Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

ESTABLISHED 1821. ®he ffihriatian Juries published Every Thursday at 67 South Broa Street. Atlanta. Ga. j. c. McMichael, proprirtor. Organ of the Baptist Denomination in Georgia. Sußscairnox Price: One copy, one year $ 2.00 One copy, six months 1.00 Obituaries.—One hundred words free of charge. For each extra word, one cent per word, cash with copy. To Correspondents.—Do not use abrevia tions;be extracareful in writinaproper names; write with ink, on one side of paper; Do not write copy intended for the editor and busi ness items on same sheet. Lear e off personal ities; condense. Business.—Write all names, and post offices distinctly. In ordering a change give the old as well as the new address. The date of label indicates the time your subscription expires. If you do not wish it continued, order it stop ped a week before. We consider each sub scriber permanent, until he orders his paper discontinued. When you order it stopped pay up to date. Remittances by check preferred; or regis ered letter, money order, postal note, God may allow the saints to suffer as fliction without the succors of his grace, that they may learn to prize these suc cors as they should and not forfeit them again by sin. The arrow flies to our hurt and wounding, because we would not hold the shield between to turn its flight or blunt its point. A writer in the “Standard” savs that it was a frequent custom with the late Rev. Thomas Conant, D. I)., when about to give a gentle hint of dissent, to pull his nose with his thumb and finger. We do not see why the mental process of dissent should express itself with Dr. C. in pull ing his own nose, unless as a kind of safety valve to prevent its expression in the more natural way of pulling the nose of the other party. Hon. J. J. Ingalls, ex-Senator from Kansas, writing of the separation be tween the white and black races in this country, says;“lf possible, the barrier is more insuperable at the North than at the South, and the proscription more contemptuous and intolerant." No man with brains enough to discern the truth and with honesty enough to declare it can say anything else. The Southern spirit is the spirit least hostile to the Negro. There are few things in the statistical line more ridiculous and misleading than the statement that our country is the ha ven and home of one hundred and forty three religious denominations. The word denomination is abused, is made meaningless.when applied to every little handful temporarily grouped around some blatant advocate of paltry, passing beliefs, or misbeliefs, or even unbeliefs; applied to what is scarcely a congrega tion or a club to-day, while to-morrow numbers it with the things that were. A paper by W. T. Stead, London, read at the Religions Press Congress, Chi cago, took this advanced ground. “The editor of the religious paper is distinctly a minister as the pastor of a local church: he is, in fact, pastor; only, of a larger flock.” 'The editor, of course, needs the brain of the minister, the heart of the pastor, the cnlture and piety of both; and he may, many times, possess them. But his post and his work can not make him an office-bearer in the church, if Christ is the Church’s Head and has once for all determined the Church's organi zation—two things which we hold as true. Daudet, the French author has been saying some things of late whi ch ought to ling er in the thoughts of parents, We quote a sentence or two:—“They say that children were never loved so much as now. Whether that is true or not depends upon the fashion of loving. It is very pretty for a mother to be always kissing her children and spoiling them; and it is very convenient for a father to let them do whatever they like, so long as they don’t annoy him. But to bring them up seriously—-that is a hard task, and one that often lacks gayety. To work for them! that's nothing; but to make them work—what a business that is!” How freely money flows in the chan nels of men’s wishes: how the touched heart opens the hands to let the gold and silver out! When Rubenstein, the mu sician, made his tour of our country in 1872, his net earnings for two hundred and fifteen concerts were $50,000. The present year, net earnings to the amount of $150,000 were secured by Paderewski, in a tour of seventy concerts. Oh, if what instructs and what saves men only put forth over the heart and its wishes a power equal to what amuses them, funds for Christian enterprises would never be wanting. And shall we consent to be a Iways least affected by things of supreme moment and divine sanction and eternal award, so as to keep back our money most of all from these? “The largest single appropriation for government expenditure ever made on the face of the globe” was made by the last American Congress, when it voted “the one item which startled the coun try— $105,000,000 for pensions.” There is the savor of something lavish and wasteful and fraudulent in such vast sums; and it is not wholly incredible, as the papers tell us, that a