
how Christians could expect the continuance
of the blessings of life, who are more abu
sive of them, and unthankful for them, than
heathen, who never use any of a new crop
till they have offered the first fruits to the
great Giver of ail good. To the brethren
who are so alraid of spoiling the minister by
liberalities, he said, ‘Are not your sons and
daughters as lovely, and their souls as pre
cious in your sight, as your minister? If so,
why not govern them by the same; and
when the sons request super fines to wear,
high priced, gay/y horses, and fifty or sixty -
dollar saddles to ride; and the daughters
lute string diesses, with trails from three to
five feet in length, fine bonnets and feathers,
and other costly equipage of dress, why do
you not say, no, my lovely children, these
will make \ou proud and ruin you? No,
your families can appear in all fashionable
elegance of dress, and your boards loaded with
all the luxuries of life, without adverting to
the evil consequences of such conduct. I
would that bretnren would be consistent.’”*
A Correspondent of the Index.
* Circular Letter of the Georgia Association, for ISOB.
Christians Sitting off in Church.
Bishop Pierce says: “ Our hearers are gen
erally too far from us. lam always glad to
see. the amen corners well filled with church
members, and the rest close to the altar. If
there is room to choose, a man’s interest in
the sermon and in religion, may be determined
by his voluntary distance lrum the preacher.
1 heard a wise man once say that ‘ the truth
delivered by the human voice could not reach
a man over forty feet."
According to a writer in the Banner of
Peace, Rev. Robert D mnell was once holding
a meeting among a farming people in the
West, at a tune when Indian corn was the
staple production. He had occasion to rebuke
the members of the church who habitually
to<>k their places on the outside of the con
gregation. Said he, addressing them : “ Re
member, my friends, the squirrels are apt to
destroy the outside rows.” To the class of
men before whom he was speaking, he could
not have, used a more forcible figure.
The Texas Christian Advocate says: “Old
brother C used to say, ‘ that a lire never
could be kindled so long as the sticks were
scattered. You must get the chunks together
and then they will not only kindle, but will
retain the heat. Just so,’ he reasoned, ‘you
must get the members of the church together.
L> t them scatter over the house, keeping out
of the amen corner and they will take fire
very slowly ; md even when kindled, it will
soon die out.’ There is good sense in the
suggestion. When a Christian takes a seat
near the dour or among the unconverted, the
chilling associations around him will keep
Cool all the warmth of feeling the sermon may
be likely to produce.”
Long Sermons. —ln earl) times,the preach
ers from about Bethany, or some of them,
when they went abroad, thought they must
preach from two and a half to three hours, as
Alexander Campbell did on some great occa
sinus; but they e<>uld not breathe the breath
of life into their discourses as he did into his ;
and it, by some means, came to be a saying,
in Cincinnati, when it would be reported that
one of these brethren would speak, that “ we
shall have the everlastiny gospel.”— American
Christian Review.
The Simple Thuth. —The Watchman and
Ryfiector well remarks: “ Rev. Dr. Hall, in
l is advice to the graduating class of Union
Theological Seminary, told them that they
could either give their hearers clear light
through plain windows, or let it in on them
through stained windows. He thought,
though the latter was some times beautiful,
that, on the whole, the former was best. For
ourselves, we think that the clear light of ihe
glorious gospel of God is best and most beau
tiful.
WHOLE NO. 2511.
Salvation by Physical Agencies.
In an address delivered before the (Episco
pal) Church Missionary Society, last Novem
ber, Bishop Cummins, of Ky., spoke of the
spread, among Episcopalians, of “something
more fatal, more alarming than Ritualism, —
that which gives to Ritualism all its basis, a
defection from the very spirituality of the
doctrine of man’s salvation, the substitution
of another gospel.” lie said : “ Almost daily,
is the press sending forth volumes of sermons,
manuals of devotion, catechisms, and doctri
nal treatises, that make the soul’s union with
Christ to be through physical agencies gifted
with supernatural power to convey the life of
God to the soul of man. The water of bap
tism, by God’s appointment, communicates
the Holy Ghost to the soul. The bread and
wine of the Lord’s supper, consecrated by a
priest, communicate the veritable body and
blood of Christ to the heart, through the hand
and the mouth.”
Among tfie proofs adduced by him was the
following: “ The Annotated Book of Common
Prayer, by the Rev. John Henry Blunt, is
the latest and most elaborate commentary
upon the Praier Book issued in England. It
is a work of much scholarship and research,
the work of several writers of kindred views,
and has been introduced into this country
with much eclat. As the fruit of ripe schol
arship and a treasury of historical informa
tion bearing upon the Prayer Book, it will be
most favorably received and widely circu
lated. But what is the doctrinal teaching of
that volume on the great question of the soul’s
union with Christ] ‘The whole scheme of
Redemption,’ says Mr. Blunt (Ritual Intro
duction to the Prayer Book) ‘ is based upon
a principle that God establishes communion
between himself and mankind chiefly through
bodily acts, and not through purely menial
ones, as. the exercise of thought and will.’
