Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

#nr dEnrrespntonfs. Forthe Index and Baotistl Visitors to Onr Pulpits—-The Rev. L. It. Gwalt ney, of Koine, Georgia. NO. 111. The above named brother, honored and beloved as a model pastor, a de vout Christian and the tender shepherd of a faithful flock, spent Sunday, April 9th, in Atlanta. Perhaps, the reverend gentleman never stood before so large a congregation as greeted him at the Second Baptist church on Sabbath night. The spacious building was filled completely, and extra'seats pro vided in the aisles. The sermon was profoundly interesting. “If by any means I might attain to the resurrection of the dead.” Phil, iii: 11, was the solemn and suggestive text. “ Will there be a resurrection of the dead?” These momentous words were the first of the sermon. Said the speaker: “ The bare possibility of such an eveut, is enough to engage the seri ous attention of every thoughtful man. The question is often confounded with another —‘Is the soul immortal ?’ Com paratively few have doubted this ; all the reasoning nations of earth testify to it; and the mighty Cicero, states man, orator and philosopher, adds his weighty words to strengthen this be lief. But, if a man die, shall he live again ? If the body die—what then ? Shall it bo reanimated after the long night of the tomb?” These were the questions which Mr. Gwaltney seernod desirous of answering. Our brother was not unmindful at this point of the many who doubt the idea of a purified body rising from the tomb. The au thorities cited in support of this en trancing theory of actual resurrection, were aptly selected. “All that are in their graves, shall hear the voice of the Son of Man, and they that hear shall come forth.” Paul, in speaking of the judgment by Jesus Christ says, “where of he hath given assurance unto all men, in that He hath raised him from the dead.” “ Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead ?” “ Whence these clear conceptions, these distinct utterances of tho Bible? The wiso men of old, while they believed in the immortality of the soul, had no correct idea of tlie resurrection of the body. Whence, then, did the simple .writers of the Bible, get these views of the resurrection so distinct, so un mistakable? There can be but one answer—they were taught of God, in spired to reveal this glorious truth. With Him nothing is impossible. All arguments, however plausible, against tho resurrection, are fully answered by the fact that God has all matter, all force at His command.” Probably Mr. Gwaltney supported the theory of tho resurrection more strongly from nature’s examples than in any others. The bursting of morn ing out of darkness, the joyous sprit%- time throwing aside the withered em blems of decay ; tho insect world, many of whose species are wrapped iu their tiny charnel houses before emerging, the beautiful chrysalis that floats in the summer air—all these striking exam ples were beautifully portrayed. In deed, one had but to listen, to feel that Nature was the grandest proof of Paul’s doctrine of the corruptible be coming incorruptible. “ Paul himself argues from the grain of wheat, ‘ not quickened except| it dio.’ With God there is no more difficulty with the bodies of men, than with the seeds of the vegetable kingdom. In eaeh, and by tho same Divine appointment, then is death and quickening a glorious transformation.” The theology of Mr. Gwaltney, as advanced in this sermon, we deem strictly orthodox. His views on some points, may have impressed some as advanced and startling, possibly, but those who noticed how closely he clung to the B'ble as the basis of resurrec tion doctrine, will sec on what a solid pillar the wondrous doot.rino is sup ported. The sermon was comforting. The promise that these vile bodies shall be clad in immortality, that our en raptured souls shall find everlasting abode in spiritual bodies, fashioned after Christ himself, was so unfolded to us that all must have felt now incent ives to holy life hero below. So far, we have but briefly hinted at the leading thoughts of Mr. Gwaltney’s premises. It was in the latter parts of the sermon that resurrection was even more fully shown up in its glorious at tractiveness. We regret our inability to lay the sermon complete before the readers of The Index. These fervent themes of our holy religion are, perhaps, not often enough expounded. A re ligion like ours, that so plainly prom ises everlasting felicity of soul, and finally a spiritual body, made radiant by the touch of Almighty God, should be so preached that these glorious cli maxes of Heaven, resurrection and spiritual bodies, should constantly re mind us of the reward ahead. Mr. Gwaltney is an attractive pulpit speaker; his mauner is easy, yet mod est and reverential; his ianguago is chaste, yet easily understood and strictly English. When we recall this eloquent and exhaustive sermon, so full of Christ, and Heaven and resurrec tion, we do not wonder that the Rome church love their pastor. Some of Mr. Gwaltnev’s illustrati >ns were graph, ic and beautiful. Perhaps we may THE CHRISTIAN INDEX' AND SOUTHEASTERN