Missouri soldier has been granted a pension for no other reason than the two corns on his feet! Well, whatever may be true in the spir itual and ecclesiastical sphere, money does not always wait in the secular sphere for the valid demand and the im perative need and the weighty, worthy motive. After It has been kept back from God and the things of God, nothing seems too false and empty and mean to secure it. God. even when dealing with masses still deals with individuals—counting all> even to the very least and the very last. When he accepted the tribe of Levi to minister in his sanctuary in lieu of the first-born sons of all the tribes, it was found that the latter were more in num ber than the former by two hundred and seventy-three all these he required to be redeemed—to be bought back from sanctuary ministration—at the rate of five shekels each. And when the re demption money was paid into his treas ury, he abated nothing for any one of them: the full sum of one thousand, three hundred and sixty-Tive shekels was exacted. No individual ever is or ever .can be lost from sight by GOd: it were »qulte as possible for him to close his eye and not to see the universe itself. THE CHRISTIAN INDEX. ....... 94 RwTßWes ~ THE SECOND BY S. G. HILLYER. That Christ will come again to this world, in his visible person, is distinctly foretold in the New Tes tament. Upon this point, so far as I know, all Christians are heartily agreed. But as touching the time when he shall thus appear, there is a difference of opinion. Let the reader bear in mind that the Christian dispensation embraces two great periods. The first is a period of twilight, under the “Morn ing star.” The other is a period of perfect day, under the effulgent glory of the rising “Sun of righteousness.” This is the period of the Christ’s triumph over the world, when “the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the earth as the waters cover the sea.” Now the question upon which Christian writers are divided is this: Shall tho second visible advent of the Saviour precede, or follow after this long expected Day of Gospel light and glory? Many pious and intelligent peo ple answer this question by holding that Jesus will actually come, in his visible person to reign on this earth, before the no called Millennium; and they farther hold that he will bring with him the martyrs, who suffered death for the testimony of Jesus, and perhaps all the pious dead to share with him the glory of his earthly kingdom. And they also hold that he will destroy by “the brightness of his coming” all forms of antichrist, and speedily bring all mankind to submit to his authority, when all the nations shall be blessed. I have given the merest sketch of this picture, but it is exceedingly attrac tive. The skillful word painter could make it glow with surpassing beauty. No wonder so many are captivated by its charms, and echo with enthusiasm the words of the inspired seer :“Even so, come Lord Jesus coine quickly, ” —supposing these words refer to his second per sonal and visible coming. But this beautiful theory is en compassed with some -very serious difficulties. Ist. It is founded upon an inter pretation of a few of the ancient messianic prophecies partly, literal, and partly not literal. Among these the reader will please notice Isa. ix. 6:7 xvi. 5. xxii. 20:2122. Jer. xxx. 9. Eze. xxxvii. 24 etc., These passages, certainly, foretell a period of great blessedness for Israel, when his scattered \tribcs shall be gathered once more in the land of their fathers, and when David their, King shall rule over them ; and the gentiles shall share the benefits of his reign. The pious or orthodox Jews to-day ate looking and longing for the fulfil ment of these precious promises. And Christians accept them as af fording support to their own expec tation of the glory that shall follow the triumph of Christianity over all the nations. The Jews, looking at the subject from their standpoint, may be excusable for expecting a literal fulfilment of the promises. But Christians looking at it from their stand point, cannot interpret these prophecies literally without great danger to some of our most cherished Christian ideas. Look at Jer. xxx. 9. He is speaking of the blesedness that shall come to Israel at some future time. “But they shall serve the Lord their God and David, their king whom I will raise up unto them.” Now, a literal in terpretation of these words would mean, that God would literally raise up from the dead, David, who had been, then in his grave nearly 400 years, and restore him to his literal throne in a literal Jerusalem. And this might suit the Jews very well. But would it suit the Christians? Was it the literal David that ap peared in the person of our Jesus, that was baptized in the Jordan, crucified on Calvary, and rose again on the 3rd day? Then what be comes of our notions of Christ’s Di vinity and eternal Sonship? These questions illustrate the extreme ab surdity of literal interpretation. But Jeremiah is not alone in thus using the name of