Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

ESTABLISHED 1821. ©Tirietian gndrx I'ubljghed Every Thursday at 1C East Mitchel Street, Atlanta. Ga. j. c. McMichael, pkopribtob. Organ of the Baptist Denomination in Georgia. Subscription Pbicb: g 7ns copy, one year $ 2.00 L’ne copy, six months 1.00 Obituaries.—One hundred words free of F barge. For each extra word, one cent per ’ord, cash with copy. To Corkrspondknts.—Do not use abrevia tions; be extra careful in writing proper names; K -rite with ink, on one side of paper; Do not rite copy intended for the editor and busi ness items on same sheet. Leat e off personal ities; condense. Business.—Write all names, and post offices distinctly. In ordering a cha..ge give the old as well as the new address. Ihe 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 ho orders his paper discontinued. When you order it stopped pay up to date. i Kkmittancks by check preferred; orregis Med letter, money order, postal note, I There are certain English pills which, ■in the course of fifty years, have attain ted an annual use of six million boxes. In other words, on an average, eleven of these pills are taken every time the clock ticks. What a fearful bondage to ill . J’palth, and what a wide spread depend- W ice on medicine, a fact like this sug ;sts. If the diseases of the soul was on as fully realized, and if the one true I >nd divine remedy for them were only ■ As earnestly sought, what a transfigured f (world ours would soon show itself! 'But, alas, the “balm in Gilead’’ is regar- I .ded lightly, and men do not com efor ■ cure to “the Physician there.” i It appears that the State of Virginia, a year or two ago, enacted “a law which prohibits the sale of liquors within three miles of any meeting hold for the pro motion of the cause of temperance.” i This is an original idea, that the plea .gainst strong drink shall be allowed to y its full strength on the minds of men f’ithout interference at the time from Lie opposing strength of strong drink I self; but we seriously question whether (such minute legislation is likely to bear fruit to justify or repay it, We | lommit the matter, however, to those I V our Georgia law-makers who are B Vnds of temperance, willing to accept ■ >ir judgement in the case. -Vadame Madjeska, the actress, may M Lately trusted not to say causeless vis to the detriment of the theatre. gWill speak of it, doubtless, as well Ml lie may truthfully speak. And this at she says: “There is no art which much abused. Controlled by ufluences, it descends slowlv but n degraded position. Its influ ainlv ci ows, but not tor cod. ■MM ’* it-elf ■ uiiid.- in n att< i > MMHH cent and art. Gestae’ f t-- <!.i> MMHM merelv by the quest,,.p of at MMMw 9 - au 'l knows no higher aim KHM "Ipts of the box otnei £ > t<> improve the public t * lu tastes of the ■MMBMEi-xa ler's.'no c.iti deu.v that the ~.s'.e is, the more general it is? rfpeak heie of the great public, search for excitement. Is Aything more noticeable than the ring vulgarity, falsely called real- Jt the plays that nowadays achieve success?” So wide-spre d pT Bis corruption of the stage and so Wing the tendency to worse corruption, ! m ItMadame Modjeska sees no hope for | V Vitrification of the drama, but in the ■ /wmentof the theatre, its emanci p*Vi from dependence for its profits ( ,M).o popularity engendered by the apw-al of plays to low taste and vulgar ity? As she puts the case herself, then, we |re absolved from all attendance on the theatre until this great reform takes place. And that will hardly come in our day. Rev. A. F. Beard, D. D., in the “Mis •ionary Review of the World” for June, paints the the present religious cotf dition of the Negro in the United States in pitchy colors. “Twenty-seven years ago,” he says, “the act of libera tion left the great mass of the Negroes as utterly sunk in heathenism and voo dooism as their brethren in Africa. Slav ery gave the Negro a nominal Christian ity, but did not expel Paganism." To say that the Christianity of Southern (laves, as a rule, was nominal, is to come vithin a hairs-bredth of saying that lothing else than a nominal Christianity ixists anywhere in our country or among any class of our people. The Christian ty of Southern slaves was. measurably it least, the work of the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit is blasphemed by this iweeping censure. Hundreds of thou lands of Southern slaves, who upborne ay their Christianity, have passed into ‘.he skies, will have no cause to blush when they meet their present merciless fcritic before the Throne; and we hope that Dr. B, before that day dawns, will find no reason to feel, as we find reason to fear, that the younger generation of Negro Christians are not evincing a higher and more ethical type of religious character than the one he trainpies in the mire of Pharisaic scorn. He talks about •‘the extent to which education has paved the way for the reception of higher truth” by the Negroes, but is not the