CHRISTIAN SOUTH-WESTERN BAPTIST.
YOL. 50—NO. 44
A Religious and Family Paper,
PUBLISHED WEEKLY I* ATLANTA, OA., AT
Three Dollars per Annum,
Invariably in advance.
J. J. TOON, Proprietor
“ How is the Strong Staff broken, and the
Beautiful Bod!’ ’
“ Dr. N. M. Crawford is dead !” Such
was the startling announcement which
reached our quiet little city yesterday and
sent a painful feeling of bereavement to
many hearts.
\Y hen the great leveller prostrated the
familiar form of Nathaniel Macon Craw
ford, he struck a shining mark ; for then
a great and good man fell in Israel. There
fell the ripe scholar, the able divine, the
honest man, and, more than all, the hum
ble, devout and child-like Christian. He
was a man of the noblest principles, of
the purest morality, of the simplest faith,
and of the broadest charity.
The writer has had very considerable
opportunities for observing and knowing
men, and he can truly say, that he never
mot a finer, more completely developed
character than N. M. Crawford. Although
possessed of strong passions, he had so
completely subjected them to the obedi
ence of Christ, that a stranger might sup
pose he never felt the force of a powerful
impulse, and that he was free from many
of the temptations which beset men of
warmer tempei’aments and more ardent
natures.
But no man, perhaps, ever lived who
had a warmer heart and stronger sympa
thies than the subject of this brief notice.
His benevolence was like a majestic river,
—broad, placid, and refreshing in its
course, and his liberality was bounded
only by his ability.
For the distressed he always had a heart
to feel and a hand to help; and when the
secrets of all men shall be revealed, then
many a deed of charity performed by N.
M. Crawford, and known only to God and
the beneficiary, shall receive meet reward.
He accepted, as one article of his creed,
that “No man livetli unto himself;” and
therefore, whenever good was to be done,
or evil to be put dotvn, he was always to
be found.
But he is gone now : the eye that beam
ed with Heaven’s own truth, is closed for
ever ; the face where candor had fixed her
abode, is marred by the ashen hue of
death ; and the clod rests upon that manly
bosom in which once beat as true and no
ble a heart as was ever covered by the
blazonry of star and garter.
He has gone to join that great caravan
of the mighty dead who now “ rest from
their labors, and their works do follow
them.”
Y€s, my brother, a whole denomination
bereaved, stand with tearful eyes and
chastened hearts to receive the news of
thy departure ; but in our sorrow we will
say:
■ “ Eropier, thou art gone to rest;
Thy toils ana cares are o’er;
And sorrow, puiu aud suffering now
Shall ne’er distress thee more.
Brother, thou art gone to rest;
Thy sins are all torgiven;
And saints in light have welcomed theo
To share the bliss of heaven.”
Brother, peace to thy ashes ! Peace to
thy soul! H. C. H.
Lessons from Creation—No. 11.
Another lesson to be learnad from the
Mosaic account of the creation is that of
Unquestioning Faith.
The Bible is not a systematic treatise on
theology. If it were, it would probably
begin with a labored argument to prove
the existence of a God. The Bible at
tempts no such proof. It assumes a God
to begin with. The very first sentence
introduces Jehovah at work. If a man
denies the existence of a God, the Bible
calls him a fool, and refuses to argue the
point.
The fact is, that, in this whole matter,
argument is, at best, unsatisfactory, unless
we use it for other purposes than for that
of direct proof. The argument from de
sign itself, though it has had such modern
advocates as Paley and McCosh, is any
thing but satisfactory, unless it be used as
indirect proof. Mathematical science itself,
rigidly deductive as it is, frequently needs
indirect proof. The reductio ad absurdum
is a common method of proof in plain
geometry. If our natural theologians
would only use the argument from design
for what it is worth, and not insist upon
it as a method of direct proof, we should
probably find less difficulty in meeting
the scientific objections of some modem
investigators.
If we were seeking for direct proof of
the of a God as is assumed
in the Bible, we should greatly prefer to
look in the direction of metaphysics, than
in that of physics, we should feel more
confidence in accepting the argument of
Descartes, obscure as it may seem, than
in committing ourselves to what is com
monly called the argument from design.
Descartes built upon an acknowledgment
of human ignorance ; and, sceptical as he
may seem to be, committed liimself to a
theory, which was in reality ‘the highest
development of faith. There is a bold
humility and a decisive caution about this
man, which we cannot but contrast with
the flippant assumption of knowledge,
which forms the chief feature of much of
our modern theological speculation. In
fact, modern cosmogony has advanced to
such a pitch of self-sufficient complacency,
that our chief wonder is that some of our
great scientific men don’t illustrate their
theories, and, at the same time, astonish
the natives of this vulgar earth, by making
half-a-dozen worlds some flue morning, by
way of getting an appetite for .breakfast.