BAPTIST. fittingly close this criticism by the lines of a gifted poetess quoted in this sermon. An English nobleman travel ing in Egypt, found in the closed palm of a mummy a seed two thousand yeaft old, this he brought home to England and planted, and the result was a beautiful flower peculiar to Egyptian soil : “ And will He not who watched the seed, And kept the life within the shell; When those He loves are laid to rest, Watch o’er their buried dust as well. “ And will He not, from ’neath the sod, Cause something glorious to arise; Aye, though it sleep two thousand years, Yet ail that buried dust shall rise. “ Just such a face as greets you now, Just such a form as here we wear; Only more glorious far will rise, To meet the Saviour in the air.” Atlanta, April, 1876. J. B. K. For the Index and Baptist.! DRY ROT IN THE CHURCH. NO. 11. Decay in a stick of timber begins ordinarily at the surface, but the pecu liarity of dry rot is, that the exterior— all that is visible—looks fair and sound. Not until the bodily life and substance is almost, or quite destroyed, is the mischief apparent to the casual eye. So, in the church it is sometimes the case, that while all looks fair, and no danger is suspected, causes are work ing secretly which will, if not arrested, utterly eat out its life, and bring it to the condition of the church in Sardis — having a name to live while practically dead. One of the indications of dry rot was pointed out in a former article. Since that was written, there has appeared in one of the leading religious journals a con tribution from the pen of a minister,who evidently sees danger, and calls atten tion to it in such forcible style that it would bo well could the entire article be reprinted until it had reached every church in the land whore the described condition exists. A few sentences quoted will not be inappropriate here. “ The controlling idea of a church does not always appear in its covenant or manual. In fact there is usually in a church an unwritten law, and an un written constitution that are far more potent than anything formally adopted and pnblishtd to the world. The cov enant may say one thing and the whole temper of the church say another. Thousands of Christians regard the church as they do a club When strangers come among them the first question is whether they are of the kind wanted in their circle. If not, they are left out; not by any rule, or any church action, but by something moro potent than either; . . i of course they can join the church, but they will not be received into its circle. The old deacon, who told an unwelcome applicant that ‘ there was no vacancy in their church just then,’ was only a little more frank than usual, and ex pressed in words what others only feel, and express in deeds. Of course there can be no rule excluding undesirable applicants. Kules of such a nature would not look well on the bcolc. But there are more ways than one to Lon don, and there can be coldness that shall be harder to lace than the lions in the Pilgrim’s path. Strangers are sometimes received into such a circle after proper probation. After being kept in the vestibule, and sitting on back seats, and being looked at through opera glasses sufficiently long, they are sometimes gradually taken into social fellowship. Christian fellowship is not of much account in such a church. . . . Such a spirit as this, curses aud blights many a church. We may call it the club house theory of church organiza tion. . . . The members seem to feet that the church is their own, and that they have a perfect right to shape it to their own tastes and use it for their own advantage “ But the church is Christ’s, if it be a church at all. His law is its consti tution. It exisls by His authority and for His work. It forfeits its char te: when it fails to meet its design.- It is not an organization for mutual ad miration, or even for mutual comfort and help alone. Its members have put themselves under Christ’s law, and pledged themselves to live for His kingdom. Then must all God’s chil dren be welcome as to their Father’s house, and then all who wish to return to God, must liud an open door and a ready welcome.” The pen of the satirist has often found employment in showing up the absurdity and hollowness of the pre tensions of the would-be exclusives who assume to rule and lay down the laws in the reaim of “society.” But the narrower field of church organiza tion furnishes many instances not less deserving of censure, even were they not (as they undoubtedly are) much more offensive, and more pernicious in their effects. How often has it hap pened that commmercial bankruptcy hasdisclosed the fact that some haughty family, who have assumed a patronizing demeanor toward the supposed poorer members, have been for yoars living a life of dishonesty and false pretences, or perhaps the death of the head of the family and consequent settling up of his estate, in like manner tears away the veil aud lots iu the pitiless light of day upon many things *hat have been carefully kept in the dark, lest the as serted right to hold the keys of the kingdom of Heaven—to bind aud