Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

SOUTH-WESTERN BAPTIST, X THE CHRISTIAN HERALD, of Alabama. of Tennessee. ESTABLISHED I 811. Table of Contents. First Page—Alabama Department: Political Acrimony; Extent of Inspiration ; With drawal of Appointments. The Religious Press. Second Page—Cofrespondence: Ministerial Life; Doubts on Inspiration; A Sunday in Washington; Jottings by the Way; ' Reminiscences of Mercer; Ordination. Missionary Department. Third Page Children's Corner: Bible Ex ¥lorations; Enigmas; Correspondence he Sunday School —The Red Sea—Lesson for August 14th. New Advertisements. Fourth Page—Editorials: Not a Dog; Our Mission Contributions ; That Kiss ; Com plete Surrender; Glimpses and Hints; Georgia Baptist News. Fifth Page-Secular Editorials: The Glory of Literature; Literary Notes and Com ments ; The Magazines; Georgia News. Sixth Page—The Household : The Sweet Old Story—poetry; Words of Wisdom; Be Friendly; The Month of August—poetry (illustrated). Obituaries. Seventh Page—The Farmer’’ Index: Farm Work for August; Late Cotton Culture; Sowing Wheat; Our Duty; German Mil let; etc. Eight Page—Florida Department: Facts. Fancies and Figures; Scottsville; etc. Alabama Department. BY SAMUEL HENDERSON. POLITICAL ACRIMONY. If there is one crime above all other crimes of which the American people as a whole are guilty, it is the habit of "speaking evil of dignities.” It is an offence that must recoil in the end against the very integrity of our govern ment, by inspiring contempt for the very parties for whom the profoundest respect is due—those who are in author ity. A large portion of our citizens, editors, politicians, state and national, seem to consider it a part of their duty to impute to our officials the basest motives that can actuate the most de praved, and to place the worst con struction upon their conduct that it can bear. The idea that a public man can rise above the merest partisanship and selfishness that can animate the meanest of men, never seems to enter many of their heads. If he does any thing which defies the “Argus eyes” of these carpers, they impute even that to some partizan purpose. If he claims to be animated by any thing like pa triotism in the administration of the public service, why, it is all cant, in tended to cloak some selfish end. So that if he does right or wrong, it comes to the same end, it is all part and par cel es the came corrupt source. We verily believe that the late attempted assassinnation of our worthy chief mag’strate, President Garfield, is one of the legitimate fruits of the licentious, wholesale abuse of our public men. When we think of it seriously, is it strange that among a population of fifty millions, where this moral virus circulates incessantly, some desperado should be found, who, under the spe cious plea of relieving the country or the party of a troublesome official, an of ficial who claims to have a mind of his own, and who cannot accommodate every scapegrace with an office who demands it, should seek to carry out in fact what has been more than suggest ed by this horde of disappointed office seekers? especially,as the plea of “moral insanity” has come to be the universal excuse for every enormous crime! We see that some statements are coming out to the effect that the mis erable wretch, Guiteau, who attempted the murder of the President, has been insane for years. But is it not time to be putting some of these insane people where they can do no more mischief? He was thought to be sane enough by the party with whom he acted to take part in the last Presidential canvass. He certainly understood his lesson then quite well, for he abused the South as well as any “stalwart of the stalwarts.” ■ He elaborated a scheme to assassinate the President with as much coolness and sagacity as was ever concocted by any man who practiced “murder as one of the fine arts,” and came within an ace of carrying it out. The motive he claims to have actuated him, is just the motive that animates the whole tribe of disappointed office seek ers, who are hurling not the less deadly missiles of vituperation and slander at our same chief executive, only he aim ed at the life while they aim at the reputation of the same man. He only went a step farther than they. He only sought to do with a bullet what they are seeking to do with envenomed tongues and pens. “Insane” forsooth! And who is not insane at the instant he takes the life of his fellow-man? It is time the world was rid of this species of insanity. The spirit that would strike down the chief magistrate of this nation of freemen, would run riot over the last vestiges of civil liberty. It is as bad as treason of the deepest die. And nothing short of the extrem est penalty which crime can provoke, can adequately express that sense of indignation and wrong which every worthy citizen feels in this emergency. The life of our President is sacred in the eyes of every true man, and his body guard is the breast of every gen uine patriot. There was rather too much method in Guiteau's madness for the plea of insanity to hold. Insane people generally act without motive and from sudden impulses. But his motive was transparent, was avowed by himself, he even exulted in it. And then the infamous act was the result of six weeks premeditation. Human nature is not capable of planning more elaborately and executing more cun ningly a deed of blood. His punish ment is not a question of vengeance at a.l, but a question of impartial, retrib utive, inexorable justice. No occasion has ever offered itself in our past his tory as a