David. Ezekiel, three times in as many verses, and in different chapters, does the same thing. And in every case a literal interpretation would be absurd. Some may reply to all this by claiming that they would give a literal interpretation only to a part of the leading terms; but this method should never be resort ed to, unless the context demands it, and then we convict the writer of very bad Rhetoric. Try this meth od on any of the Saviour’s parables and see what a botch you will make of them. It is therefore a serious objection to the theory now under consideration, that it depends upon an interpretation of the prophecies 2. Another objection to this theory is, that it seems to overlook the dif ferent modes of the Saviour’s com ing where it is spoken of in the New Testament. These modes are two. One is an invisible coming. The other is a visible coming. Exam ples of the first class are numerous. When, Jesus sent out his disciples to preach, he said to them: “But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another; for verily I say ATLANTA, GA., THURSDAY. JUNE 29,1893. unto you: ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.” The context shows that this coming would take place in a very short time. It had its ful filment on the day of Pentecost when the Saviour came, not visibly, but in the power and demonstration of his Spirit. On another occasion he said ; “Verily I say unto you ; there be some standing here, who shall not taste of death, till they see the Son of man coming in his kingdom.” This coming could not be more re mote than the destruction of Jeru salem. It was then that Jesus came in his judicial Providence to abolish Judaism, that he might develop a new and a better dispensation. But his coming was not visible to the natural eye. Christians saw the signs of his coming, and fled from the devoted city ; but they saw not his person. Once more, Jesus said to his disciples “If any man love me he will keep my words, and my Fa ther will love him, and we will come and make our abode with him.” There is a coming to the individual saint in the sweet influences of his grace, which is, indeed, a precious element of every Christian experi ence. These invisible comings, of the Saviour, are often alluded to in the New Testament; and they should be carefully distinguished from pas sages which refer to his second visi ble advent. Ever since Jesus as cended on the Mount of Olivet, he has been invisible, save only his ap pearance to Paul “as one born out of due time.” Yet, though invisible to human eyes, he has often come, and will continue to come till all his pur poses shall be accomplished. He is the king of whom David was the type; upon the throne, of which the throne of David was the type ; and ruling the Spiritual kingdom of God, of which the kingdom of David was the type. And thus he is now, and has been ever since his ascen sion, actually fulfilling the ancient prophecies concerning himself. And through all the ages he has been the efficient cause of all that his people, under his grace and Providence, have been able to achieve in the world. And he will thus reign “till all enemies shall be put under his feet, and the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death.” But there are passages of Script ure that do foretell his second visi ble coming. Want of space forbids me to discuss them now. I hope to do so in another paper'. 73 Wheat street Atlanta. theYundaF QUESTION. HON. WILLIAM L. SCRUGGS. The Pharisees derived their name from an old Hebrew word which corresponds to our term “exclusive.” They were the self constituted ari stocracy of the Jewish Church, and .took precedence in social life. They bad an extraordinary amount o r re ligion associated with an infinitesim ally small amount of piety. In other w’ords, they were brazen hypocrites. Nevertheless, their influence over the minds of the people was very great. The popular mind is readily capti vated by sanctimonious display, and the Pharisees understood a good deal of human nature. They were distinguished from all the other re ligious \sects by the peculiarity of their dn?ss and by the extreme rigidity <>f their manners. They wore long rolls of parchment on their foreheads and wrists, on which were written certain words and maxims of the law. The fringes and borders of their garments were wider and more costly than those worn by other people. They were very devout and were particularly fond of praying at the street corners. They took the most prominent seats in places of public worship. In all their intercourse with men, they carried about the m the air of a privi leged class who had a special pass port to heaven. They had particularly refined upon the scrupulous observance of the Sabbath. To them, that particular day was sacred. Even a physician could not visit the sick with a pur pose of prescribing or administering remedies. Nay, it was held a mortal sin to heal a sick mtn on that day, even though this should be done by a single word without recourse to the apothecary; and readers of the New