to loose—should be contested. Perhaps it that such examples should now and then be made, so that attri tion may be turned to the evil erating such assumptions iu ca®any of professed followers of Him w* has declared that “ one is your Master, even Christ, and all ye a>-e brethr en.” For the Index and Baptist.) WOMAN NOT WANTED AS AN EVANGELIST IN 01'R CHURCHES. ni. When our Lord entered upon His glorious mission, He found woman moving in certain spheres and sustain ing certain relations. Whether He approved of her situation or not we have never been informed, but this one thing we have learned, He left her just where He found her. He never, in a solitary instance, summoned her from one of those spheres, however humble or exhalted, to work in the boundless field of missionary enterprise. He never for a single moment difliurbed her in the least, or the most important of the relations she sustained to others, that she might bear her part efren in the interest of human salvation. If He saw her grinding at the mill, work ing in the field or in the vineyard, or “plying her evening care” at home, like a true and “busy housewife,” He never said to her “Follow Me,” in the same sense in which He addressed those words to the sons of Zebedee, when He wished to “make them fishers of men.” Why did He thus seemingly ignore her in the great work of the world’s evan gelization? Was it because among all His female disciples there was not one who had the qualifications that the calling of the evangelist demanded ? Was there not at least one who might have preached the Gospel as successful ly and acceptably, as any of the women of our day,who are amongst the noisiest occupants of the pulpit and the ros trum ? In some respects, the literal fol lower of Jesus, he who sat at His feet, who looked into His very eyes, who heard the words that “proceeded from His gracious lips,” that walked by His side from place to place, had greatly the advantage of these who follow Him altogether Dy faith. Prophets and kings longed to enjoy the elevating, re fining, inspiring privilege of diriect, personal communication with the com ing Messiah, which was especially re served for those whose lot was caßt “in the fullness of time.” Although,* then, “he is blessed who having not seen yet believes he who saw as well as be lieved because he saw, was still more blessed. For one to be a successful evangelist three things are absolutely rguisite : Knowledge of Ji'SiiS (i faith in for Him. So it was in the earlLsft JSys" of Christianity, and so it will be until “Jesus shall come the second time without sin unto salvation.” He who has these grand essentials with’* him, can go forth and so preach “the un searchable riches of Christ” that “the wilderness and the solitary places shall bo glad thereof, and the desert shall re joice and blossom as the rose.” Now, of all our Lord’s female disciples, was there not one who possessed these ele ments ? How was it with His mother? It seems to us that, if ever the church, amongst all its female members, had one who was pre-eminently qualified to preach the Gospel, she was that one. Look at her unique history. An angel saluted her as woman had never been saluted before aud has never been sa luted since. “Hail thou that art high ly favored among women,” etc. She rwas peculiarly honored in giving birth to the long expected Messiah, Imman uel, God with us. That wonderful child instead of being borne away immedi ately after His birth to His Father’s court to be reared under the tutilage of the most exalted intelligences, aud in constant association with the only being worthy of His companionship, was left to the care of a noble but eaithly, human mother. Under that mother's care He, like other children, advanced from infancy to childhood, from childhood to youth, from youth to manhood. For thirty years, through one long generation, He dwelt under the same roof, partook of the satne fare, and mingled iu constant, daily in tercourse with His mother, sisters aud brethren. Can we suppose, can we believe, that she who was His compan ion for so long a time, knew no more of Him than others ? Did tho apostles themselves know more of Him than Mary knew ? Some may think so, be cause they were inspired men, and we have their writings, sayings and do ings, while we have not a solitary letter from the pen of Mary, aud only a few sentences from her lips. But in whose name and by whose authority were they inspired? The name and authority of Jesus. What the Holy Spirit commu nicated to them by the direction of Christ, they cquimunicated to others. But in the case of Mary He taught through His own lips all that He in tended her to know. Or must we believe that during all those years that preceded “His showing to Israel,” He never taught the loved ones in that home circle at Nazareth what He had been, what He was, and what He would be ? Did He who as tonished His mother, when twelve years of age by asking’“Wist ye not that I must be about my Father’s business,” ignore that Father’s business, except in the publicity of the Temple aud in the midst of the Jewish doctors ? We cannot believe it; on the