government, in which law so much needs to be magnified and vin dicated. That the chief magistrate of a free, enlightened people, who, in ad dition to his virtues as a man, con bines the excellences of a Christian statesman, should be put upon a level with those tyrants of the Old World whose infamous careers could only be ended by the saletto of assassins, is humiliating to the last degree. For murder, intended or real, never had a more groundless pretext, than the at tempt on President Garfield. Whose heart was not touched by the affecting exclamation of liis aged mother when the news was broke to her: “ Who could be so cold hearted as to kill my baby boy I” Let us say in conclusion, that when ever party spirit becomes so acrimoni ous as to make assassinations of high functionaries even possible, patriotism can no longer be a plea or pretext for its conduct. So long as party spirit is in subordination to patriotism, all parties readely coalesce in whatever is essential to preserve the free institu tions of a country. But when it de generates into a faction, it is only the precursor of that treason that will ruin where it cannot rule. Thus far had we written when The Index of the 14th July was received, in which our worthy chief has two editorials which almost supersede the necessity of our saying anything on the foregoing subject, except that we discuss it from a different standpoint. If there is any difference in our views, it is on the relative value of human life, and by consequence the relative magnitude of the crime that would take it. Perhaps in this we are at one. When, at a great crisis in a battle in the late war, General Lee was estopped by General Gordon and others from rushing to the front to recover his broken lines, thus putting his life in peril, it was because it was better for any other lives in the army to be sacri ficed than his. Deep down in the con sciousness of every right minded man, we suppose, this same sentiment exists. David’s life was estimated to be of more value than ten thousand of his people. _ EXTENT OFINSPIRA TION. We are sure the reader will indulge us, while on the subject of inspiration, to bring out one other aspect of it to which we attach no little degree of im portance. Theories on this, as well as on most other subjects, may have been pressed too far. The advocates of plena ry inspiration, as Dr. Carson, for in stance. may have claimed more than the subject demands—while those who claim that the thought only was in spired, and the sacred writer was left to express it in his own language, have certainly erred on the other side. The truth in this, as in so many other cases, lies between these extremes. We think the following principle will about meet the case, a principle which is re cognized in “Kurtz’s Sacred History,” a work translated from the German, and published in this country about twenty-five years ago. It is this: That all those truths which lie beyond the limits of human knowledge and ex perience—those truths which we never could have known but for divine rev elation— were suggested by the Spirit in matter and form, just as they ap- ALANTA, GEORGIA, THURSDAY, AUGUST 4, 1881. pear in the original; and that in all those truths which lie within the bounds of human knowledge, such as historical and biographical facts de tailed in their writings, the Holy Spirit protected the writer from the possibili ty of error. It seems to us that this is the lowest ground on which a con sistent believer in inspiration can ever think of putting this question. If “God, who at sundry times and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers, by the prophets, bath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son,” and if that book we call the Bible con tains the sum of his utterances, then it must possess an authority which it would be impious in us to accord to any other book in the world. Take that por tion of Holy Writ, the matter of which lies beyond the powers of human rea son and observation, that never could have been known but by the Holy Spirit —it is impossible to conceive how it ever could have been made intelligi ble but by something like what we call “plenary inspiration.” It is doubtless in inspiration as it is in every depart ment of the divine economy. The Holy One economizes his power. That is, He only undertakes to do that directly which surpasses human capacity, and and which is essential to be done for his own glory aud for the good of his creatures. For instance, the regenera tion of the soul is the result of a direct divine agency, as much so as the crea tion of a world. But the subsequent growth in grace of that soul in some important respects depends upon the diligence and perseverance of the new creature. So also, the descent of rain upon the earth is purely a divine ar rangement. “He sendeth his rain npon the just and the unjust.” We can no more command the clouds than we can make a universe. But we can plant the seed and cultivate them, sb that when the rain does fall we can share its benefits. Even so is it in the domain of revelation, as Paul affirmsf Rom. 8:11—“For what man knowetb the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him; even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.” And it is by “the Spirit of God” that these “things of God” are revealed to us. But in those things which the Bible contains that come fairly within the scope of human knowledge, its histori cal and biographical facts, the sayings and doings of living actors, whether pro phets, apostles,or Christ himself, all that is essential to stamp the impress of di vine