Great artists, however, commonly employ
some artisan to perform the mechanical
part of their work ; and the trouble would
be, that these theories of word-making are
so very sublimated and etherial, that no
artisan under heaven could possibly un
dertake what was to be done.
We hear a good deal about reasoning
from “ nature up to nature’s God ;” but
when this has been done at all, it has been
almost exclusively confined to those who
have, in one way or another, been enlight
ened by revelation. The tendency has
been decidedly the other way—namely, to
reason down through nature into blind in
fidelity, or else to refuse to reason at all,
{53,00 A YEAS.}
and to,deify nature herself. A greater
reasoner than Thomas Hobbes probably
never lived; and yet he called his death
“ a leap in the dark." Indeed, he was in
the dark all his life. Hume was a man of
splendid powers; and yet how dark was
his life, and how much darker still his
death! Voltaire’s genius has rarely been
excelled for versatility; yet the man was
befogged all his days, and died miserably.
We cannot even accept the time-honored
proverb, “An undevout astronomer is
mad.” If a man looks at nature with the
eye of faith, he sees a grand mirror re
flecting the attributes of God; but if he
looks upon nature with the eye of unbe
lief, he finds her reflecting his own wild
fancies, or else refusing to throw back any
image. Newton having first consulted
reverently the oracles of God, peered into
the heavens. He was hnmble, child-like,
truth-loving ; and he saw and told to the
world more mysteries than it was able to
receive. He gathered shells on the beach
of the great sea of truth, as he humbly
said; but the glory of those shells is that
“ Wherever they go they will sing of the sea”—
they will be representative —and thus they
will give momentum to true progress. La
place had no faith ; and “ rising to the
heavens on the wings of Newton’s faith,
he turned his back upon the sun, and
came back to earth in the darkness ot his
own atheistic shadow.”
To accept God’s account of creation re
quires faith —humble, child-like trust.
The very first sentence in the Bible tests
this. It is well to sound the key-note at
the beginning. We can thus start right.
At the creation, the morning stars sang
together, and all the sons of God shouted
for joy. At the birth of Jesus, the an
gelic choir took up the notes of the an
them. God’s people, the church militant,
have ever since been singing it as a great
battle song; and when the fight is done,
and we lay our armor down, the song ol
triumph—the song of Moses and the Lamb
—shall celebrate the victory as faith gives
place to sight, and grace to glory. Let
us, then, be faithful to God; let us hope
now, that we may enjoy then ; let us be
lieve now, that we may see then. Now, we
see through a glass, darkly ; hut then we
shall see face to face. It doth not yet ap
pear what we shall be ; but we knoiv that
when He 6hall appear, wo shall he like
Him; for we shall see Him as He is.
J. C. lIIDEN.
Wilmington, N. C.
The Presence of God Worth Dying For.
Lord, ’iis an infinite delight
To see Thy holy face,
To dwell whole ages in Thy sight,
And feel Thy vital rays.
This Gabriel knows ; and sings Thy name
With rapture on Bis tongue;
Moses, the saint, enjoys the same,
Aud heaven repeats the song.
While the bright nation sounds Thy praise
From each eternal hill,
Bweet odors of exhaling grace
The happy region fill.
Thy love, a sea without a shore,
Spreads life aud joy abroad ;
Oj’tis a heaven'worth dying foi
To see a smiling God !
Show me Thy face, and I’ll away
From all inferior things;
Speak, Lord, and here I quit my clay,
And stretch my airy wings.
Sweet was the jouruev to the sky,
The wondrous prophet tried:
‘‘Climb up the mount,” says God “and die
The prophet climbed and died.
Softly his fainting head he lay
Upon his Maker’s breast,
His Maker kissed his soul away,
And laid his flesh to rest.
In God’s own arms he left the breath
That God’s own Spirit gave;
His was the noblest road tadeuth, -
And his the sweetest grave.
— Dr. Watts.
Answer to “ A Call from Zion,” or, Ministe
rial Support.
In the Index and Baptist of October
sth, Bro. Jos. S. Baker advertises for a
pastor for some church, perhaps in S. W.
Georgia. He desires a pious, discreet,
intelligent young minister, without a fam
ily, willing to devote his whole time to
the work, and offers him 0400 for his ser
vices. He calls the attention of the
brethren of Greenville and Richmond to
this flattering inducement. To us, this
sounds like high sights and low figures,
and we would suggest to the brother, that
if he would look nearer home, he would
be more apt to find ministers of 0400
ability, than in Greenville and Richmond.
To state our position, and make known
the object of this article, we join issue
with Bro. 8., and confess to belong to
that class of ministers who believe in re
warding men according to their works,
and as men cannot work without ability,
we believe in rewarding ability. As this
' n heavenly rule, we feel that it is not
very sinful to practice the same on earth.