Testament, will readily recall how these sanctimonious hypocrites were scandalized by the Savior who had, by a single word spoken, healed a paralytic on the Sabbath. Indeed, they regarded Christ as a very wicked heretic, not only be cause he taught the possibility of an inner spiritual life, but because he was an habitual Sabbath breaker. He did not regard the Seventh an intrinsically more sacred day than any other. He did not make it a sort of fetich and fall down and worship it. Hence one of the standing charges against him was that ho, after attending the synagogue in tho forenoon, would go about healing the sick and comforting the needy on that day, just as ho did’, on any other. Aside from this, he permitted his disciples to do many things on that day which were peculiarly of fensive to these straight-laced gentle men of tho then “orthodox” Church; and some of the most animated dis cussions recorded in the four gos pels, arose on this very point of Sabbath-breaking. Take, for instance, the case of the disciples who had been arrainged for plucking and eating a few ears of corn on the Sabbath. By the old Jewish law (Deut. xxii,) persons coming into a field of standing corn might “pluck, the ears with their hands” in order to satisfy pressing hunger; though on no account were they permitted to “move a sickle” into the standing corn of the neigh bor. The act of the disciples was not therefore unlawful in itself. Even the Pharisees were ready to admit this. But the act was done on Sunday, on “the holy Sabbath day;” and this made the act an unpardon able offense. The law said plainly, “thou shalt not do any work on the Sabbath day,” (Ex. xx.) Hence the complaint by the Pharisee doctors. This lead to one of the most re markable discussions recorded in tho life of Christ. Instead of apologiz ing for the act of his followers, who were for the most part simple-mind ed men, he boldly justified their con duct. Willing to meet these canting hypocrites on their owe*4ine of argu ment, he cites the precedent of David, of whose memory and achievements the Pharisees were es pecially boastful. David, while fleeing from Saul, came to a place called Nob, entered the Temple weary, foot-sore and hungry, where a person of the name of Abimalech was the officiating priest. Being in great extremity, David falsely represented that he was on a secret and confidential mission of the king; and, whether Abimalech believed this story or not, he permitted David to eat the bread from the altar, which was lawful only for the priests to eat. The act was unlawful in itself. Not only this, it was performed on the Sabbath day. Hence Christ’s argument, in justification of his dis ciples, addressed to the Pharisee doctors, was substantially this: “You recognize the binding force of the letter of the law and precedents ru corded in the Old Testament. You likewise recognize David as the most pious, gifted and powerful of the early Jewish princes. But you have nothing to say against him for doing an intrinsically unlawful act on Sun day, even though that act was ag gravated by a falsehood. Where fore, then, do you presume to arraign my followers for an in itself, merely because it happened to be performed on a Sabbath afternoon when they were suffering from the pangs of hunger?” The argument, taken as a whole, rises in the following logical order: The conduct of the disciples is justi fied from an exceptional case of hunger, like that recorded of David ; it is justified by the immemorial cus tom, duly recognized even by the Pharisees, of profaning the Sabbath, in the literal sense, by the elaborate preparations for sacrifices in the Temple ; it is justified on the ground that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath ; and last, though not least, it is justified from the very nature of Christ’s own character and mission—in virtue of his Messiaship, as Lord of tho SabLth, and the proper interpreter of its ob ligations. I have sometimes thought that possibly we retain much of “the i leaven of the Pharisees” in the form of customs and traditions derived from our early Puritan ancestors. ‘ Even in the Southern States of our | Union, where Puritanism was never; dominant, we retain many absurd I notions and customs touching the so-called “Sunday question” which it would be difficult to find any au thority for in the New Testament Scriptures. I would not be mis understood on this point. An intelli gent and rational observance of the Christian Sunday (or “Sabbath” as; we presist in calling it,) is not only right and proper from a purely re ligious point of view; but it is like wise desireable as an economic meas ure in our social and civic policy. Hence a rational observance of the first day of the week (instead of the old Jewish seventh) >s very properly enjoined by the civic laws of all modern Christian communities. But Christian teachers make a great mis take when they undertake, by what ever means,to incorporate their con struction of the old Jewish Deca logue into the fundimental and stat utory law of a free country