Funding for the digitization of this title was provided by R.J. Taylor, Jr. Foundation.
About Christian index and South-western Baptist. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1866-1871 | View Entire Issue (April 27, 1871)
CHRISUAN IfeKA AND &UTH-WESTERN BAPTIST. •iL 59—NO, 17. Is3 00 1 YEAR.' A RELIGIOUS AND FAMILY PAPER, PUBLISHED WEEKLY IBT ATLANTA, GA AT $3.00 PER ANNUM,* IrivariabYy in Advance. 1 ■ L J. ,T. TOON, Proprietor.; * e > Adrift. i Out on the ocean, I’m drifting away,£ My, light bark is tossed, and o’erwbelmed by each spray, Dirk lowering clouds shut oat heaven’s own light, And my sick heart keeps moaning in sadpess and night, NA beacon light shines in the distance for me, No watchword of love floats ae. 038 from the lee, No prayer is sent up heaven’s vengeance to lift, I'm out on the sea, I’m adrift, I’m adrift. I have passed through the wilderness, weary and worn, My feet sore from thorns, and my raiment alUoro, I’ve been mocked by the hope of * fountains coef And a bird that would warWe all night in my dream. I plucked tbe bright flowers that grew on the hill, but they withered a»d died, though I clasped them Vm, .••ii:., whose warmed me back to Passed away, % has left me too cold for the strife. Now I’iaA#«n the sea, and tho wind howling round; Miiuts out'from, my heart every beautiful sound, i • Aiid I moan and cry out, for a hand-clasp once more, , That would help moor me feist unto the shore.-- Xfoice that witold sound with the watchword of love, m ajm thJrf Would bold op the beacon aboves Itnl *y>udd*|W. and my frail bark IS toIUA- *= 1 ato imt-ou Ore VMS’I am lost, lam last. Maria. Galileo on the Atonement. Aristotle, the father of science, sent one of his pupils to the summit of a lofty rock, while he and the rest stood at the base. A stone and a feather were to be let fall for the pur pose ol obtaining, by actual experiment, whether a heavy body falls more quickly than a light one. The stone came down with great velocity, and struck the ground with mighty force; but the feather lingered in the air, and after a long interval it reached the »round. Having performed this experiment, the philosopher said that, “ bodies in falling to the ground, vary in velocity according to their weight.” This statement was believed by all the philosophers of Europe, without any further proof, and taught in all its Col leges and Universities for two thousand years —until the error was exposed by Galileo, in the lower of Pisa. Here we see an example of two features of human character, which have been most ruin ous in their influence, especially in the reli gious world. These are (a) That men have pronenes3 to is said, and be satisfied with the statements of others in stead of proving the thing for themselves; (b) and that men have a disposition to gen eralize without an examination of a sufficient number of individual cases—a tendency at once, to jump at conclusions and assume as facts, theories whose proof are defective. Nothing has suffered more from these defects than the Bible. It has been made to teach things the most contradictory and absurd. One man reads the promise of God, “1 will give you a clean heart,” and at once comes to the conclusion that man can do nothing to secure his own salvation, but that all is done for him by God. Another reads the text, Make )’ e anew heart and anew spirit,” (Ezek. xviii: 31,) and assumes that man’s salvation depends altogether upon himself. Both are in error. Each verse should be read in the light of the other. Tho same fatal propensities of our race are open in the tendency of -Utfßulfaahw ninwwtfr-j from the Apostolic age, to assume that the sacred writers attached tho same meaning to words as they do. We live in an age when theology has taken form—become, as some of our theologians say, a science (!) —Scrip- tural doctrines are now given in concise defi nitions. We are brought up attaching to certain words the ideas expressed by those definitions; and when we meet with one of these words in the Bible, we assume that the writer meant just what we mean. Thus are the sacred Scriptures distorted, disfigured, and made to teach the notions of men, and not to reveal the thoughts of God. As our Saviour said to the theologians of His day. “Ye render the commandments of God of no effect through your traditions,” so may we say of the theologians of our day, “ Ye make the Word of God worthless through your false definitions. ’ Let us look briefly at one subject, the great importance of which will be seen and ac knowledged by all: “The doctrine of sacri fice.” Those who know what uses are made of it by Romanists, need not be reminded of the importance of the subject. All evidence goes to prove that the notions of the first men who lived upon the earth were very crude. The structure of the He brew language itself, though not in existence probably for two thousand years after Adam, favors this idea. In early times, men were little accustomed to abstraction, and could not conceive of God as disconnected with some locality ; nor did they see any objec tion to a plurality of gods, any more than a plurality of men. As the rain and the light came from the sky, the ancients came to the conclusion that God’s dwelling was upwards ; and when they worshipped, they did their best to get as near heaven as possible; for they worshipped on the mountains. Hector, according to Homer, offered sacrifices on the top of Mt. Ida—22 11. 