And again : ‘ fir the particular application of
the benefits of His mediation, Christ ordained
sacraments which are endowed with the capa
city of conveying inward and spiritual grace
to the soul through the organs of the body."
Bishop Cummins remarked on this passage:
“This is indeed a bold and unshrinking avowal
of the mechanical system of salvation by
physical agencies. The great Father of
Spirits, acting upon the human spirit through
the Holy Ghost, acts not through mental acts,
but through the body ! And the benefits of
Christ’s redemption are conveyed to us
through sacraments alone, and these endowed
with the capacity of conveying grace to the
sftul through the organs of the body ! That
is, through water acting upon bodily organs,
the very flesh and skin, the Holy Ghost con
veys the new birth of the heart, and the ele
ments of the Lord’s supper convey through
the organs of digestion to the soul, pardon,
grace, healing, life—even the life of Christ.
What is such teaching but the grossest mate
rialism ]”
Unconverted Membership.
A Kentucky Methodist writes to the Nash
ville Christian Advocate : “ I attended a meet
ing twelve months ago, at which thirty per
sons joined the church and were baptized, and
l hive never heard of one of these persons
being converted. The question generally
asked is. ‘ How many joined the church ]’ It
should be, 'How many were converted]’
What is to be done] Cannot our church
papers pr (test against this? Our pulpits]
Our people] Cannot we reerect the old altar,
and have it said of our Zion, ‘ This and that
man was born in her] and the Highest him
self shall establish her. The Lord shall count
when He writeth of the people, that this man
was born there.’ Campbellism prevails
largely in Kentucky, and is doing all in its
power to destroy the spirituality of Method
ism. Its members are saying to us that we
have adopted their method of receiving mem
bers into the chureh, and that we are toning
down the emphasis with which we once in
sisted on the necessity of spiritual regenera
tion.”
This loose practice seems to spread else
where. A c of the Southern
Christian Advocate , Macon, Ga., mentions a
Methodist minister who holds “that persons
offering themselves for membership, is suffi
cient testimony on their part of their desire
to flee the wrath to come, and he has full
privilege, according to the discipline, to pro
ceed immediately to administer to them the
ordinances of the church and receive them to
full membership, without any further evidence
of the correctness of their faith or spiritual
knowledge.”
Christ.
Although the writings of Carlyle are dis
tinguished by a strange distortion of the Eng
lish tongue, his conversation is remarkably
simple and straightforward; he talks right to
the point. His hatred of affectation and sham
is openly expressed, careless whom he may
offends I remember one occasion, at Mrs.
Ba-fil Montagu’s, when some lady, famous
for her “ muslin theology,” was bewailing the
wickedness of the Jews in not receiving our
Saviour, and ended her diatribe against them
by expressing her regret that he had not ap
peared in our tiroes. “ How delighted,” said
she, “we should all be to throw our doors
open to Him and listen to His divine pre
cepts ! Don’t you think so, Mr. Carlyle ]”
The sturdy philosopher, thus appealed to,
said, in his broad Scotch, “ Madam, I don’t.
I think that, had he come very fashionably
dressed, with plenty of money, %nd preaching
doctrines palatable to the higher orders, I
might have had the honor of receiving from
yon a card of invitation, on the back of which
would be written, ‘ To meet our Saviour;’ but
if He had come uttering His divine precepts,
and denouncing the Pharisees, and associating
with the Publicans and lower order, as He
did, you would have treated Him much as
the Jews did.”
The Two Syitems.
In the Independent Presbyterian church,
Philadelphia, Rev. John Chambers pastor, at
a recent communion service, every man, or
woman, or boy, or girl, who wished to com
memorate the Lord’s death, was invited to
participate, whether a member of any church
or not. A correspondent of the National
Baptist who was present, writes: “Upon
looking carefully over the hundreds of com
municants present, I think 1 am safe in saying
that I never saw so many Baptist church
members assembled for such service, when
there were so few children present. Rev.
Dr. Goulburn says in his recent work, * Pur
suit of Holiness’: The speoial blessing of in
fant baptism is this, that ‘ before one who is
baptized in infancy can be soiled by evil, he
is tinctured with good.’ Now, if such is the
case, we should naturally suppose a very
large number of youth would be found active
members of Pedobaptiet churches, while we
should look for a less number among the Bap
tists. If, however, the reverse be true, must
not we conclude that there is a more excel
lent way of bringing the children to Jesus,
than by meaus of the so called infant bap
tism ?”
Depravity. —“ Totally depraved” is not
equivalent to “as depraved as possible.’ It
imports nothing as to degree. It affirms only
that depravity (however defined) affects not
a part ot the man or a part ot his acts, but
the whole.