like the United States. Here at least, if no where else in Christendom, con science is perfectly Lee; and it is of the very essence of our institutions that it should remain so. If wo can -| not persuade mon into our way of' thinking about religious matters, let' us concede to them the same rights of j opinion which we claim for ourselves. If I cannot conscientiously visit the World’s Fair grounds on Sunday, or read Dickens or Thackery or Shake spere or tho secular newspapers on that day, that is my affair. My more liberal-minded neighbor dare not interfere to force me by law to ac cept his views on the subject. No more have I tho right to force my views upon him. 1 may endeavor to courteously persuade him to my way of thinking; but the time is long past for appeal to the civic magistrate in such matters. About tho most unprofitable business that any Government can engage in, is legislation on religious subjects. Let it preserve order and allow men to think and act for themselves on matters of conscience. REFLECTIONS ON OUR MISSION TO PAPAL LANDS- BY A. B. VAUGHAN, JR. Cardinal Gibbons, in a little book bearing the title “The Faith of Our Fathers,” gives out to the public these significant words, as constitu ting a part of that faith : “The Church has authority from God to teach re specting truth and morals; and in her teaching, she is preserved from error by the special guidance of the Holy Spirit. There is no just ground for denying to the apostolic teachers of the 19th century, a prerogative cleerly possessed by those of the first century. Especially as the divine Lord nowhere intimates that this unerring guidance was to die out with the Apostles.” This high dignitary of the Roman Catholic Church, thus places every bishop, priest, archdeacon and dea con of that church on the same plane of authority with the immediate apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ. What they teach either by oral ut terance or by pen, is therefore as binding on the consciences of men, as the gospels or the epistles. Do not be mislead by this digni tary’s use of the word church. In his view, as in the view of all Catho lics, there is but one church, and that is the Romish hierarchy. The dogma, quoted above, lies at the basis of all their instriJte.ion ; and accounts for their strong grasp on all who come under the influence of their teaching. When once this dogma is accepted every other dog ma of the “church,” follows as a natural result. Indeed the acceptance of this dogma guarantees the accep tance of whatever the "church” may be pleased to teach. Thus in the estimation of the Romanists, Protes tants and Baptists are Schismatics, opposesrs of God, and of ail righ teousness, children of the devil, and worthy of death ; even though these Protestants and Baptists number among their adherents, fathers and mothers and children. According to Cardinal Gibbons, and he but voices the faith of al CatholUs, the latest revelations from’ God are the oral and written utter ances of “the apostolic teachers of the 19th century.” From this, it is not difficult to see why the Bible finds no place in the individual Catholic’s religion,and forms no part of it.. Paul as an inspired writer pos sesses no more of divine authority, than does Cardinal Gibbons, since he, no less than Paul, is under “the spec ial guidance of the Holy Spirit,” and is “preserved from error” by this “special guidance." And since Car dinal Gibbons is a later “apostolic teacher” than Paul, where Paul con tridicts him, there Paul must be dis credited. Thus by one fell stroke of his pen, this “apostolic teacher of the 19th century,” abolishes the authori ty of the Bible. But what has this to do with our mission work? Where do the re. flections come in? Just here; J Every town throughout our country, ’ of any importance, has its cathedral, its convent, its school, one or all. In 1 these schools, instruction altogether ; in harmony with “The Faith of Our ! Fathers,” is carried on with eternal I vigilance. Toward the founding and maintenance of these Cathedrals, convents, schoools, Baptists and Pro testants have contributed of their means. Nor is this all. Into these schools and convents, Baptists and Protestants have placed their child ren, where they will imbibe such in , struction as that refered to above. Thus these Baptists—l forbear any further reference to Protestants— are aiding Catholicism in fastening its strong talons of steel around our people, contributing to the susten ance and strength of that hierarchy, which has tor its object the complete and final overthrow of this Repub lican government, the destruction of the peace and happiness of our homes tho substitution of religious desposi tism for religious freedom. Do these Baptists favor the preach ing of the gospel of Jesus Christ in papal lands, Italy, Cuba, Mexico Brazil? If so; do they believe in it strong enough to contribute of their means to support the gospel in those lands? Would they in this way dis place tho dark superstitions, the I moral corruptness’ the ecclisiastical