170. Strabo says that the Persians used no temples, but wor shipped in high places. (Geo. xvi.) “ High Places” are often mentioned in icripture as the worshipping places of Jewish idolaters. Abraham went to the top of a mountain to offer his son. At a later period, when places of worship were built, we find these generally erected on the top of mountains, and so was the temple of Solomon, in Jerusalem. Tacitus explains this universal custom by saying that the mountain tops are near heaven, and that there is a shorter passage thence to the gods for the prayers of men. The ancients —especially the Eastern na tions, and the Bible is an Eastern book gave gifts to their ftiends and superiors to show their love or gratitude. They felt grateful to God, but as He was in the sky, and not on the earth, how could they present their gifts to Him? Who could carry them upwards? They observed that fire consumed what was burnt; the substance disappeared almost altogether. They observed, too, that smoke was the produce of combustion, and that smoke ascended to the sky. What was burnt, they reasoned, ascended heavenward in the form of smoke. Hence the origin of burning sacrifices. As they understood it, it was a mere conveyance of the people’s gifts to God. As men’s notions of God degenerated, the idea attached to sacrifices became more base. The idolatries of the present, as well as the worship of Moloch in ancient times, repre rent the conception of God to which the hu man mind tended after the first departures from truth. The heathen then, as now, thought that God was like themselves, tyran nical, unfeeling, blood-thirsty and mean. They thought that nothing would satisfy Him but the witnessing of pain. Instead of offer ing the fruit of the earth, and the blood, as the life, of a choice and most valuable animal to God, to testify their gratitude and show their love, as they had been accustomed to do, they crouched with trembling at the altar, and hoped by pain and blood, to satiate the cravings of a Juggernaut. This last idea is never connected with Jewish or Patriarchal sacrifices. Noah sacrificed after the flood, biitr it was to express fits thanks to God for His providential case. Solomoa, also, at the dedication of bis mag nificent temple, sacrificed twenty-two thousand oxen and a hundred and twenty thousand ‘sheep. These animals were slaughtered, not .ffcr appease an angry, or satiate a blood thirsty taste, of a cruel and unfriendly God. They were offered to show the ting and the nation’s gratitude to God that He had per qjjfted- the temple at length to be finished. But that .was not all. The flesh of these animals was not wasted. The animals as wholes, represented by the blood, and some of the fat, were offered to God to express joy and gratitude. The flesh was then divi ded among the thousands of people, rich and pcK)T, that they might feast together. It was a grand day for the poor. It was ‘meant that it should be joyous and memora bly. On this point, see what the sacred wri ler penned : I Kings viri: 05,06. These are .the principal ideas connected with the Jewish sacrifices. Other sacrifice# had reference to ] SsonaUor national ceremonial cleansing, as tvc explained in a previons article. l?van gJical Christians attach, in these days, when an'abTrrial slain; 'efr# ft&ajof, vicariousness. We fancy that the animal is slain for the sin of the sacrificer, add that on account of the death of the sac rifice, the sinner is blessed. The sacrifice is thus regarded as furnishing the ground, the meritorious cause, on account of which God car. bless the sinful; and we fancy, moreover, that the Jewish sacrifices had that significance typically. This is a sad mistake, but it has grown amongst us uncorrected, like Aristotle’s dictum about the stone and feather. The heath en of old and the heathen of to day connect this idea with their sacrifices; but then they look upon Cod as a Being only to be dreaded, neither kind nor just, and they represent Him in Sheva, Juggernaut, and Ivalee, which are supposed to drink only blood, and to like best the blood of man. The Jewish sacrifices had nothing—not a trace of this idea. If you take the Old Tes tament and read it through, you will meet with a record of a vast number- of prayers. The majority are not in any way connected with sacrifices; but some ar/>. What is re markable is this: that in these prayers there is never a reference to the sacrifice—to any sacrifice. Examine, very carefully, I Kings viii, where a full report of the dedication or opening of the temple is given. An enormous sacrifice is offered to God. Solomon offers prayer to God at the dedication. He stood over the altar while he prayed ; he prays for himself and he prays for the nation ; he prays again and again for the forgiveness of sins; but what is remarkable is this: Solomon never makes any reference to the sacrifices. He does not ask God, on account of the sacrifices or their significance, to forgive the people and bless the nation. He does not seem to sup pose that the sacrifices were of any value, whatever might have been his faith, as pleas in prayer. The same silence iD reference to the merit of sacrifices pervades the whole of the Old Testament. What do we learn from this singular fact? A most important truth—viz.-, that the idea of merit attached to sacrifice, was foreign tt> the Jewish system of religion,and.that godly pian kppyy inching. g£ it until aft* if- thft "lose of theOlT Testament, and the departure of the spirit of prophecy. W T e learn that whether our notions of sacrifice be right or wrong, the notions of pious Jews in the days of the pa triarchs and prophets did not correspond to those of which I have spoken as our own. And now it may be profitable to inquire whether sacrifices, either patriarchal, Jewish, or heathen, were suggested by man or God. Many, in our day, think that God suggested them ; but the further back we go, and the nearer the apostolic days we come, we find the other opinion prevalent —that sacrifices are human inventions. Had Cain and Abel been told to do what was so strange and new as the offering of sacrifice, surely it would have been recorded. I have explained before how sacrifices originated. Justin Martyr devotes much space in his dialogue with Try pho, the Jew. to prove that even the sacrifices legislated about by Moses were not Divine; but that God introduced them into Jewish worship on account of the hardness of the people’s hearts, as he, did divorce slavery, etc., with the Jewish code. Our Saviour tells us that some things were in the Mosaic code on aocount of the hardness of the people’s hearts. (See Justin D. C. Trypho, capp. xxii, xl, xlvi.) It is difficult to explain tho fact that, throughout the Bible God sets no value on sacrifices, on the supposition of Di vine origin. And on the supposition that the Jewish sacrifices had any prospective refer ence to the sacrifice of Christ, it is impossible to explain those passages which speak of them so disparagingly, suoh as: “To do justice and judgment, is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice;” “Though