contrary, we are not only inclined but forced to con- clude that He revealed Him e'f to His divinely appointed moth rt s He did not unto the world.” He, like the other citizens of N- ..th, spend most of His working . s in the dis cussion only of the o* nary occurren ces of His quiet home life ? Were the weightiest themes that were ever pressed upon human consideration al most if not altogether ignored ? Did He who said “Seek first the Kingdom of God” seldom if ever speak of that Kingdom amongst His faimlv and His friends ? Is it likely that He would have acted so strangelj of whom it was said “The zeal of thy house hath eaten one up? By no means. We can imagine with how much delight He explained to the listening family “the name above every name, that was given to Him before His wondrous birth,” with what a beaming counte nance, and in what inspiring language He spoke of His pre-existent state, its happiness, its duration, its glory, when He thought it not robbery to be equal with God. We find it too hard to be lieve that He dwelt for years with those He came to redeem, and never unfolded to them the great plan of redemption. Is it at all probable that He suffered a thousand opportunities for explaining to His mother and His brethren the way by which they, with all other sin ners, were to be saved, to pass by un improved ? Is it likely that He never alluded to the fall of man in the first and his recovery in the second Adam ? Must not the all absorbing thought, the one grand intention of His soul, have been, at least now and then, the theme of conversation ? How could a silence be kept unbroken by such persons, sustaining such relations to each other, under such circumstances, for so many years ? Such a silence would be al most as mysterious as the incarnation itself. Now, although we are not in formed as to what he said and did du ring the thirty years that He lived at Nazareth, yet we can readily conceive in the case of such a being, coming on such an errand, and living in the midst of thoso who were to partake of the blessings He came to bestow, what would be some of the subjects upon which He would “speak as man never spake.” But if He decjjned to con verse upon some themes that our too curious minds might select; if He de clined to expatiate upon His Divinity, its inconceivable perfections, to dnve away that impenetrable cloud of mystery that shrouds its union with humanity, and to irradiate the thick darkness that gathers about the inter mediate state, it was, no doubt, because a knowledge of these things is not es sential to salvation. There was one subject, however, that towered in im portance rftrraV above all others, that, we venture to affirm that He never ig nored —the justification of fallen man. The question, “How can man be just with God,” He answered, as neither priest, nor prophet, nor patriarch, had ever done. He shed so much light up on the long hidden path of the prodi gal’s return to his father’s house that from that hour ever onward to the end of time, the wildest prodigal “need not err therein.” A knowledge of this path is essential. He who posseses it, is wiser than all the sages of the heathen world. Without it who could proclaim “tho great salvation” to men? Taught then by a teacher, in whom even “all the treasures of wisdom aud knowledge," the mother of Jesus must have been eminently qualified to preach the gospel to others. How many in every age of the church have envied her the priceless privilege she enjoyed of learning all that “pertains to life and salvation from the lips of Him who was the giver of that life and the author of that salvation !” Again, is it required that an evange list should have strong faith in Christ ? Who could have had a faith so stroug as Mary's ? Who has ever had a strong er faith than hers ? Others might have doubted if Jesus of Nazareth really was the Son of God. They saw so much of the human about Him; they found Him so much “in fashion like a man” that they might not have been altogether satisfied that He was a God. Mary could not doubt; as well might she doubt her own existence. For her to doubt was to utterly ignore her own consciousness. Was it possible for her to forget the astounding annunciation, the mysterious conception and the con sequent birth of Immanuel? Never, Nwvre, NEVER! She could, she would have forgotten anything, everything else, her name, her tribe, her race, her lineage, her home, the temple, Jerusa lem itself—but not these. But be side these grounds of faith that she alone had, there were others that she had in common with J,he rest of the disciples and with the apostles them selves. Did they see Him change the water into wine, heal the sick, cleanse the leper, cast out devils, raise the dead? So did she. Did the the apostles see Him after His resur rection, and were thus peculiarly quali fied to preach salvation through a cru cified, and buried but risen Redeemer ? So did she. Did these men, “of whom the world was not worthy,” derive so strong a faith from what they had seen and heard that they went forth and met with unequalled fortitude,Jpersecu tion and famine, and nakedness, and