tyranny of the Romish Church in those lands, by the enlightening, , purifying, liberty-giving gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ ? Why then, I ask in the name and behalf of their own unsuspecting kith and kin, do they help to enslave their own coun try to “that man of sin,” by contrib uting of their means for his support, and by putting their own offspring under his corrupt and corrupting in fluence? Would they lift to shore the drowning foreigner, while neg lecting their own child, whelmed in the same cruel water? Does the piteous and heartrendering wail of the slave,under tho scourgings of tho merciless tyrant, move them to pity, and arouse them to deeds of daring for his rescue, and while they rush to his relief, will they drag their own households, helpless and in chains, to put them into the rescued slave’s bard lot of suffering and servi tude? But it may be that these Baptists do not favor preaching the pure gos pel in these papal lands; and for its support have not contributed of their means. It must be because they be lieve that Roman Catholicism holds and preaches the gospel of Jesus Christ. In that event consistency, loyalty to their own convictions, would compel them to repudiate the faith of Baptists, and instead to em brace, out and out, the dogmas of the Romish hierarchy. For—quo ting from the great speech of Dr. B. H. Carroll—“the two faiths are not identical. They are inherently and fundamentally antogcnistic. They can no more amalgamate than night and day. True both claim to be Christian; but both cannot be Chris tian. The edge of a knife is broader than the neutral boundary between them.” Emphatically and signifi cantly true is it here : “No man can serve two masters”—Christ and the pope—-“for either he will hate the one, and love the other, or else he will hold to the one and despise the other.” For be it remembered that Baptists in all their history never had, nor have now, nor ever will have, any book of confession, but the Bible ; that they call no man master, but the Lord Christ; that they bow to the behests, and obey the decrees of no king, prelate or bishop in mat ters of religion; but only to him, “who is the blessed and only Poten tate, the king of kings, and Lord of Lords,” do they bow in these mat ters. What therefore would such repu diation of Baptist faith, and accep tance of Romish dogmas necessarily involve ? Quoting once more from Dr- Carroll: “You must go home and say to your mother, ‘mother you were my fathers concubine, and I am your illegitimate child. You must send your wife to the confes sional to whisper the secrets of her heart in the ear of another man than her husband. You must place the hand of the cradle of as grave, illYun say ’ er ‘Thou art and to t . I bread of the communion, ‘Thou art 1 my God.’ You must let the shadow of the Vatican fall on your open Bi ble, and let another tell you what it means.” Are you ready for such debasement of yourself, your wife, your children—body and soul? Surely,surely this “cannot be—never, never—forever.” What then? The only other alt erative for Baptists, Baptists who be lieve in the omnipotence of the Holy Spirit, is to withdraw all helps, of whatever kind or character, from Catholics in establishing and main taining their withering, blighting, blasting power in our own land ; and unremittingly and energetically to push the conquests of the gospel in those lands, where they smite and rule and ruin. In answer to Dr. Wm. E. Hatch er’s question : “Bro. George, how do you feel about the conversion of Ita ly ?” Dr. George B. Taylor, our missionary in that papal country, said : “Well God has brought us here and he is blessing us; and while I know not the times or the seasons of the Son of Man, I feel that we are here to do our part in preparing for his glorious coming.” Worthy say ing of a faithful servant. He has suffered much; but all the while he has been cheered and sustained that he is doing liis “part in preparing for the glorious coming” of our Lord Jesus. We are too far away to re lieve him of bodily suffering which be has to endure ; but we can share with him in his glorious work by our prayers and contributions, as we hope to share with him in that more “glo rious coming” of the Lord. From the Foreign Mission Jour nal I glean the following facts: “Death to the Protestants,” is the cry of fanatical priests to excite the more fanatical people to deeds of heartless cruelty. “Intrigues of the false religion, ramify in every direc tion, and bring perplexities* embar rassments and sorrow in Florence and in Rome.” “One blow falls on the head of Dr. Taylor; another on Dr. Eager; and both come on the faithful comrades together.” Yet in the face of such difficulties, these men “in holy warfare” toil on uncomplain ingly. Nor is their labor >n vain, as the “Texas Doctor” would have us to believe' New churches are spring ing into life—old churches are being revived. Extraordinary evangelistic and colportage work is being done— “ 10,000 tracts distributed.” “Child ren services, numbering