authority upon such portions of our sacred writings, is, just what our blessed Lord promised to his witnesses in the descent of the Spirit: “But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.” John 14 :26. Under the tuition of this Spirit, their minds would, as we may say, be fertilised, purified and exalted, so that what they wrote is preserved from the least taint of human infirmity. And this is the Spirit which inspired “Holy men of old,” under the former dispensation as well as the Apos tles. Now this protects the whole record, whether of facts and events that came under the observation of the divine witnesses, and which may have somewhat faded from their minds,but is, by this Spirit,restored as by a palimpsest, a re-writing; or those great truths which a direct revelation only could make in telligible to mortal comprehension. This secures the full integrity of the sacred volume —this fixes upon all its utterances the very signet of divinity. And nothing short of this can make it what it claims to be, the Word of God. Thus much we have felt it our duty to say, as the whole question of inspi ration is now undergoing a very rigid investigation, and we could not let the occasion pass without contributing our mite, humble though it is, to a question so transcendently important. And we promise the reader not to bore him any more on the subject, unless “advanced thought!” (save the mark!) turns up some new phase to an old error. The friends of “Prohibition” in our county (Talladega) are fully organiz ed, the best men in the county coming to the front, and .the prospect is flatter ing that we will redeem the county from that most despicable tyrant that ever ruled to ruin, Alcohol. It only needs every good man to do his duty, and the victory is assured. Many men addicted to the use of liquor favor it, as it will remove the temptation from them, I and thus facilitate their reformation. WITHDRAWAL OF APPOINT- MENTS. We regret most profoundly the nec essity under which our Foreign Mis sion Board felt compelled to withdraw the appointment of our young brethren Bell and Stout as missionaries to our foreign field on account of their views upon the subject of inspiration. But to have continued them after it was known that they had adopted the loose views of Prof. Toy on that subject, and that, too, after Prof. T.’s resignation had been accepted by the Trustees of the S. B. Theological Seminary, as one of its faculty, on account of these views, would have been inexpedient, incon sistent and wrong. To appoint men to our foreign field, the very pioneers of evangelization, who avow it as their (belief that the word o f God is “partly human and partly divine,” and that it is competent for uninspired men in this age, eighteen centuries after the sacred canon was closed, to sit in judgment on what it is proper and what it is not proper for God to reveal, is not only in consistent with the solemn obligations that Board to the denomination, but to tho integrity of divine truth itself. No man is behind us in respect and af fection for these young brethren. Their piety and talents are cheerfully accord ed to them. One of them, brother Stout, we have known from his very infancy. His father was one of the best Christian friends we ever had; and was one of the most godly minis ters we ever knew. But if that father were an archangel to-day, it would not redeem the sad error of his gifted son upon a question than which a more important cannot be conceived. “Prin ciples, not men,” should be the motto of Christians above all other men. Loose principles once admitted, will always find bad men to give them their full force and effect. And there can be whither that principle will tend which avers that the histor ical portion of the Bible is human, sub ject to all the errors of any human his tory, and that only its doctrines are inspired. Yield this to the demands of infidelity, and its apostles may well turn upon us and say, ‘defend the bal ance if you can! To send an ambas sador from these United States to the Prussian Court whose avowed senti ments upon the subject of government were partly monarchical and partly re publican would be wisdom compared with sending an ambassador of Christ to a foreign field to establish and de fend the divine authenticity of the very Book which he declares is “partly human and partly divine.” Their very piety and talents are the reason why they should not go to such fields, for the reason that remaining here their sentiments can be met and combatted with effect, while there they would have a clear field to disseminate them. Goodness, culture, talents, are not all that are needed in a foreign missionary. Fenelon, Pascal, Massillon, and many others who were Catholics, were good cultivated, talented men, and Christians we believe; but were they living now. we should scarcely think of appointing them to foreign mission stations, with their other views, even if we had the opportunity. Greatly regretting the circumstances under which the Board felt it necessary to rescind these appointments to a foreign field, we can but commend them for their faithfulness. A worthy Christian lady contributed the other day at one of our churches twenty-five dollars to be specially sent to these two brethren; but we venture to say, when she learns the facts of the case, that no contributor to missions in the South will more heartily endorse the action of that Board than she. Cherishing the hope that these excellent young brethren will yet see their way back to the paths from which they have diver ged, we here dismiss the painful sub ject. Were they our own brothers ac cording to the flesh, we could not say less. It is stated that the Revised New Tesa ment does not sell in the country, the people regarding any alteration in the text as pro fanation.