ye offer me burnt offerings and meat offerings, I will not accept them,” etc. If the fortieth Psalm has reference to the Messiah, we perceive that the ancient Jews— the Jewish prophets—had no idea of His coming to be sacrified, or to offer Himself a sacrifice, a Jewish victim in the Jewish sense; for the Psalm says : “ Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire .... burnt offerings and sin offerings hast thou not required.” Finding, by a most careful examination of the Old Testament, that the sacrifices men tioned in it had no reference whatever to any thing then future, were, in some cases, like the passover lamb, simply commemorative of past events; in others, were intended to be cleansing in their effect; for thus they were made God’s property, and, therefore, so holy in themselves as to be able to give cer emonial cleansing, both to individuals and. to the nation. This cleansing process was regarded as a reminder of the people’s need of moral cleansing; but in most cases they were a meaus of giving God thanks, and for providing food for those who were allowed to eat them. Finding this to be the nature of the Old Testament sacrifices, the question arises: Is what light were they regarded by the Apostles, and in what sense did they use the word sacrifice ? Before coming to the testimony of the Apostles, let me refer to the conduct of our Lord in reference to these sacrifices. Had they been such important elements of divine worship, as to have been instituted with an intentional reference to Himself, is it not certain that He would have spoken of them, especially when foretelting His death to His disciples? He never referred to the ancient sacrifices, however, excepting to show their comparative insignificance. He said to the Scribes and Pharisees who murmured at His kindness to the outcast: “ Go, learn what this meaneth; I will have mercy and not sacrifice.” The Apostles, too, scarcely ever refer, in any way, to Jewish sacrifices, excepting the Apostle Paul in his epistle to the Hebrews. But here he simply speaks of the ancient sacrifices as illustrations. He does not sup- pose that they were intended or understood to have any reference to what was then future. His argument is this, and ia intended to show the superiority of the gospel to the law, and not to show their similarity j the literal blood FRANKLIN PRINTING HOUSE, AfljlNT A, GA., THURSDAY, APRIL 27, 1871. of sacrifice gave ceremonial cleansing, but only remind their worshippers of their need of moral "purity ; hut the figurative blood of Christ, the love of God as demonstrated in His death, has power over men’s souls to make them love God, and hate sin, and thus become holy. The Apostle does not say. that the sacrifice of our Lord in any way resem bled the Mosaic sacrifices. He knew that that would not have been correct. He uses the word in quite a different sense. His ob ject is not to *the similarity of sac rifices, but to show the superiority of that of Christ. .. ' '{ : The sacrifice of <mr Lord hatDno resem blance to those of the * law, agd therefore could not be prefigured by them. A sacri fice was in every sense a solemn religious act. Accidental death .whs never regarded as a sacrifice: nor was murder ever thought to be a sacrifice; nor could a public execution be a sacrifice in its Jewish senator One element was never absent The sacrificer mentally gave the animal to God when he slew it. But our Lord was put to deakh by those' who regarded Him as unfit to live, much more unfit to be presented to Goff. He was sim ply murdered by religious bigo|9y. He was Myriads ’of 1 His folio werifjlltve The sacrifice of Christ was no sacrifice after a Jewish fashion. His was « sacrifice in a far higher, nobler and truer sense—a giving up of life, and all in God’s service; a dying the most ignominious death rather than prove unfaithful to His word, unfaithful to His love, and unfaithful to the truth. A greater sacrifice He could not have made, and a greater proof of His own love, both to truth and to mankind, He could not have given. And He being God, in showing His love, showed the love of God to man. Thus, the death of Jesus, or the sacrifice of His life, becomes a medium of revelation—a rev elation of* the love of God to jnan. It be comes, also, a source of why did our Lord make this sacrifice? \Va3 it to appease’ an angry God ? Was it to induce God to be kind toman? Was it to cause God to love the world? Oh ! No. God has always been angry with the wicked, and always will be; but “let the wicked forsake bis way, etc., and lie will have mercy upon him.” This is God’s rule of conduct, as ex pressed in His own words. God has always been kind to man, and it was because He so loved the world that Jesus came, and lived, and toiled, and in the end sacrificed Himself that we may not perish. And now I have done, although I have not said half I have found I could have said on this intensely important subject. If the ob jections I have candidly stated, and tong and deeply felt, are real, and not imaginary, I shall have.done some littlo go r in the cause of truth, but if they are ima-mary, and not real, some hand will perform the task of ex posing, answering and removing them, and will so earn the gratitude of the writer, and thousands of others who have long confessed that the theology of Christians on this point was not satisfactory. It will be evident to the most superficial reader, that among the advo cates themselves, of the theories l have con sidered, there is not calm, and rest, and 9at inaction. There is, on the contrary, much straining of points, and wrestling with text to compel a doctrine they do jnot willing ■to speak. i } • It was not my purpose to write, or speak, or preach them in opposition to the cherished theories of theologians on the Atonement. I was unexpectedly led to express some thoughts on the matter, in common with other breth ren, and a promise was given that “one of the ablest writers and best theologians” of tho country would review my position. I was glad of this, and determined that I would give him as much work as I could, so that the matter might be thoroughly discussed, and, as I hoped, my own mind, at least, relieved of the difficulties I have candidly stated, and, as before remarked, greatly felt. I wish to say, in closing, that I have never undertaken to make a theory—the apostles and earliest writers had none. Neither have I adopted the theory of Coleridge, or Bush nell. The former’s theory I can hardly un derstand, and the theory of the latter—l doubt if he understands it himself. I have simply stated my objections to the best known and most extensively received theories; ex amined those Scriptures on which the theories are said to be founded—and shown that they are unsupported by the sacred writings. What I have a right now to expect, and what alone will be to the purpose, is, that each ar gument I have made shall be taken up and an swered. At present I say no more. Galileo. A Chapter on Agents. In Boswell’s Life of Johnson there i9 res corded a conversation somewhat like this: Boswell. —“Those suppers in which we used to indulge always gave me the headache.” John son.