highest of the higher truths “the truth as it is in Jesus,” and did not Jesus impart this highest truth to South ern slaves in imparting to them him self? Funk and Wagnails have not “let well enough alone.” The “Standard Dic tionary,” which they now have In course of preparation, bids fair to possess many qualities of substantial excellence, but they have decided to fasten on it one blemish or blot. As our readers know, there are certain “Spelling Reform As sociations” in England and America, which have proposed changes in the orthography of some 3,500 words; and all these words are to appear in this Dictionary, not of course to the exclu sion of the words for which they are substituted, but as if there could be any "authority" against current usage in such propositions from such quarters. And so. when looking through the vo cabulary, the reader may refresh himself with “ar" for “are,” with "dubl” for “double,” with “abuv” for “above,” with “ruf” for “rough,” with “tung” for “tongue,” with “batl” for “battle,” with "latter” for “laughter,” with “lookt” for "looked,” etc., etc. These are things both unwelcome and ridicu lous, but we suppose it will be no hard task to wink at them, to see as not see ing them, in a book which professes to bontain a list of "280,000 words; than THE CHRISTIAN INDEX. twice the number of wordsin any other single-volume dictionary, and 50,000 more than in any other dictionary of the language.” Nor should we be so exact ing as to leave no space for future im provment; the first “Webster” had many things that needed to be sweptout from later editions, and let us not grudge the first “Standard" the opportunity to use its broom on this batch of Spelling-Re form crudities. THE SUND AY QUEBTION-00N TINUED. ®Y HON. WILLIAM L. SCRUGGS. In the further discussion of the Sunday question, let us try to keep in mind that the old Jewish Sabbath is not the Chirstian Sunday. It was not the first, but the seventh day of the week that the Pharisees held to be sacred 1 Thou shalt not do “any work” on the Sabbath day, was not written of Sunday but of Saturday. Just when Christians began to observe Sunday as a holy day is not very clear. Neither in the New Testament nor in the writings of the Church Fathers, do we find anything very direct on this point It is cer tain, however, that, up to the begin ning of the fourth century, Chris tians never identified Sunday with the old Jewish Sabbath. They did not ground their observance of the first day of the week upon injunc tions contained in the law of Moses. They did not ground it upon any precept or example of Christ or his apostles. Nor did they ground it upon any pre-Mosaic Sunday law, promulgated to mankind at “the be ginning,” and in force after the ad vent of Christ. If such a law ever existed, the attention of the Gentile converts to Christianity was never once directed to it by Paul. On the contrary, his declaration of their entire freedom from “the observance of days,” was so general as to apply to all laws on the subject; and the almost necessary inference is, either that he was ignorant of such a law or that he regarded it as obsolete under the new dispensation. How came it about then, that the early Christians selected the first day of the week as a time for reli gious assemblage and exercise? This question has never been satisfactori ly answered. The custom may have originated in apostolic precept and example, or it may have originated in the peculiar circumstances and environments of the primitive Church. If it originated in apostolic precept, it is remarkable that no sirch precept should be found of record. If it originated in such examples as are recorded in John xx, Acts 11, and xx, Cor. xvi, and Rev. i, this does not necessarily raise a presump tion that it was prompted by any positive command, the record of which may have been lost. Perhaps the practice may have originated in the mere circumstances of the case. During the first two centuries, the Christians were extremely unpopu lar. Persecuted and hunted down as they were by the civil and ecclesi astical authorities, they would very naturally meet on stated days for worship, instruction and mutual en couragement. And they would as naturally select some day of the week other than the old Jewish Sab bath. It was equally natural that they should select the first day of the week (Sunday) in commemora tion of the resurrection of Christ, which occurred on the morning of that day. Be that as it may, the inference, derived from what little we know of the origin of the custom, is that, except during the time of actual meeting and worship, the early Christians deemed it lawful and proper to follow their ordinary pur suits on that day. For it was not until about the close of the second century that TVrtullian describes them as “putting off even their busi ness on the Lord’s Day, lest they might give place to the devil.” That is to say, rather than that the reli gious duties peculiar to the day should be in any wise