—Central Presbyterian. We suppose there are people in the country, and in the cities too, who be lieve that the English words of the Bible are inspired. It may be of service to such persons to know that the last of the sacred books was written 1800 years ago, and that the English language ( having been spoken not more than six hundred years) came into existence 1200 years after the last sacred writer died. The Religious Press. “Iscariot was never suspected by the other eleven, though their associations with him were intimate, and though he was possessed of the devil from the beginning.” So said The Index not long ago> and now comes to the front the Baptist Reflector and says: Now we remember to have made once on a time, a similar assertion, and it was chal lenged. The objector said . “The Scriptures nowhere say anything to show that ‘Judas was possessed of the devil from the begin ning 1 ;” and this from John xiii: 27. 1 And after the sop, Satan entered in to him,” was drawn on ns. We had to give it up. How is this octor? If you can make good your assertion, we will yet rejoice over wbat would have been our triumph, if we had been shar per. There was not much to give up. How far Judas was under the influ ence of Satan at various periods of his life, we cannot say. True in John 13 : 27. it is said that “after the sop Satan entered into him ;” but in the 2d verse of the same chapter we read in the new version as follows: “And during supper the devil already having put into the heart of Judas. to betray him.” So the entering in of the Satan after the sop was not his first entrance. More than a year before this, our Lord speaking of Judas said, “Did not I choose you twelve and one of you is a devil.” Jno. 6 :70. The exact differ ence between being a devil in thesen«e in which our Lord used those words, and being possessed of the devil we must think is a matter of no practical importance. Hundreds of years before this the “Holy Ghost spake by the mouth of David concerning Judas,” (Acts 1:16) and if it is not said in so many words that he was possessed of the devil from the beginning, an ac count is given of him which shows that he might as well have been so posses sed, whether he was so or not. He after wards went to his “own place” (Acts 2 :25) which was prepared for him as thoroughly aa he was prepared for it. There is no evidence that any change ever took place in the character of Judas. What it was at the end it was at the beginning. The Canadian Baptist informs us that, On Thursday and Friday of the last week an advertisement appeared in one or two of the daily papers of this city, inviting the “Liberal Baptists” of Toronto and vicinity, to assemble in Jackson’s Hall, to consider the propriety of forming an Open Commun ion Baptist church, under the pastorate of Rev. William Brookman. The meeti. g was held on Friday evening last, and was attend ed by from 30 to 40 persons, several of wnom were present simply as spectators. From questions put and answered on the occasion it appears that the new organization is noi only to be open in communion, but latitud inarian in doctrine. It was expressly an nounced that the pastor was to have the ful lest liberty to preach his peculiar views re garding the sleep of the soul and future punishment. We deeply regret the forma tion of a church on such a basis. But we of The Index have no such regrets; we rejoice rather. If we have such people among us, the sooner they leave the better. Nor are we at all surprised. Open communionism is very apt to lead to general looseness of doc trine ; and the above is a striking in stance of it. * a * The Evangelist speaking the num erical strength of its denomination, says: It would be immensely more to our glory if, instead of pointingout the size of our ar my, we would point to its deeds. Divorce.—Speaking of the necessity of some National law regulating mar riage, the Christian at Work says: Such a measure must be secured by Com stitutional Amendmentit can be secured in no other way. The Bth Section of Article 10 of the Constitution provides that “Powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people.” This section as it stands is certainly in surmountable. A Divorce law passed by Congress in face of such a provision would speedily have to undergo the test of the United States Supreme Court, where it would be pronounced unconstitutional. But suppose Congress were to propose an amend ment to the Constitution like the,following: ARTICLE XVI. Congress shall have power to regnlate the institution of Marriage and prescribe the conditions of Divorce throughout the United States. Now why, with the iniquities and infamies of the easy-divorce laws which exist, throughout the States, enabling citizens to go out of the State, marry or be divorced under conditions forbidden therein, and re turn and live in defiance of the law and of public sentiment, —why should not this Constitutional Amendment or something like it prevail? Beyond question the proposed amendment to the Constitution of the United States ought to be adopted. It is impossible to secure uniformity in marriage laws in any other way. vol. 59. —NO. 3<£ The President's critical illness has brongh to the surface tbe difference between Protes tantism snd Roman Catholicism in the event of impending death. Thus a Roman Catho lic paper—the Boston Pilot—speaks of the "empty negation called