—“ It was not the suppers which your head ache, but the sense which I put into it.” Boswell.—“ Why, does sense make a man’s head ache?” Johnson.—“ Certainly, sir, when the head is unaccustomed to it.” Now, I must, oandidly confess that my jour ney through Southern and Southwestern Geor gia produces upon me, in recollection, an ef fect similar to that which Johnson’s conver sation produced upon Boswell. Whether I have had more sense or more nonsense put into my head may be questionable, but the. effort to recall the incidents and impressions of that journey is certainly attended with a dull cerebral pain. Fortunately for me, how ever, there is no need that I should subject myself to this species of suffering. The ground over which I passed has been traversed by two or three young brother agents, and with or without pain, as the case may be, they have done the work of description so well, that I will not attempt to follow in their foot steps. But I owe them a debt of gratitude, and will repay it by writing a chapter on Agents. The system of agencies which, for many centuries, has been in bud and blossom,itas at last, in this 19th century, ripened into the full fruit. Every department of trade, every new enterprise, every benevolent cause has its special agents. They are “ going to and fro upon the earth, and up and down in it.” But numerous as they are, they may be di vided into three great classes, each easily distinguishable from the others. The mer cantile agent is the flower of the flock. Asa traveller, his glossy beaver, his nicely fitting kid gloves, his polished boots, and his raking whiskers make him the ornament of the cars. In the city, too, there is none like him. Stop ping at the best hotels, selecting the best rooms, smoking the best cigars, he would cer tainly be pronounced by any ignorant for eigner a prince let loose upon the world. The insurance agent holds a lower position in the scale of magnificence. Time was, I believe, when he was the favored child of fortune. But since then, times have gone hardly with him. And as the felt hat has become more slouchy and the general appearance more seedy, there has come to him, in compensa tion, enlarged powers of talkativeness, and an increased disposition to button-hole every fellow man. There is one other class of agents. Should you ever meet at a depot a man with a carpet bag strapped around his shoulder, an his arm, a valise in his hand, andjg#ets&3Took of inquiry upon his face, that flfira is an agent for some reli gious object, ESpnot let appearances deceive you: he is the. feenest and the liveliest of the whole brood.. Swop for a moment before him, and look him in the face: be needs no more. Quick as lightni%-2h»"f:Ul draw upon you a paper or a book, a«d.» will go hard but that tie will make you deliver on the spot the contents of your purse. Strange as it there is no one who appreciates coh&ftjjt more highly, or bet ter understands take care of himself than a good agent, that old valise and carpet bag, in the capwious pockets of that pvercoat there are StQjnp away profound mys teries of comfort, fcpm this lug gage he now parts. become as neces sary a portion of aa Lis lungs or His liver. Follow raft as he trundles it to the train, and you find that, thumping and thumped, he still Tnakes a bee line for the best seat in the Ivies’ car. Ther j, sur rounded by his spoils,' he is at home. You can at once detect upof’his f ace an( l If* h* a posture an air of dpiotliuccomfort. h that car no one Se knows no one ; but., iu a oji Vtotr es amount ed with the inmates^ l *! house, and after awhile, unconsciously to them, he becomes quite the members of his short-lived family. He discovers their peculiarities. He his favorites, and though unnoticed, he hii a’general good time of it in the society of the ladies. Sometimes, as one and another of this dumb sisterhood reach their destination and leave him, there is a momentary feeling of loneliness, but he consoles himself the thought, that the family will soon increase, and perhaps for the better. Thus he travels on the railroad a great inventor of comfort. Iu the city or town he is rather a discoverer than an inventor. Wish a kind of intuitive attraction he is drawn toward the house where there is a comfortable “ prophet’s chamber,” and it is wonderful to see with what an in stinctive geneiosity h* avoids those homes where there is only a handful of meal in the barrel, and a little oil in the cruise. There is one comfort, however, of which, I believe, my brother agents are ignorant. Many years ago I read a book ot travel, by a Dr. Kitchener. In it he counsels all of his readers, who should even travel, to purchase a piece of stout oil cloth, and to carry it wherever they may go. This oil cloth he ad vises them to spread carefully over every bench or chair on which they may sit, lest they should contract csm! or rheumatism from dampness. This, I beiieve, is the only com fort necessary to complete the equipment of the agent brotherhood ; and, in bringing it to their notice, 1 think I may justly claim, here after; the title of The Agent’s Benefactor. I sometimes fear that agents are rather un dervalued ; at least, not sufficiently appre ciated. There are so many of them abroad that the redundancy of the currency has somewhat depreciated its value. We meet them at every store. They knock at