perils, and sword,” for tho name of that Redeemer ? Why, then, did she whose faith was equal to theirs, not go forth to the same suffering for the same name ? Simply because she was not commissioned to go. They obeyed their Lord, preaching the gospel and “turning many from darkness to light.” She equally obeyed her Son, living with the beloved disciples, to whose care that Son had committed her when dying on the cross. Must an evangelist love Christ? To ask this question is to answer it. Ani mated by this feeling, Stephen, Peter, Paul, and thousands more have laid down their lives for Him who laid down His life for them. But not oue of the glorious army of martyrs ever loved like Mary. Her’s was—if I might say so—a double love: two loves in o"e. She had the love that all the other dis ciples felt, and she had her own beside. John, highly-favored as he was —ner- mitted to lean upon his Saviour’s breast, entrusted with that Saviour’s mother, chosen of all the Apostles to see in vision “those wonderful things which must shortly come to pass”— even John himself did not, could not love as Mary loved. All that endeared Him to others endeared Him to her ; but there was that which endeared Him to her which endeared Him to no other —He was her son; she was HU moth er. Possessed, then, as she must have been, of knowledge, faith and love, not only unsurpassed, but unequalled by those of all the confessors, Apostles and martyrs of Jesus, who was better qualified than she to goforth and evan gelize the world? *Tell us not that she had no learning, no eloquence, no spe cial preparation for that work, such as the Apostles and others had. Knowl edge, faith and love such as she had will supply any and every deficiency. They will loose the tongaeof the dumb and make it as eloquent as the lips of Apollos. An evangelist, fully possessed of these, be he who he may, man, wo man or child, can accomplish wonders in the boundless field, “ white already to harvest.” Had Mary, woman as she was, merely related what she had seen and heard, from the visit of Gabriel to the ascension of Jesus, in the simple language of the street, the shop, and the field, “the common people would have heard her gladly,” and would have believed in her son as the Saviour of the world. Aud had she appeared on some great occasion before the assem bled wisdom of the Jewish nation, be fore Scribes, Pharisees and Sadduces, and related the same story in the sub lime language of the “magnificat” she would have “taken with ravishment the thronging audience,” and woul?l have achieved one of the crowning victories of the Cross. But this was not her work. Mary was not an evangelist. S. For tht Index and Baptist | AN APOLOGY FOB BID SPELLERS. In The IndRX of the 2Sd of Maych, I find an editorial headed “ Unweleome Intelligence.” It stated that one of the editorial corps recently received a letter from a young minister, which clearly evinced his having paid little attention to Webster, while pursuing his classical studies. That editor than, as usual with good spellers, ridicules the unfortunate blunderer. To this I enter a solemn protest, though I do not admit that I wrote the letter in question; I will admit this, I would feel guilty if I had recently written to any of the corps besides that one who has known my defects in this regard longer than any man living, and who has labored more faithfully and more fruitlessly td correct the errors thau teacher ever did; I know he has Dot complained to any of you about the bad spelliug in my letter. There is a real philosophy that under lies this subject, and because I have suffered so keenly on account of iny acknowledged defects, I have taken great pains to learn the source of the evil, that I might make the correction there. But when I reached the source I found that the cause lies beyond the reach of Webster, and the teacher; and the rod, cannot make the agencies ef fective. The disease is not curable, it is a natural deformity, and can by the most careful training and patient study be at best but slightly modified, and for that purpose, Webster, as a text — book, fails utterly —as a book of refer ence alone is it at all valuable. In this article I desire to set forth as succinctly as I can the metaphysics of spelling, so that good speliers mav learn from it to be charitable, aud bad spellers may take at least some small comfort, in the midst of their deep mortification. Words are spelled either by sight or sound. Good spellers spell by sight, and do so as the result of a native fac ulty of their minds, which is lacking in the mind of bad spellers. The good spellers have the faculty of forming distinct conceptions of the “ look” of a word. They see a word that is spelled wrong, their eyes detect at once that there is something unusual about it, and they say “It does not look right,” they mean, that they have a mental picture of that word as it is spelled correctly; they easily and promptly correct the error. Those less fortu nately endowed, have no conception of the look of a word, they remember only the sounds, and in English spelling tho sound is a very unsafe guide. Such unfortunate