We hope, therefore, the brethren of
Greenville and Richmond have taught
their pupils to properly appreciate their
abilities, and to take care that they do
not throw their pearls before swine. We
simply mean just this : that any Baptist
church that says 0400 is a sufficient re
ward for the time and services of a pious,
discreet, intelligent Greenville graduate,
is too much lacking, either in piety, dis
cretion, or intelligence, to be behefitted
much if they really had the pastor their
human pride makes them desire.
If we know our own hearts, we are not
disposed to make grave charges without
cause, but if language means anything,
we cannot regard Bro. Baker’s “Call
from Zion ’’’ in any other light than an
insult to a large and highly respected
portion of the ministry, and calculated to
do great injury to the cause of Ghrist.
He concludes his “call” with the fol
lowing wholly unnecessary and offensive
appendage: “As to those who demand a
salary proportionate to what they con
ceive to be their ability, or equal to what
they could make at the bar, or in a Pro
fessor’s or President’s chair, in some
High School or College, or what would
be needful to support a wife and a dozen
little responsibilities at some future day,
I am unwilling to aid in introducing any
such to the aforesaid or any other church
of Christ, I would rather see them ac
cepting an office of some of our theifing
carpet-bag rulers, than filling the office of
pastor in the church of Christ.”
Is Bro. Baker candid in the above ?
If so, then be it known to all ministers of
the gospel who demand a salary for
preaching, equal to what they can make
at another employment, that Bro. Baker
publicly proclaims he had rather see you
FRANKLIN PRINTING HOUSE, ATLANTA, GA., THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 1871.
attached to a clan of thieves than the
church of Christ! If you are thieves, it
is high time that you either stop your
roguery, or else drop the sacred profes
sion you claim, and ally yourselves to the
clan of thieves to which he thinks you
more properly belong. But, if you are
not guilty of this most infamous ox all
crimes, it is high time yoif were defending
yourselves like honest men, and stopping
the mouths of your accusers. To say the
least of it, it is high time that Baptist
ministers and Baptist churches generally
understood, and were agreed upon the
truth, whatever it may be, in regard to
this vexed question of “ministerial sup
port,” and having learned the truth, let
them, with unanimity, practice that truth.
We are glad to see the question is being
noticed to some extent in our own Index
and Baptist, and we do hope others will
come in, and the subject never again be
permitted to rest till the truth is found,
and so clearly and definitely set forth that
no enlightened Christian will deny it.
With the hope of being able to suggest
some points for inquiry, we would respect
fully ask a place for the following ques
tions, designed especially for the consid
eration of Bro. Baker, and any others
who may entertain his opinions.
To begin at the root of the matter, we
would ask, first, has God commanded His
ministers to go forth into all the world
and preach the gospel to every creature,
and yet denied them the right either to
demand or receive any compensation
whatever for their time and services ?
If it be admitted that it is a Bible truth,
that “ the Lord hath ordained that they
which preach the gospel shall live of the
gospel,” has the Lord also definitely de
cided how much, and just how little, is a
living in each particular minister’s case ?
And has the Lord also limited this “ liv
ing” to mean neither more nor less than
a present, personal sufficiency of food and
clothing ? If so, has not the Lord limit
ed the “ living ” of every private Chris
tian to the same ? If it be admitted that
the Lord has not decided definitely as to
what a living is, to whom does the right
of deciding belong—to the minister, or to
the church ? This is the first question we
wish to decide:
Has a minister of the gospel any right,
the least right, natural or otherwise, to
use the grace and intellect that God has
given him, in judging of his own necessi
ties and setting an estimate upon the val
ue of his time and services, or has God
delegated this right exclusively to the
superior judgment and grace of the mem
bers of the church or churches which he
may be called to serve? It will be ad
mitted by all, that the minister naturally
has this right, and if it cannot be shown
where God has ever taken it away, or
delegated it to the church, he still has it.
But if God has taken it away and given
it to the church, then Bro. Baker, being
a minister, should not claim the right of
deciding that a salary of 0400 ought to
be saificienl to sustain a siiigle man.
If it be granted that a minister of the
gospel naturally has some right to use his
judgment, as above-mentioned, has he not
as much right, an equal right, as good a
right, according to the laws of both God
and man, to exercise this privilege while
engaged in the ministry, as he would have
if engaged in other pursuits, or as any
private church member has to set an esti
mate upon the value of his time and ser
vices while engaged in any of the ordina
ry vocations or business transactions of
life ? If God the Father, Jesus Christ,
any of the apostles, the laws of men or
common sense, has made a difference,
please mention where, how, wbv or when ?