the doors of every house. They jostle us at the corner of every street. The depots teem and the cars are thronged <?ith them, and it would not be surprising if thfword bore is the word usually employed whjti reference is made, , either collectively the mem bers of this class. as it should be. A good agent deserves high honor. Skill in his department of work should command re spect and admiration as well as skill in any other department. Doctors of medicine, doc tors of law, doctors of divinity—we honor them all. Why not equally honor a good agent —a doctor of the purse? None under stands like him how to feel its purse. None knows better than he how to bleed it. And though, like Dr. Sungrado, copious bleeding is his only remedy for every evil, yet if he does it skillfully, he ought to be made —hon- orably made—a doctor of money. R. W. F. After the Storm. All night, in the pauses, of aleep, I heard The moan of the snow-wind and the sea, Like the wail of Thy sorrowing children, O God, Who cry unto Thee. But in beauty aud silence the morning broke, O’erflowing creation the glad light streamed ; And earth stood shining and white as the souls j Os the blessed redeemed. , O glorious marvel in darkness wrought! with smilea of promise the blue sky bent, As if to whisper to all who mourn, Love’s hidden intent. —Harriet M. Kimball. Is this So?—Bead and See. “ Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations.” How plain and emphatic the injunction, even if you render it disciple instead of teach. “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature to old and young of all nations must the good news be announced. For what reason ? That Christ and His mission may be known; that the gos pel plan of salvation may be learned and souls saved. This is the great commission of God’s people on earth. The grand object of the Southtrn Baptist Convention is to encourage a promulgation of the gospel tidings, that souh may be saved. The field is the world, and the seed is to be sown in the hearts of the unconverted. Where? Wherever the end of labor is likely to be attained. Why more in Christian lands than in heathen countries ? Because most good is likely to be a£~s*plished with less labor, fewer inconveniences, and at a smaller co9t. Hence so many preachers and churches in Christendom ; but at home far too much gospel destitution prevails: hence Domestic Missions , 90 eminently proper. But “the gospel must be preached among all nations ;” so Foreign Missions, in accordance with duty, engage the heart, hands ind purses of Chris tians. What other field most invitingly lies open to successful Christian labor ? The children —that occupied by Sunday school la borers. What three great methods, then, in vite most prominently the united efforts of Christians, in disseminating the gospel? 1. Foreign Missions ; 2. Domestic Missions ; 3. Sunday Schools. The first is heaven-enjoined, and must not be neglected. Its immediate results are less promising, and, to human ken, present least reward for the efforts an<Lexpense demanded. Still, it is the ultimate purpose, end and ob ject of the church ; and all efforts should be directed to tutoring, and training, and urging the church of God to scatter abroad that gospel seed which is to result in the world’s evangelization. The second is embraced in the commission, and results in supplying, by united effort, the spiritual wants of districts of places in need of gospel preaching. The results are large and most promising. The more Domestic Missions are carried on and prosper, the more will Foreign Missions flourish. The third is the only other method in which the gospel can be disseminated in a greatly advantageous manner. If effectively prosecuted its results will be more benefi cial to the cause of Christ than the results to be attained by Foreign and Domestic Mis sions, were there no Sunday schools. By how much ? A thousand-fold. Convert chil dren to Jqsus and train them for gospel work, and the spirit of missions, of liberality, of zeal and of seltoacrifice, will permeate the entire Christian body. How much easier to convert and train the young than the old ! How much easier to mould the church to Christ’s will, when young in years, than when old and world-hardened ! The young gather ed in, taught and trained, and Domestic Mis sions will prosper a hundred fold more than under opposing circumstances. Why J jjjp cause the Christian conscience nurtured among the tens of thousands of youDg converts is more sensitive to the calls of duty. Hence the claims of Domestic Missions will be heed ed a hundred-fold more than under other cir cumstances. And such being the case, the spirit of benevolence will extend itself to Foreign Missions, and a ten fold increase over Domestic Missions will be the result. Why ? Because the instructed converts and churches will hasten to extend to the heathen the ben efits they have reaped. Larger churches, a better ministry, a more liberal laity will be felt in increased missionary labors to the end of the world. Thus, the proper prosecution of the Sunday school work is the real ground work of all Christian missionary labor. How important, then, that the Baptist Conventions in the South shouldgive a more earnest heed to this work,” rather than urging the “ impolicy ” of a Sunday sohool, or talking of “abolish ing” the most effective agency for the ulti mate evangelization of the world. The Chris tianization of children is the hope of the world. “ Abolish” the S. S. Board ! Why does each State put forth such efforts in the Sunday school cause? “Ah! they do; and that is why the S. S. Board is unnecessary !” Specious reasoning! most sophistical argu ment ! Christians can see the advantage of the Sunday school work—do not so greatly need to be urged in the perfqrtnance of this duty; therefore, the Conventions need not see the advantage of operating on the young mind. A work that is so grsat and glorious that all rejoice in it, the Conventions may ig nore! A work in which all are willing to work and cooperate, the Conventions must not encourage! Again, because the States will not do their missionary duty, the Con ventions must try to make them. The States will not form missionary Boards and prose cute the work ; therefore, the Convention