in attend ance, 70 to 130 have been started in Florence and Rifredi, despite tho raging of rabid Romanism.” Hal lelujah! “Converts stand firm in tho midst of persecution.” Thank the Lord 1 “This, our first born mis sion” in papal fields, reports last Convention year 72 baptisms; and has a membership of 347, who con tributed last year $559,56. About $32 to the member. And this, in VOL. 70—NO. 26. poor, down trodden, priest-ridden Italy 1 Is not this desert beginning to rejoice and blossom as the rose ? This is a base outline of the work being done in one of our papal mis sion fields. The limit of this article forbids even such an outline of our mission work in the two other papal lands, Mexico and Brazil—to say nothing of the glorious achievements in Cuba under the wise leadership of the indomitable Diaz. But this is enough to inspire oui' hearts, and cause us to gird our zeal afresh. While these men of God, our breth ren and companions in labor, are toiling and suffering, let us not be idle and at ease. In the light of God’s word let us study anew our obligations, and sustained by his grace, let us do our duty. Do the mountains of difficulty, which confront us, iu the prosecution of this work, appall us? Listen “All power is given unto Me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost: teach ing them to observe all things what soever I have commanded you ; and, 10, I am with you alway even unto the end of the world.” Thus pano plied and protected, by the omnipo tence and omniscience of the Lord Almighty, under the commission of infinite authority, with all nations before him, the disciple needs not to fear, and his duty is plain. PASTORAL VISITATION. REV. F. P. DAVIDSON. Some one has said that a “bouse going pastor makes a church going people.” That depends upon the character rather than the frequency of his visits. If our visitation drifts into a mere gadding about, the peo ple will see quite enough of us in their homes, and therefore have no desire to bear us in the pulpit. Many of us are much better preach ers than we are pastors. We have all heard of the man about whom it was said, “that when he was in the pulpit he preached so well that he ought never to come out, and when he was out of the pulpit he lived so poorly that he ought never to go back again.” Our association with our people ought to strengthen rather than diminish the force of our preaching. It is a sad thing when ■fcb w ‘Lwtroys tho power AH ' his preaching by the way he lives among the brethren. We cannot have two systems of theology, one for the pulpit and an other for our every day life, but they must be in perfect accord or else our work will be a failure. It is in the homes of the people that we can do some of our best work, and here we ought to impress them that we are men of God. There are a few preachers who do not be lieve in pastoral visiting. They seek to justify themselves in the state ment of Christ to his disciples, “go not from house to house.” They might as well say I do not believe in missions and rest their faith upon the words “go not in the way of the gentiles.” In the first passage re ferred to, Christ is teaching his dis ciples to have a home Lorn which to go forth to labor, and not dis couraging the personal work of the pastor. The highest ideal of pasitoral work is set forth in the life of our Lord. It can truly be said of him that he lived among the people, and the homes of the rich and the poor alike showed the heavenly benedic tions of his presence. The Bible tells us that he went about doing good, and if we would imitate him we must not be weary in well doing. The mountains of Judea and Galilee were traversed all through by him on missions of mercy to the sick and suffering. The sick he healed, the hungry he fed, the troubled he en couraged and the vile he cleansed. How blessed that church that has a pastor in whom they can confide, and whose presence brings sunshine into their homes. A study of the pastoral life of Jesus and the apostles will give us many valuable hints about this part of our work in the present time. Take as an illustration Jesus in the home of Lazarus. His visits to this home must have been exceedingly pleasant, for they learned to lean upon him in times of trouble. They could not pass through the deep waters of affliction without sending for him who had been the very light of their home. To him the two sisters in the hour of sore trial poured forth the treasures of broken hearts, knowing that in him they had a friend that sticketh closer than a brother. The Apostle tells us that God has set pastors in the church. The word pastor has the same meaning as the word shepherd, and has ref ference to the daily care of the flock, and not the occasional oversight. The faithful Shepherd is not satis fied with guarding his sheep when they are gathered within the fold for the night, but in the morning goes forth before them to the past ures, and all day long watches over them to feed them and protect them from danger. He knows them by name and at his call they readily