people are, hence, compelled to ltarn the order in which the letters come in the word, by rote, and that not the sound of the letters (for that won and be confusion itself,) but their alphabetical names. This is a task ten times more difficult than that of merely fixing the form of the word itself on the mind; such people do well to study comparative philol ogy and the rules for spelling. A knowledge of these subjects enable the student to make the spelling when he does not know it; but, even here, he finds but an imperfect remedy, be cause of the great number of exeptions. These exceptions must be laboriously learned one by one, and if he spell them wrong good spellers must be charitable. My own experience in learning to read English, Latin, Greek and French, t o nts directly to the position I here assume. I have never seen an attempt to explain this subject. The educated world gen erally condemn, utterly, bad spelling, but is it fair for those who have eyes to laugh at the blind ? No more is it for those who have learned to spell, without trouble, to deride those who have labored twice as hard, and yet have acquired less. Be charitable, 0, ye good spellers to your bad spellers, for I am One of Them. For the Index and Baptist.] Sunday-School Work iu the Georgia and Wash ington Associations. It would consume entirely too much space in The Index, to give a detailed account of the work done at twenty churches, but I cannot refrain from giving an outline of the tour recently made by brother Fish and myself, through the above-named Associa tions : We commenced at Greensboro’, where I always love to go, and where I always receive a cordial welcome from pastor, Superintendent and friends, Thursday night, March 9th, and closed at Sandersville. on Sun day night, the 26th. The churches visited, besides those mentioned, were Union Point, Penfield, Bairdstown, Carter’s Grove, Sardis, Washington, Rehoboth, Hephzibah, Lincolnton, Greenwood, Flint Hill, Thomson, Warrenton, Elim, Pow°lton, Jewell’s Mills, Mineral Springs and Union. In connection with this trip, I desire to say the following things : 1. An earnest and increasing inter est in the Sunday-school work was manifested almost everywhere, as was evident from the large congregations, and the readiness with which names were enrolled as teachers and scholars. At eleven churches, three hundred and sixty-nine .new teachers and scholars have been enlisted in the cause, and have promised to attend unless provi dentially prevented. 2. Of the schools organized by me a year ago, only one went into “winter quarters,” and that, only, for a short time. In these churches a revival spirit has been felt nearly all the time, and the zeal of the members greatly in creased. ' - . ~‘ 3. Nearly every one of the twenty churches visited, on this trip, cheer fully made contributions to the Sun day-School work, and some of them gave liberally. One brother com plained that an opportunity was not given to his church to contribute. 4. The conventions and mass-meet ings at Penfield, Thomson and Sanders ville, were peculiarly interesting. From the first named place, a number of let ters have been received, of the most gratifying character. Brother San tord, the worthy Superintendent, will be delighted when he hears that one little girl, at least, dates her convic tion and conversion from our meeting then. We have heard of conversions at other places. We have surely had a more delightful institute than that at Sandersville, and we seldom find more earnest brethren than Duggan and Medlock, the officer's of this Sun day-school. The largest contribution was made at Sandersville. A precious meeting was eujoyed at Thompson, but I regret to say that no letter has been received from there. 5. The largest numbers organized into any one school was at Union, where ninety were enrolled. A letter from brother Pounds informs us that since we left, the school has run up to over a hundred. If time and space would permit, I would be glad to speak of all the churches visited, and of the manv pleasant scenes witnessed, and of the many acts of kindness received at the hands of the dear brethren. Brother Fish and I agree that we have seldom, if ever, accomplished more in the same length of time. Before closing, I feel that I ought to call special attention to the work done by brother J. A. Shank, at Flint Hill and other places. For a year he has devoted all the time he could spare, from other duties, to the Sunday school work, and his labors have been crowned with great success. Flint Hill stands as a monument to his Christian zeal and fidelity. Nor can I refrain from giving a public expression of gratitude to broth er Fish, for the invaluable service ren dered by him, and which was so high ly appreciated by the brethren every where. I desire to say to my correspondents, old and young, that their letters shall be answered as soon as possible. T. C. B. Ex-Pkesident Jefferson Davis will sail for Europeon the Ist of May; He will pass some six or eight months in London and on the Continent, to promote the establishment of a direct trade with the cities of the Mississippi Valley. <