must establish Boards and send agents to stir up the churches to duty! Why not rather cooperate with the States in the work all are most anxious, to engage in, and educate the churches up to the proper,missionary status i through the children ? Why not rather, co operate with the States in that work which is most beneficial and productive of large, immediate and ultimate results? Does not the Sunday school work take hold of the hearts of all, and obtain the hearty coopera tion of all? Why ignore the Sunday school work, then? Why not use it as the grand means to stir up all tho churohes ? Is such a course outside of the constitution of our Conventions ? Then remodel the con stitutions ; for this work promises larger benefits to the cause of Christianity than both Foreign and Domestic Missions combined. He who denies this is asleep. He sees not the indications of Providence. He knows not how the grsat Christian pulse is beating. He is behind the age, and unfit to counsel the brotherhood as to the advancement of the Redeemer’s kingdom. Abolish the Sun day School Board! ‘Then abolish Sunday' schools. A Sunday School Board iinpoiituti Then Sunday schools are impolitic. Surely Baptists are not so blind as not to discern what is the great movement of the day. Surely they would not set back the great clock of Christian evangelistic effort! To discourage Sunday schools is to do so. On the contrary, let us organize—organize—and encourage one another by united effort to exalt and advance more than ever the great Sunday school cause. Observer. Florida Baptist Affairs. t In your issue of March 30th, there is an article from “ J. S. B.alluding also to one from “ R.” which had previously appeared in your columns, which, I think, merits some attention from the Florida Baptists. The article by “ R.” I have not seen, but, from the quotations made by “J. S. B,” I infer that “ R.” said some hard things about the action of the Florida Baptist Convention in accepting the terms of co operation offered by the American Baptist Home Mission So ciety of New York. And in “J. S. B’s. ar tide, which I have before me, there are some statements made which “J. S. 8.,” I think, would have withheld had he been conversant with all the facts in the case. He says “ I merely state facts' ’ Now, if I mistake not the initials, I am sure “J. S. B.” is incapable of stating anything for a fact, but such as he believes to be so. But, may he not be mis taken in his judgment? For instance, may not his statement that “ The Home Mission So ciety had offered to spend, it would seetn, S4OO more in Florida than our Southern Board,” rest upon evidence sufficient to convince “J. S. B.” that it was a fact, when, in fact , no such offer was ever made ? How did the New York Board offer to spend S4OO more in Florida than the Southern Board ? It was certainly never made to the Convention, nor to any member of it, so far as my knowedge ex tends ; nor did I over hear of such an offer till I saw “J. S. B’s.” article. True, the Home Mission Society had expended that year at least four times four hundred dollars more in Flor ida than the “ Domestic Board,” and it was said, in the report of the Board of Trustees, “ There was good reason for the opinion that continued co-operation would result in much larger appropriations for this field.”— But no definite sums was ever named in the Convention, nor did the Society offer any other terms to Florida than they offer to all State Conventions, which terms can be 9een in their report of 1868, page 22. And I can also assure “ R.” that the Florida Convention was not put up “to the highest bidder,” nor was it knooked down to any Society or Board, North or South. The whole question was maturely and prayerfully considered by some of our best men, —men who are earnest friends of the Marion Board, and was settled upon its own merits, the sin gle question in their minds being, “ Will the greatest good result from such co-operation ?” and the Convention decided unanimously that it.tftauld. In order that others may be able to judge properly of this action, I will further say that the “ Home Mission Society” appointed sometime in 1869 (I think) Rev. P. P. Bishop as their general missionary for Florida. He removed his family, and settled permanently in our State, and became at once identified with us. In him the Society made a wise selection, for, rising superior to every worldly consideration, and drawing his inspiration alone from “Christ crucified,” he soon proved to the Baptists of Florida that he only.de sired to build up and strengthen the waste places of Zion, and they opened to him their hearts, and cheerfully gave him the “right hand of fellowship.” He soon became ac quainted with the appalling destitution with in our State, and the Home Mission Society did what it could to supply this lack by the appointment of our own men to labor in these destitute places, and by extending a helping hand to weak churches, struggling to build houses of worship. This they did willingly, cheerfully, when help from no other source js3 00 1 YEAR. } WHOLE NO. 2537. cotfld have been secured. Under aU these circumstances, at a meeting of the Conven tion held in Monticello, November, 1809, at the request of the President, brother Bishop explained a plan by which State Conventions maya^o-operate with the American Baptist Home Mission Society. After full discussion, the subject wa9 referred to a committee, of which the President, Elder H. Z. Ardis, was chairman. In their report, they say that the subject demanded mature deliberation than could then be given, and recommended that the whole subject be referred to the Board of Trustees, who, after due deliberation, de cided to co operate. At the meeting in Jack sonville in November last, they presented a full report, recommending continued co-oper ation, which elicited a general discussion, and was um»”imously adopted by the Convention. In that report, they say, “ Time was taken for the correspondence and consultation ; and the result was a unanimous decision in favor of co operation.” After speaking of the great destitution, and the pressing need for help from without, the report* continues : “ Your Exec utive Board could not fail to be deeply moved by the offer of help which had been referred to them for consideration. They did not decide to accept the proffered assistance, however, without catreful reflection. They thought it their duty entertain the question: Does politiqal propagandism form any part of the design of the Society which invites the co operation of the Convention? But they fail ed to discover the slightest ground for an affirmative answer. Nothing that they could learn of the history of the Society, or the conduct of its missionaries, encouraged the suspicion of a political purpose. Besides, it was manifa9j.