If it be granted that the minister pos
sesses the right of judging for himself, to
an extent equal to that possessed by pri
vate church members, is there any Scrip
ture, or any good reason outside of Scrip
ture, why duty would forbid the exercise
of this right on the part es the minister,
and yet permit it in the case of a private
member ? We know of no reason, for if
it be contended that, though the minister
naturally has the right to judge for him
self, yet it is the duty of the church to
exercise this right for him, lest he be
tempted to estimate the value of his ser
vices too highly, and thereby accumulate
more filthy lucre than really needs, and
thus become contaminated, would it not
be eaually as reasonable and necessary
for the minister to pay the church for her
kindness in thus guarding him from sin,
by, in turn, exercising the right of judg
ing of the necessities of all his members,
and estimate the value of their time and
services ? We might thus have a pure
church as well as a pure ministry, and all
know the former is equally as desirable
as the latter. But the church will never
consent for the rule to work both ways,
and a rule that will not work both ways is
said not to be a good one; therefore, we
conclude that each had better exercise his
own natural right, and not interfere with
the right of the other. v
We come now to the consideration of
the point which Bro. Baker regards a9
equivalent to robbery. If a minister of
the gospel has a right to demand any sal
ary at all, for his time and services in
preaching the gospel, why has he not a
right, and why is it not his duty, to de
mand a salary proportionate to what he
conceives to be hjs ability, or equal to
what he could make at the bar, teaching,
or any other profession ? Is it because
the work Rone by the minister is less val
uable to those for whom it is done than
the same amount of work done by a teach
er is to his pupils, or by a lawyer to his
client? Or is it because it takes less
time, labor and expense to educate a min
ister for fiis work, than is required in an
other profession? Or is it because it
requires less time and labor to prepare
and preach profitable sermons, than is
required to preach at the bar, or to teach
school successfully ? Or is it because, as
sodn hs a man begins to preach the gos
pel, his temporal wants and necessities
immediately become less than when he is
engaged in other pursuits? Or is it be
cause God has promised to administer to
the temporal necessities of preachers in
some miraculous way, in which He has
not promised to assist lay members ? Or
is it because, God knowing His ministers
to be a class of men more dishonest or
prodigal than all others, and, therefore,
being wholly unfit to be trusted with one
surplus dollar, He forbids that anything
whatever should come into their hands,
outside of a scanty, present, personal
supply, while private members He can
safely trust, often with a large surplus,
seeing they always make the most char
itable and godly use of it ? Or is it be
cause churches generally are less able to
pay a salary proportionate" to their pas
tor’s ability, than he is to do without it ?
Or is it because, outside of and far above
all human reason, justice, iaw and expe
rience, God has, for purposes known only
to Himself, and which cannot be under
stood by men, decreed, and left upon re
cord a command that His ministers shall
not receive for their time and services in
preaching the gospel, one single farthing
more than is absolutely essential for the
preservation of their and that
they have no right to demand even this
much, or anything at all; but that they
shall be thrown entirely jfoon the tender
mercies of the churches winch they are
bound to serve at the peril of their souls ?
If such be the expressed will of God, we
are anxious to know whAre it may be
found.
Allow us to present the subject in a
somewhat different light. Mr. A. is a
private member of a Baptist ,ehurch, and
this year he has produced 100 bales of
cotton on his farm, which we will say are
worth 08,000, but 01,000 will supply, not
only his own personal necessities, but the
wants of his whole family. Shall he,
therefore, dispose of his cotton for 01,000,
and thus make a gratuitous present of
07,000 to an already wealthy buyer ? Oh,
no, says Bro. Baker; let him sell it for
the full market value, supply the neces
sary wants of his family, keep a little
pocket change, perhaps, and appropriate
the remainder to charitable or gospel pur
poses. Very well, be it so; we will not
quarrel here. Again, Mr. B. is a private
member of a Baptist church, and is
also a very eminent his busi
ness capacity, as such, will command a
salary of 05,000, but 01,000 will support
his family. Shall he, therefore, under
rate his ability and receive only 01,000,
thus giving other men, without any dis
crimination, four-fifths of his labor ? Oh,
no, says Bro. Baker again; let him re
ceive the full value of his labor, supply
his necessary wants, and appropriate his
surplus just as did the farmer. Be it so.
No quarrel here, either. Once more.
Mr. C. is a very eminent minister of the
gospel, but his business capacity as a
teacher or lawyer would command a sala
ry of from two to three thousand dollars,
but he prefers to preach the gospel, and
as he is a single man, 0400 will support
him. Shall he, therefore, for the crime
of desiring to preach, receive only 0400
for his services ? Bro. Baker says 0400
only; but what does common sense say ?
Does the Word of God here contradict
common sense ? Does Cod deny the
minister of the gospel the privilege and
pleasure of contributing charitable
and gospel institutions of {he* world by
compelling him to bestow all the surplus
of his ability at random, or just as oth
ers may dictate, whether deserved or un
deserved, and wholly contrary to every
principle of justice and the anxious de
sires of»the minister’s own heart ? Think
on these things.