neglected, the Christians of the second century thought it expedient to put off all worldly business to some other day. This, however, seems to have been purely optional. It was a matter of conscience merely. There was no law on the subject, either civil or ecclesiastical. It was not until near the middle of the fourth century that the edict of Constantine directed “all judges, inhabitants of cities, and all artifices,” etc., to “rest on the venerable Sunday.” But even by that edict, husbandmen were per mitted to “freely and lawfully apply themselves to the business of agii culture.” In the course of time, this law of Constantine was backed up by mystical interpretations of certain passages in the old Testament Scrip tures (notably Ps. xlvi., and xxii,) and thenceforth began the tendency to confuse the Christian Sunday with the old Jewish Sabbath. By the middle of the sixth century, all agricultural labor on Sunday was prohibited ; and towards the close of the ninth century, the day was prac tically substituted by the Roman law for the old Sabbath of the Mosaic decalogue. It is well known that one of Alar tiu Luther’s offenses against the Romish Church authorities was his practical disregard of “the Sabbath” (that is of Sunday,) and of the other ATLANTA, GA„ THURSDAY. JULY 27.1893. feast days held sacred by the priests. He opposed the theory of obligato ry observance of Sunday. He even went so far as to deny, absolutely and in toto, the then arthodox notion of holiness of that particular day. He however, in common with the other Reformers, acknowledged the manifold utility and high importance of the “Christian Sunday as a day of rest, worship, and decerous enjoy ment.” “Decerous enjoyment I” Such was Luther’s expression, properly rendered in the English equivalent. Would Luther be thought a Sabbath breaker were he living to-day? Most likely, if he were living in some parts of New England ; for he did not hesitate to smoke his to bacco pipe and play his flute on Sun day. He had no scruples about paying or receiving a social visit on Sunday. He thought it "decerous enjoyment” to play innocent games with children on that day. He loved to take long walks in the coun try and meditate upon the beauties of nature on Sunday afternoon. He thought it no sin for a poor laboring man to give his family an outing on that day. Most likely, he would take a stroll through the Fair grounds on Sundays afternoon were he now in Chicago. All this would be offen sive to New England Puritanism. But in Germany where the writings and opinions of the Protestant Re formers of the 16th century are more closely studied and adherred to, Christian people indulged in ‘’decer ous enjoyment” on Sunday without fear of hell fire. It is recorded of old Ben Franklin that when he was in con tinental Europe, on a diplomatic mission of the infant American Re. public, he was astonished at the free and easy way in which Protestant Christians of those countries observ ed what in New England was known as “the Christian Sabbath.” He said he looked in vain for any special manifestations of divine displeasure in consequence of this profanation of Sunday. He fianlly came to the conclusion that the Almighty did not seriously object to people making it a day of rational enjoyment rather than a season of self torture. For this half snering side thrust at mod ern Phariseesism, the old philosoher and patriot was called an “infidel”— and appellation which still haunts his memory in New England. It would doubtless be interesting, and perhaps not unprofit able, to trace the origin and history of Sunday legislation among our Scotch and English ancestors, and thence down through our colonial annals to the present time. But space will not here permit, and I shall hope to conclude that part of the subject in a subsequent article. THE~SEO6Nb _ ADVENT. BY 8. G. HILLYER. Continued from June 29. The Scriptures which foretell the second visible coming of Christ to this world, may be divided into three classes. First, those passages which plainly indicate the time of his com ing to be in connection with the final judgment. Second, those which are, as to time, of doubtful interpretation; and third, those that foretell his sec ond coming with no indication of time whatever. With this third class, our present discription has nothing to do. Examples of the first class are, the parable of the ten Virgins the parable of the tallents," and the story of the sheep and the goats. It is needless to occupy our space with any proof that the coming of the absent Lord in all these cases, was marked by an immediate judg ment. (See especially Matt. xxv:3l: 32.) If these passages, with several others like them, stood alone, I do not see how anybody could expect the second advent before the final judgment. But there are other scriptures which many able critics think indi cate a much earlier advent. These belong to the second class. Examples of this class deserve a more extended notice. That they are of doubtful interpretation