Newspaper Page Text
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.
’ * * - * *