Bro. Baker, it seems, would take ad
vantage of the inexperience of the pious,
discreet, intelligent young swain whom he
would gladly introduce to this weak, de
clining church, —by the way, we wonder
if “ poor pay ” did not help to bring
about this weak, declining condition ?—he
would encourage him with the hope, that
should he ever become so impious, indis
creet and foolish as to encumber himself
with a wife and a lot of little responsi
bilities, God will provide ways and means
for their sustenance. We would ask the
good brother what other ways and means
God is accustomed to provide for the sus
tenance of little responsibilities in our
day, outside of the hard-earned and scan
ty salary of the minister himself? Is
there a lucky brook Cherith flowing hard
by this weak little church, to the banks
of which heavenly ravens are accustomed
to bring supplies to the little hungry,
earthly ravens ? If so, young ravens of
Greenville and Richmond, fly to this safe
retreat, and God speed you in your jour
ney. But as for us, Bro. B. has set us
forth in such a light that we dare not
claim to belong to the raven stock of
fowls, and therefore feel constrained, till
this question is settled, to subscribe our
selves, Hawks.
Waste of Time and Money.
I am well aware of my ineompetency to
do this subject justice, and.;t>herefore make
the following remarks, in hope of bring
ing the subject before the Baptists for
their consideration, and for the employ
ment of their best pens. We can see,
evidently—
1. A waste of time and money in Sun
day school celebrations and picnics. At
these celebrations there is too little preach
ing and too much pride, pomp and vain
4ressing. In reading the Scriptures, we
learn that every one should strive to excel
in teaching, learning and doing good. The
apostles, (who were doubtless our exam
ple,) were careful to give their whole time
to the administration of the word. I read
in a Baptist Sunday school paper, of a
Christmas celebration. The church house
had very fine, flowery arrangements, and
1q ! in came Santa Claus with many things
for the children. To feed the hungry and
clothe the popr and naked ? No. We
will have a few quotations : “ More than
once was the cart sent to the forest for
‘cedars.’” “When the children began
to gather in, there was seen standing in
front of the pulpit a beautiful bower all
festooned with ‘ living green,’ and there
were the stands covered with beautiful
presents.” “M. spoke a poem about
Santa Claus, and 'as he concluded, Santa
Claus came walking down the aisle, with
a great basket on his arm filled with a
choioe oolleotion of his nice things for the
children. He was wrapped up in his huge
furs and sprinkled over with ‘ the snows
of winter,’ and his great coarse beard, as
it hung down to his breast, was frosted
ovei till it looked as if he had lain out in
an ice forest a thousand years ” (Kind
Words, 1, 1871.) Such woiks as
this, we contend, are wrongs and adverse
to the tenor and teachings of the Bible.
It is given np by all scholars that no one
knows what day of the year Christ was
born, and our Christmas is of Roman
Catholic origin. As to Santa Claus, he
is of no noble birth, and not worthy of
the notice of a Protestant, m?ch less a
Baptist. “Ye observe days and weeks,
and months and years. lam afraid of
you.” But some will say, “ We must have
something to please and interest the chil
dren.” Now, in answer to this, we would
say, that such works as that above de
scribed are unbecoming in a church house,
and not compatible with the injunction :
“Ye fathers, provoke not your children
to wrath: but bring them up in the nur
ture and admonition of the Lord."
2. There is also waste of time and
money in having too many Baptist Con
ventions. Here we wish to be understood
as including Associations and all Conven
tions, both North and South, and not op
posing Conventions altogether, but too
many. In the whole scope of the Acts of
the Apostles, we find but one Convention.
Acts xv: 1—32. There, the query was
fully discussed by able men, and but one
short letter written. There were no three
or four days spent in talking about mon
ey, Sunday school reports, etc. There
were not 040 paid to a clerk and about
075 for the printing of minutes. What
is the use in repeating, year after year,
these same reports, at such an expense of
time and money ? Have we no papers and
pastors to teach these things unto the
churches ? We are not opposed to Asso
ciations, but we want the time to be most
ly spent in preaching, in which the whole
counsel of God should be declared, the
whole ground of controversy discussed,
including baptism, communion, predesti
nation, ecclesiastical democracy, etc. A
statement of the names of the messengers,
correspondents and visiting elders, about
one page stating the destitution in the
bounds of the Associations, with a statis
tical table, is about all that need to be put
into the minutes of an Association. And
this might be simply published in a peri
odical. We are fully persuaded that the
Bible, ministers, “teachers” and editors,
should be our teachers. Every preacher
should take a paper, for there he finds the
counsel of many. While we are in favor
of our District Associations, when con
ducted in the manner described above,
thinking that they would he sufficient, it
can be seen that we oppose all State, na
tional, semi-national, and Sunday School
Conventions, and district meetings. If
one Association is not able to employ a
missionary, surely it can unite with an
other or with even a third, and employ a
missionary without having a Convention.