is evi dent from the fact, that they are differently understood by learned men. The pre-mjllenarians under stand them to teach, that the second visible advent of Christ will occur before the triumph of Christianity over the world, i. e. before the so called millennium; while the great majority of religious writers give to the same scriptures a very different interpretation as to the time of the advent. An example of this class is Ist Cor. xv. 21-24. “As by man camo death, so by man also came tho res urrection of the dead, (all the dead); for as, in Adam all die, so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order; Christ the first fruits, afterward, they that are Christ’s at his coming, thou cometh the end etc.” Here the stylo is simple, didactic, and very literal, —. having only one word used meta phorically. Paul does not mention, the resurrection of tho wicked, I suppose, because ho considered the resurrection of both so nearly si multaneous that it was needless to distinguish the time of tho one from the time of the other. If the inter val between tho resurrection of tho righteous, and of the wicked is re ally to be a thousand years or more, ho surely would not have omitted so important a fact; but would have mentioned it as the third step in the order of events. Instead of this, he does mention, as tie third step, the end of the Messianic kingdom,— “Then cometh the end, when he shall deliver up -the kingdom to God, even the Father.” If, therefore, the com ing of Christ,” here spoken of by Paul, denotes his second visible ad vent, which I think all will admit, then that advent must stand in close connection with the general resur rection, and, of course with the final judgment, and also with the end of the Christian dispensation. This exposition, I am sure, meets all the requirements of the context, so far as Paul’s statement of the case is concerned. And yet, the pre-millenarians do not accept the foregoing exposition. In my paper of June 29, I gave a sketch of their views. They inter pret the passage of Paul, above ex plained, by comparing it with Rev. xx : 4. 5. where John speaks of some thing which he calls “the first res urrection.” But their argument is based upon the assumption, that the resurrection spoken of by John, is identically tho resurrection foretold by Paul. And, as the one mention ed by John occurred a thousand or more years before the final catastro phe ; and, as the one mentioned by Paul was coincident in time with our Lord’s “second coming,” they think it follows, that his second com ing must also be a thousand years before the end. The argument is very plausible. But the assumption upon which it depends, is not true. The resurrec tion mentioned by John, coincides, in time, with the confinement of Satan ; and it must be noticed, that John makes not the slightest allusion to any visible appearance of Christ. True, he says that the “souls,” of the pious dead, which he saw, “lived afid reigned with Christ a thousand years; but not a word about Christ’s being visibly present on earth. No allusion is made to his coming. Let us bear in mind, that Jesus, ever since his ascension, has been reign ing on his throne in heaven. From that throne he has been, and is now administering the kingdom of God on earth, by the agency of his Holy Spirit, and through the instrumental ity of his living saints, whom bo has qualified for this high function, by giving to them “power over the na tions.” But all this has been done without any visible manifestation of himself to his people. Those very souls whom John saw, even while they were in the flesh, reigned with Christ, though they saw him not with their natural eyes. If then it should please the Master to raise up these devoted ones, when Satan shall be bound in his dark prison, surely they would again reign with him; and being no more subject to death, would continue to the end of time. So then, there is no evidence of a visible Christ at the resurrection described by John. And so that cannot be the one which Paul de scribes, in his letter to the Corinth ians. Therefore, even upon tho hypothesis that tho resurrection, spoken of, by John, is to be a literal resurrection, it affords no proof of the second advent at that time. During the thousand years many generations of men and women will live and die, of whom, the great majority, possibly all of them, will be true saints, and those that die will sleep in Jesus. These shall be a part of the “rest of the dead” of whom it is said, they “shall not live till the thousand years ar* passed ; ” and these are they, whose resurrec tion Paul so closely connects with the coming of our Lord. I therefore say again : Even if John means a literal resurrection, in Rev. xx ;5, it is not the resurrection described by Paul, which is the only one of the two associated in point of time, with the visible coming of Christ. But does John mean that what he saw in his vision, was a literal, phys ical resurrection of the martyrs, and perhaps