*#mt such a purpose, if it existed, would be’ utterly defeated by the plan of co-operation proposed by the Society itself. Your Board saw that, so long as it should be t left to themselves to determine who should be appointed to labor as Baptist Missionaries in- Florida, they would hold in their own hands ample security, not only against the designed prqstituticVii of missionary labor to political ends', but also against the accidental appointment of men who would carry parti san bitterness into the Christain pulpit. The conclusion arrived at, was this: Our Baptist brethren of the more populous States, earn estly desiring the prevalence in purity of that Gospel which is “ the power of God unto salvation to every one that beleiveth,” and zealous “ for tlife faith once delivered to the saints,” are cordially, and without guile, extending to us the hand of fraternal fellow ship, and asking permission t,o share with us the burdens connected with the work of evan gelization which God has placed before us. It becomes us with equal superiority to un worthy prejudices, to recognize the brotherly spirit thus manifested and gratefully to wel come the offered cooperation.” Now, I ask, was this action wise ? Was it right? Would the Convention have done its duty to the perishing thousands within its bounds, its duty to the oause of truth, its duty to the Master, if the proposition had been rejected? We think not. Once more. “J. S. B.” says he is ins formed that the Convention was composed of only ten or twelve brethren, and that three of the number were and are sustained, in whole or in part, by .the N. Y. Board, and that others “ had not resided long enough in “tne State, t>r travelTeff ektetfSTveiy’ Enough through it, to acquaint themselves with the views and feelings of Florida Baptists gener-’ ally,” and in a more recent communication, the same writer (I suppose) says, “The ac tion of a little handful of brethren at Jack sonville, has not, and cannot transfer the great mass of our brethren in Florida from a Southern to a Northern Board. The hearts o. an overwhelming majority of the Baptists in Florida, I (J. S. B.) have the best of reasons to know, are still with their brethren of the Southern Baptist Convention.” In reply, I have this to say, that the Convention, though not large, was at least twice as numerous as J. S. B. states, being composed of twenty one members, representing seven constituent bodies, with a membership of three thousand. It was eminently representative in character, and had J. S. B. been present in person, as he was by letter, I have no doubt but he would have given the Slight of his counsel for cooperation. To the last point quoted from “J.S. 8.,” 1 reply, it never was con templated by the “little handfull of*breth ren at Jacksonville,” to transfer any single Baptist from a Southern to a Northern Board, nor to sever their own connection with the Southern Baptist Convention. I believe brother Sumner himself* were he acquainted with all the circumstances, wo*dd say, “Co operate with the Home Mission Society, but give us your ,aid in Foreign Missions, and in the Sabbath school workand this, I be lieve, would be the advice of our wisest and best men of other States. H. B. MoCallum. Lake City , Fla. Self and the Saviour. A person who long practiced many austerities without finding any comfort or change of heart, was once complaining to the Bishop of Alst of his state. “ Alas,” said he, “ self-will and self-righteousness follow me everywhere. Only tell me when you think I shall learn to l:>ave self. Will it be by study, or prayer, or good works? “I think,” replied the Bishop, “ that the place where you lose self will be that where you find your Saviour.” At another time, a person was excusing himself for not attending public worship, by observing that the manner and appearance of the minister were disagreeable to him. “ Let us,” said the bishop, “ look more at our Sa viour and less at the instruments. Elijah was as well fed when the bread from heaven was brought by a laven as Ishmael when the spring of water was pointed out by an angel. Whether, then, we are fed immediately from God, as the Israelites with manna in the wil desness, or by the glorious means of those who may seem to us as angels, or by the base means of those who seem to us contemptible, let us be content and thankful, if they are but appointed by God, and if it be the bread aud water of life which they bring.” The Cross of Christ. He that stands beneath the cross, and un derstands the scene, dare not sin ; not because there is a hell beneath him, or an angry God above him, but because holiness is felt to reign there. The ground on which ho treads is sacred; the glory of the Lord encircles him; and, like Moses, he must remove the shoes from his feet. The cross is a venerable spot. I love to linger about it, not merely that I may read my title to everlasting life, but that l may study the greatness of God. Iu .3 the term advisedly. God never appears so truly great, so intensely holy, as when, from the pure energy of principle, He gives Himselfj in the person of the Son, to die rather than His character shall be impugned. Who dares prevaricate with moral distinc tions, and talk of death as a greater evil than dishonor, when God, the mighty Maker, died rather than that truth or justice should be compromised ? Who, at the foot of Calvary, can pronounce sin to be a slight evil 1 Here, then, lies the most impressive sanction of revelation .-r- TkornmU. Alone. Alone, alone 1 in utmost need, With conscience banning evil deed, And heart that breaks not, though it bleed. All, alone! to solve the doubt.