I would suggest that this be done by means
of the Executive Committee, etc., without
the waste of time and money to hold a
Convention, pay a clerk thirty or forty
dollars, and nearly twice that amount for
printing minutes, etc.
Now, if we want to have more meetings
of a. general character than are herein
suggested, let them be meetings to preach
the everlasting gospel of the blessed Son
of God—to defend the truth, and contend
earnestly for the faith once delivered to
the saints. H. Stevenson.
Whitewater, Ala., Oct. 22, 1871.
Watchman, What of the Night?
“ What of the night ?” It dark and darker grows ;
The very heavens above seem black with woes.
By mighty winds the gathering clouds are hurled,
In awful conflict, round our fallen world.
“What of the night?” The careless ones are lying
In slumber deep, and know not they are dying.
I sound the trumpet in their ears in vain,
Fettered and sunk in darkness they remain.
“What of the night?” The saints their watch are
keeping,
But every eye is dim and swollen with weeping;
And every heart is sad—and oft they sigh,
“ When will the morning star appear on high?”
And carefully they trim the feeble light
Within their lamps, to guide them through the night.
But oh ! it wavereth much through doubts and fears,
And oft is wall-nigh quenched by floods of tears.
“ What of the night?” Each to the other say,
“When shall we see the dawn of endless day.
Our spirits tremble: can it be the Lord
Will proye at last unfaithful to His word ?”
“ What of the night?” Hush! on the breeze is borne
A still small voice to comfort those who mourn :
“Though yet I tarry, dry the tearful eye—
Lift up your heads, redemption draweth nigh,
“Quickly I come. Oh! droop not thus forlorn :
Look up and smile—joy cometh with the morn.
Quickly I come to banish all your fears,
And God’s own hand shall wipe away your tears.”
And then I heard the voice of earnest prayer;
Sweetly it sounded on the midnight air:
“Even so, Lord Jesus, come and chase our gloom :
The night is dark—oh ! take thy children home.”
Christian Treasury.
Our Larger-Liberty Friends.
It may be too bad to reveal a secret,
but one cannot always forego the pleas
ure of it, especially when it is known to
half a hundred people or so. Somebody
has conceived the idea of taking the Bap
tist denomination by storm on the com
munion question—of making the stoutest
old-fashioned Baptist quail before a forth
coming disclosure of disaffection with the
logical communion we now have. The
disclosure, when it comes, will of course be
noised abroad. But the making ready
for it—that’s the secret.
A printed “ Plea for larger liberty at
the Communion Table,” is being quietly
circulated among the churches, as we
happen to know, to be returned, -with
names appended, to certain centres, from
some one of which, when the list is suffi
ciently formidable, the stunning call is to
be made upon Baptist churches to surren
der—or die ! •
Isn’t the alternative somewhat dreadful
to think of? But if it is not quite too
late, we would modestly suggest that the
leaders in this movement might reconsider
their work without damage tt> their con
sistency, and make a yet more thorough
job of it besides. Suppose the title of
their secret circular be changed so as to
read, “A Plea for larger liberty in the
ordinance of Baptism ?” Give to every
church the right of dispensing with bap
tism altogether, when deemed best, and
of administering it in any form the can
didate prefers. Nothing could he “ lar
ger” than the “liberty” thus to be
gained at “ the communion table.” Then
to think how logically consistent, and free
from the slightest taint of “exclusive
ness,” such a table would be l *■■■■■ •«
Some of our English “Baptist” church
es have attained to this larger communion
table liberty. Persons can be members
of them with or without baptism, or with
anything they choose to call baptism.
Nothing could be freer than their com
munion, and the beauty of it is that their
baptism is as free as their communion.
Their unrestricted communion has its ripe
fruit in equally unrestricted baptism.
We do not see why our American Baptist
reformers should not go to the root of the
thing, and make a strike for “ larger lib
erty in the matter of baptism.”— Ex. $
Chron.
A Word for Humble Toilers.
The world is to be converted to Christ
by earnest men, rather than by great
men; those whose motive power is in the
heart, rather than the head. In the com
pany of workers are not only those who
occupy high places, as men estimate them,
but those who are willing to take any
place, if only the Master may be honored.
And these are themselves most worthy of
honor. For it seems to me that not those
who walk as watchmen on the completed
wall of Zion, seen, known, and respected
by their fellows, are most deserving of
our praise, but those who toil at the foun
dations, laying deep and strong the basis
of the future edifice —themselves unknown,
save as their works shall proclaim them.
Oh! these men and women who are con
tent to work and pray in mission schools,
or in remote neighborhoods, asking no
thanks, expecting no reward beyond the
consciousness that they are faithful and
their Saviour’s smile. What bands of
angels gather round these true disciples,
and what celestial cheer and comfort do
they bring to them! They shall have
their crown at last. Yet there is a re
ward richer than the crown of gold. Sal
vation may be borne by them to the souls
of the dying, and those souls shall be
come the gems in those glorious crowns.
