Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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.