— To work our own aalration out; Gaatirg our feeble hands about For human hope, or human cheer, Or only for a human tear, — Forgetting God is always near. The loveliest face has never brought Its loveliest look; the deepest thought Is never into language wrought; And beauty to the highest art Slips from the painter’s hand a part, And leaves him aching at the heart. And musio, borne by echo back, Pines on a solitary track, Till faint hearts cry, Alas, alack! Aud love! his deepest, truest tone, Is known to God Himself alone, And finds no answer to his own. The wine-press must alone be trod, The burning ploughshare pressed unshod,— There is no rook of help but God. —Mrs. Mimibeth Oakes Smith. Calling Pastors. Human nature is the same among all de nominations, not excepting the Presbyterian. It is not unfrequently the case, that it takes a church a year or twp of experience.to find out that it is not so easy to secure such a minister as will satisfy tkw»ir Anibitim. The brilliant men are not numbered by the scores; and yet many a church is uneasy under the earnest and faithful preaching of a strong and useful man, because it has got into some fool’s head, and from his head into the minds of people who are otherwise sensible enough, that they ought to have one of the most bi il liant lights in the church; And many a church is pastcyless, and wretched, and every week becoming more so, because, forsooth, an eloquent, learned, affable, widely-known and good looking minister cannot be had. There is a vast deal of folly and some wick edness in these matters. A revival of reli gion which should be so truly and wholly from God as to teach professing Christians what they go to church for, —to say nothing of the non-professing portion of the congrega tion, —would be an untold blessing to the American church. —lnterior. Deny Thyself. Aygoland, a king of the Moors, having waged war for a considerable time with Charles thejGreat, was induced, as was the fashion of the day, to receive the Christian faith, in order to obtain peace on more ad vantageous terms. For this purpose ho re paired to the French court with prodigious pomp, and observing there a great number of poor men, who were fed and clothed by the* Emperor’s bounty, inquired who they were. The reply was, “They are the servants of God.” “What!” said the heathen prince, “ are the servants of Emperor so rich and fine, and the servants of God so poor and wretched ? I did intend to be baptized, and become a Christian, but now I am resolved never to serve that God who keeps his ser vants no better.” Caryl, who relates this anecdote, observes, that what this ignorant prince spoke out free ly, many speak secretly in their hearts : t hey will not serve Christ upon self deny ing and suffering terms. Da You See It in your Heart ? Dr. Merle d’Aubigne was a student at Geneva at a time whon the gospel was openly ridiculed by the professors as well as the stu dents. In 1816, he presided at a meeting which indignantly protested against a pam phlet defending the doctrine of the divinity of Jesus Christ. In 1817, Mr. Robert Hal dane was honored of God to renew a testi mony to the despised gospel among these students. During his stay at Geneva, Merle d’Aubigne met him at a private house, and heard him read a chapter from the Epistle to the Romans, concerning the natural corrup tion of man. The student of theology was astonished to hear of men being corrupt by nature; but, being clearly convinced by the passages read to him, he said to Mr. Hal dane, “ Now I do indeed see this doctrine in the Bible.” “Yes,” replied Mr. Haldane, “ but do you see it in your heart?” It was a sim ple question, but it came home to the young man’s conscience. From that time he saw and felt himself to be indeed a sinner, and learned that he could bo saved by grace alone, through faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.— Witness. Amusements. We degrade human life when we seek amusement for any other purpose than recre ation. As there exists a tendency to carry nearly every class of amusements to excess, and to associate that which is evil therewith, it fol lows that what is purely innocent needs to be closely watched and carefully restrained to shield from harm. The so called popular amusements of the day, to which class belong such diversions as theatre-going, card-playing, horse-racing, dancing, and a host of others, are generally more or less fully demoralizing, that the members of the church cannot engage in them without harm to the spiritual life*.and that when encouraged, or allowed in connection with our families, the probability is lessened of their conversion to God. As ministers and people we should put forth energetic efforts to lessen the influence of all amusements which are productive of harm. Speak for Christ. —Every word we speak for Christ is pouring oil on the fires of grace in our own heart, and will make them burn with an ardor otherwise unknown. The Chris tian will find, that while, before he com menced this course, he had a thousand ques tionings and difficulties, after he has done so, he will scarcely have an hour’s trouble with himself. The truth seems to be this : Christ is so kind and unexacting a master, that He will not let His servants fight two battles at once ; if they will take the sword and go into the enemy’s camp, He will keep the citadel for them ; if they will be about His business, He will set their hearts entirely at rest. Household Baptism. —ln a sketch of Hyde Park church, a writer in the Christian referring to a revival then, says: I was per mitted to baptize more than twenty converts, and among them, three entire household— just such households as we believe the Apostle baptized-—all babes in Christ. ■ m ||sgj| — Puiflf Ms is.—There may appear two or three in an age whom we should not wish to see giving up their habit of sermon-reading in the pulpit, they do it so well, and their thoughts are so grand and beautiful. But, as practiced by most men, it is like dancing in chains ; there is no ease nor gracefulness in it. — R. P. ATMaster. Few in Number.— According to a writer in the New Jerusalem Messenger there are only seventy Swedenborgian churches in this country, and only half of the seventy have ministers, and there are just four theological students in the New Church Divinity School. ’ * * - * *