Scores, perhaps hundreds, of young work
ers may be brought by them to assist in
rearing the grand superstructure, of
which they are laying the foundation, and
the rising walls shall be the enduring and
splendid monuments of their wisdom and
devotion. It is a blessed privilege to
labor when God can so gloriously multi
ply the fruits of our toil. It is an occa
sion for thanks that we are counted wor
thy to be spent, where our offering of
service shall be attended by such far
reaching results. Let every teacher be
aware of the real dignity of his calling,
and allow the brilliance of the future, with
its possible blessings, to throw back its
light upon any seasons of present difficul
ty, or unrecompensed self-denial. He
may teach a mind that is ignorant, he
may glorify his Lord, he may establish a
power that shall continue to do all this in
ever-increasing ratio, when he shall he
resting in his grave. — Rev. Jas. Reis.
The Prayer Meeting.
We understand that the four nouns in
Acts ii: 42 represent four apostolic insti
tutions, which are to be perpetual in all
Christian churches. First in the list
stands the teaching. Apostolic teaching
is indispensable to the perpetuation of the
Christian church. It lies at the very
foundation of all intelligent worship, it
is not accidental, but essential. It is one
of the main pillars of the Christian sys
tem. «It was designed to be perpetual, be
cause the office of Christian teacher was
instituted by Divine authority, and abides
permanently in the church. The apostolic
teaching, therefore, holds the rank of
an abiding institution in all Christian
churches. Churches in which it is want
ing, forfeit all claim to be called Chris
tian ; for “ teaching" is named in the
great commission as an implied condition
to the promise, “ Lo, I am with you al
way.” In modern Christianity, the ex
ponent of the primeval apostolic institu
tion is the pulpit. It abides and is recog
nized as an institution.
“ The breaking of the loaf” undoubted
ly stands for the Lord’s supper. This is
universally recognized as a Christian in
stitution. Scripturally and historically
it belongs in the church, and holds in
modern Christianity its primeval rank.
The interpretation which is now usually
given to the last noun in the series,, viz.,
“prayers,” seems vague and unsatisfac
tory. It takes no account of the article
which is elaborately repeated before each
noun of the series.
Dean Alford, in his revised English
Testament, attempts to remedy this de
fect in the common version by repeating
the pronoun “ their” before each of the
substantives except the first. His attempt
to express the article is commendable, be
cause its repetition shows it to be em
phatic. His translation, however, is de
fective, because we might understand from
it that the converts “ continued steadfast
in their prayers,” i. e., to repeat the apos
tles’ prayers; hut the use of a liturgy be
longs to a latter date of the church’s his
tory. There may be no English word
which exactly corresponds to the Greek
one here employed. This word is fre
quently used in the Septuagint and in the
New Testament to denote both individual
prayer and also a collective petition in
which several worshippers unite. From
the latter usage it came at length to de
note the place where several devout per
sons assembled for prayer. At all events,
the idea of place became prominent in its
meaning. In Acts xvi: 16, “ the verb
implies,” says Dean Alford, that Paul
and Silas “ habitually resorted to this
place of prayer." Our idea may he briefly
expressed by the following 'translation of
the passage: “It came to pass, as we
were proceeding to the prayer meeting, a
certain bondmaid who had a spirit of di
vination met us,” The manuscripts and
editors here insert the article. There was
an assembling of several persons at the
same time 'and place for the purpose of
prayer. Such an assembly is in mod
ern phrase a prayer meeting. The arti
cle is used to designate it as a definite
and well-known institution. In Acts xv:
13, there is undeniably un allusion to
place. Bqt the translation “ where was
wont to be a place of prayer,” i3 inade
quate. If this had been the entire mean
ing, we should have had the imperfect of
the verb hupxrcho or ien, and not enomi
zeto, which is always used in the New Tes
tament of human habits and transactions,
but not properly of a place. Let us look
at tfie facts. One Sabbath day Paul and
Silas went forth out of the gate of Phil
ippi, beside a river. There certain wo
men had assembled manifestly for prayer;
for this was the custom. With them Paul
and Silas sat down. To those thus assem-
| s3.o# A YEAfi.}
bled they discoursed. In this instance the
essential elements of a prayer meeting are
apparent. Several women met together
at the same time and in the same place for
prayer. ,Qur term for such a transaction
is prayer meeting. Let us translate ac
cordingly, “where was want to be a
prayer meeting.” The article may be
omitted, because it refers to a Jewish and
not to the Christian institution. In Acts
iii: 1, the common rendering ignores the
article. It can be translated thus . “ And
Peter and John were going up together
into the temple at the hour of the prayer
meeting, being the ninth hour.” Acts i:
14 is susceptible of the rendering: “These
all with one accord were regular attend
ants on the prayer meeting .” We may un
derstand the same Greek word in Acts ii:
4, with the article, to denote the same idea
as is developed above. In other words,
the department of prayer is spoken of as
co-ordinate with the didactic department
indicated by the words “ the ministry of
the word.” The passages which we have
j' st noted include all the instances in the
Acts where the word occurs, except two.