of many others of like spirit? Many of our best commenta tors do not think so. I confess, how ever, that the question is a difficult one. But I have not space to dis cuss it. In either case that resurrec tion has no connection with the visible coming of Jesus to reigu upon the earth. So the premillenarians are certainly mistaken in looking for Him before the millennium. There are several other passages, claimed by premillenarians in sup port of their views, which it would be profitable to discuss. But I can not do it in this paper. What I have said is sufficient to show, I think that they had very little ground to stand upon so far, at least, as con cerns the time of tho Saviour’s sec ond advent. OUR CHINA LETTER. BY FLORENCE NIGHTENGALE LEAGUE Missionary circles have been some what excited recently over the news that two hundred new missionaries were to be sent out for interior work in China. They are to come out under the auspices of the In ternational Missionary Alliance of which Rev. A. B. Simpson of New York seems to be the leadidg spirit* Perhaps the reader wonders why such news should produce any won der or excitement in missionary cir cles. It is because the movement is so different from all other attempts to send missionaries to China. In the first place, the salary is to be only S2OO per individual. (I have not learned whether anything is provided for outside expenses such as teacher of the language, trav elling etc., or not.) In this movement, men are not to be refused who have not had the benefits of the so called “higher ed ucation.” This has led some to say that the movement is to be made up from the common classes and of ig norant men. There is no sort of evidence that this is nor will be true. Most of them so far have come from Sweden and Norway. They are to go immediately into the interior and give their lives wholly to telling the people of Jesus. A committee in Shanghai which has been appointed at the recent conference to ask for a thousand missionaries for China sent a vig orous remonstrance to Rev. A. B. Simpson opposing, the movement. Others went so far as to. say they looked upon the movement in the light of an “invasion” and as “crim inal.” One can scarcely understand why the movement can be an “in vasion.” The field is the Lord’s, and if we are really burning to see souls brought into His kingdom, we ought to welcome any movement that promises to put more workers on the field. If God through His Spirit is calling men to give up good salaries and take a mere support and press into the interior of this great empire, what are we to set up our judgment against the Heavenly Spirit? There arc, however, many mission aries scattered over China, who look upon the movement with more favor able eyes, and are ready to welcome all who are to come to help spread the news of salvation in China. The idea that one, who has not had a “college education” cannot be a missionary, seems to be quite preva lent, both at home and on the field. A “college education” is a good thing in its place, and we doubt not it has its iilace or ‘he mission field, but ' by no means occupies all the ground and has no monopoly of the Spirits call. Some of the most earnest workers in China and the quickest in acquir ing the language have only had a “common school education.” If one is truly called of God and feels he must preach to the heathen God will make him a successful sower of the seed. The greatest need is men who have the gospel in their hearts, who know Christ as a personal Sa viour and above all who are per suaded that there is no other way of Salvation. Those who look upon the move ment as “criminal” believe the sura for support entirely insufficient. They say the missionaries will de prive themselves of sufficient food and in many cases of medical care, and thus in a few years, many will die or return home broken down in health. But there are two sides to this as we shall see if we examine the matter. I have heard that central homes are to be provided for rest and change, but cannot say how true this is. The movements may have its faults which will be corrected after experience on the field but tho Lord is in it and will bless it just as He has the China Inland Mission which was started under similar circum stances about twenty-five years ago and now supports the largest num ber of missionaries in China if not in the world. This mission has been and still is more abused and criticised than any other mission in China but it is doing more for the evangelization of China than any other mission, and a hap pier, healthier, more devoted lot of people it has not been my privilege to meet. The first bazaar, fair or oyster supper, etc., to obtain funds for the maintenance of its missionaries is still in tho future, as well as the first public appeal for help and yet over four hundred mis sionaries are supported. They seem to put their whole trust in God and He has cared for them. I heard of a Baptist mission ary recently saying, “Os course, the