Protestantism,” di* | lates upon tbe fact that when the President was struck down, not a priest, but a surgeon was sent for. “All thought is for the body —no care is for the soul,” it says and adds: “With Catholicsit is different. In case of calamity, concern for the soul is first. The priest is the soonest summoned, then the doctor, then the friends. Eternity is of more moment than time, and whfn all attention has been paid to its interests, the man is more disposed to profit by the ministrations intended for h‘s spiritual good.” The difference between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism is very strikinglyly set forth in this matter. With Roman Catho lics the priest is sent for first, not because concern for the soul is first with Roman Catholics and secondary with Protestants, but because the Roman Catholics hold* that only the priest can prepare the dying man for heaven, and this however vicious his life may have been, while Protestants hold that a Christian is always prepared, and that be yond tbe comfort which every dying Chris tian man experiences in having a minister and his friends by bis bedside, the offices of the minister cannot change the destiny of the soul. In brief, in the Protestant system it is tbe attitude of tbe soul to God that de termines the destiny of the soul —not the perfunctory acts of a priest. To send for the priest first is the logical deduction of Roman Catholicism, as to send for a surgeon first is the logical consequence of Protestantism—the difference being that under the one system there is always priest ly preparation to be made before the sufferer departs ; under the other, the Protestant sys tem, when the sinner comes to Christ the soul is passed from death to life, and when the Christian has made bis peace with God there is required of tbe sonl no secondary peace at the hands of a priest. And so the case is admirably put by the Christian at Work. Yet there are some who are not Catholics, but who will send for a minister to “baptize” a dying babe before they will send for s physician to prescribe for it. The very same persons accuse Baptists of “lay ing too much stress on baptism!” Their action is Popish and their talk is unworthy of them. No words ever spoken have had such a history as the words of Jesus. They have been Incorporated into the literature of all modem (Hvilized nations, they hava gone into the jurisprudence and civic economyof Christendom. They have thrilled and con solated the hearts of bereaved men and wo men, in the chamber of death and at the gates of the cemetery, as no other words ever did or could. In millions of cases they have been the first words which lisping infancy has learned in the mother's lap, and in a» many more they have been the last words, which the aged and the dying have fondly uttered, as they closed their eyes on all eartuly scenes, and stood in the presence of God. They have had a power to administer consolation in trouble, to raise the fallen to cheer the helpless, to awaken hope in death and to dispel even the gloom of the dying hour, that has not belonged to any other written or spoken words—lnterior. We have often said the same thing,, but never, we think, qt.i e so well. The Queen of England lately attended a funeral service after the Congregational form when a favorite retainer was buried from Windsor Castle, and in consequence thereof the Ritualists and High-churchmen of Eng land have had another spasm. The Queen of England has away of doing what she pleases, and the High flying churchmen of England have a way of making themselves ridiculous. Withheld Statistics.—Under this title we have here, from the Sunday School Times, one of the most telling articles we have seen in a long time. Read it: How it would startle some of our congre gations to have the pastor follow the reading of the annual report of his church with a few of the withheld statistics, somewhat after this sort: —“ Os the thirty-two who Lava joined our church the past year I find that five of those who came in on profession have unmistakably fallen into former evil ways, while of those who were received by letter three were certainly lacking in good charac ter in the churches they left, although by the record they were in ‘good and regular stand ing.’ One of our elders is popularly reported to have swindled a neighbor outrageously in a notorious business transaction. We have lost one of our more prominent members by bis transfer to the county jail on conviction of crime. A eareful examination of our record has convinced me that fully one-third of our members can be counted on the ‘dead head’ list. They do nothing in the line of Christian activity. As to their example they are not bad enough to be a warning to the outside world, nor good enough to be taken as an example by anybody—in or out. Our benevolent contributions look pretty well for our numbers, but I learn that nearly one* third of their full amount has been given by four persons; and that of the other members of the church more than one-half gave leas to religious ca rises than they pay toward: public amusements, while there are not »• tew families which gave more for peanuta during the year than they put in tie com tribution box. A fair estimate of the tobacco bills of the congregation is twice and three eighths the amount given by the church to home and foreign missions combined.” 1 Such a supplement as this, in kind and in degree according to the particular communi ty, could be truthfully made in many » church where the annual report last present ed is spoken of as “every way encouraging.” 7