In those two the possessive pronoun is
added. They are therefore entirely dis
similar. If the interpretations above given
are justifiable, the conclusion follows that
a Christian prayer meeting is an apostolic
institution to which the pentecostal con
verts steadfastly devoted themselves. We
do not say that our word prayer meeting
is always the equivalent of the Greek word
with the article. It is not easy to find
terms which are exactly commensurate;
but the Greek word certainly often de
notes prayer in concert; and the persis
tent use of the article with it in the above
passages designates prayer as a definite and
recognized Christian institution. If fur
ther argument were necessary to show
that the prayer meeting holds the rank of
an abiding institution in the church, wo
might p;'int to its authorization by Christ
himself.— Rev. J. C. Wightman, in Bap
tist Quarterly.
The Ancient Bing.
A man who wished to buy a handsome
ring went into a jeweller’s at Paris and
desired to see some. The jeweller showed
him a very ancient gold ring, remarkably
fine, and curious on this account, that on
the inside of it were two lion’s claws. The
buyer, while looking at the others, was
playing with this ; at last he purchased
another and went away. But he had
scarcely reached home when first his hand,
then his side, then his whole body became
numb and without feeling, as if he had
had a stroke of the palsy; and it grew
worse and worse, till the physician, who
came in haste, thought him dying. “ You
must somehow have taken poison,” he said.
The sick man protested that he had not.
At length, some one remembered this ring,
and it was then discovered to be what used
to be called a death ring, and which was
often employed in those wicked Italian
States three or four hujaApd years ago.
If n marrhated desired to
murder him, ho would present him with
one of them. In the inside was a drop of
deadly poison, and a very small hole, out
of which it would not make its way except
it was squeezed. When the'poor man was
wearing it, the murderer would come out
and shake his hand violently, the lion’s
claw would give his finger a little scratch,
and in a few hours he was a dead man.
Now, see why I told you this story. For
four hundred years this ring has kept its
poison, and at the end of that time it was
strong enough almost to kill the man who
had unintentionally scratched his finger
with the claw ; for he was only saved by
great skill on the part of the physician,
and by the strongest medicines. I thought,
when I read that short story, how like this
poison was to sin. You may commit a sin
now, and for the present forget it; and
perhaps ten or twelve years hence the
wound you then, so to speak, gave your
self may break out again, and that more
dangerously than ever. And the greatest
danger of all is, lest the thoughts of sins
we have committed, and the pleasure we
had in committing them, should come
back upon us in the hour of death.— Dr.
J. M. Neale.
I Think I See the Point.
A Baptist Sunday School missionary had
addressed the Baptist church at Friendship,
Calhoun county, Arkansas, advocating the or
ganization of a Baptist Sunday School. Next
day, the missionary was accosted by a Meth
odist brother, thus:
“ Mr. TANARUS., I understand you, last evening,
to be in favor of a Baptist Sunday School."
“ Yes,” replied the missionary, “that is the
kind of a Sunday school I advocate, because
Baptists teach all that is taught by other de
nominations that is scriptural; and they also
teach some scriptural doctrines which other
denominations do not teach.”
“ Well,” said the Methodist brother, “ I am
opposed to denominational schools. I believe
in unton schools. I donot think the minds
of children ought to be biased in favor of any
particular denomination. Just teach them
the doctrines of the Bible, and leave them
to decide for themselves what branch of the
church they will join.” The missionary replied:
“ I think I see the point. You Pedo-bap
tist all teach and require that your children
shall be baptized and made members of the
church in infancy, before they are able or
have the opportunity, to decide for themselves
what branch of the church they will join; *
you would, if possible, build the walls so high
and bar the doors so strong, that they could
never get out. And while you take this
course in respect to your children, you would
have Baptists neglect their children altogeth
er, in respect to those doctrines which are held
by Baptists only, hoping thereby to get some
of them into your branches. If Baptists
don’t teach their children, who will V’—Mace
donian.
Fashion. —It is Herbert Spencer, I be
lieve, who says that fashionable life, “in
stead of being life, conducted in the most
rational manner, is life regulated by spend
thrifts and idlers, milliners and tailors,
dandies and silly women.” Reason cries
out against all this. “ Choose thy clothes
with thino own eyes, not another’s,”
was the sensible advice of William Penn.
But if we must copy, let us imitate the
highest, not the lowest arts; the raiment
worn by the real superiors of our kind, not
the most frivolous and insane. Reason
bids us consider Beriously whether w r e are
really willing that persons of questionable
standing, and of obviously vulgar judg
ment, should regulate the way in whick
we dress.
WHOLE NO. 2564.