money will come ; it is perfectly natu ral, for the people know they are de pending on God and therein for sup port.” Would it not be better then if we did it in the “natural” way and let the homo people realize we are de pending on them as God’s people to do their part? 1 think the great success of tho C. I. Al. is duo to tho fact that the funds are all voluntary, not begged but consecrated to tho service of God. Another thing, about this groat mission ought to make Southern Baptists blush. This mission sup ports four hundred missionaries on an income of only a few thousand dollars more than is contributed by Southern Baptists who are represent ed at this writing on all fields by considerably less than one hundred missionaries. Just think of it! There are nearly five hundred missionaries in the C. I. AL but some are self-sup porting. One can sneer and say they are “ignorant enthusiasts” “cheap mis sionaries” etc., but while you are sneerjng they are doing the work. If you deprecate the fact that they are not sectarian or denominational, would it not be well to try and put the same number of Baptists on the field and bid them God-speed into the interior of this vast empire ? Os course, as one has said, “Mis sionaries ought not to have to strug gle to keep the wolf from the door.” There are struggles enough in a heathen land without this, but we ought not to feel that the leaving of home and friends is the last sacrifice we need to make. We speak of our “sacrifices” but if we will only think of our Saviour’s life on earth remem ber that he said, “The disciple is not above the Alaster nor the ser vant above his Lord,” we will not think quite so much about our sac rifices.” That one can live on a smaller sal ary than is usually given to mission aries and still save a little has been amply proved by the experience of the C. I. Al., and many others be sides. I might give some of our personal experiences in China and show that for the greater part food is far cheaper here than in America. Os course, the prices and variety of food varies in different parts of Chi na but from what I can learn, one need not suffer anywhere. If one uses Chinese prepared food he can live still cheaper as they, use cheaper fuel in preparing it such as grass, straw, etc., and can afford to sell it cheaper. The Chinese are born cooks and their food is not at all unwholesome as is often repre sented. Some of the daintiest food I ever ate was Chinese prepared. Some of the Chinese live on sweet potato leaves, onion and millet. It is not necessary for us to do that. If it was, we would scarcely need $lO a year for support. How to put more missionaries on the field is a question that is agitat ing the minds and hearts of our best missionaries and as the Lord seemed to be in it, it is a question that must bp fairi s .* mot ar 1 dqcidr-A in the fear jl God and notlof man. 1 Q When one missionary has decided j to live on a much smaller salary and ) press into interior work it is unchris tian at least for those who believe in larger salaries to cry him down and sneeringly inti- mate that he is a cheap mission ary “and only worth a small salary anyway. A man’s ability or call of God to the work, is not measured by his salary. When one is truly called to tell the news of salvation to the heathen, he will not let the question of a large or small salary deter him from responding to that call. Alany people think China Is al most evangelized. It is estimated that there are fifty thousand Christians in China. Even if that be true there are at least over three hundred and fifty million who have never heard of Christ. What are we going to do about it? Right here in this Pingtu valley there are thousands of villages and only one person here and there who have heard of Jesus, and it is impossible for five missionaries to reach a tenth of them. Isn’t it time we were thinking about the matter? God grant that as other denomina tions are pressing forward our Baptist people will wake up and not let themselves be last in this great work. P. O. Chofoo, North China. Afay 20, 1803. THE B- Y- P- U- A- INTERNATIONAL CONVENTION. BY REV. U. M. MCGUIRE* In point of members, the annual convention of the Baptist Young Peoples Union of America, just closed at Indianapolis was not equal to that of last year; but it was char acterized by a remarkable degree of enthusiasm, and of sober, aggressive purpose. The overshadowing inter est of the World’s Fair, financial stringency, and hot weather were generally assigned as the causes con spiring to reduce attendance. Still they came by thousands; tho meeting was truly international, big and in spiring; banners were displayed by delegations from Vermont, Massa chusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illi nois, Michigan, Wisconsin, Alinne sota, lowa, Missouri, Arkansas, Texas, Kansas, Nebraska, the two Dakotas, Oregon, California, Ontario and the Alaritime Provinces; and or ganizations, in contemplation or pro visionally effected, were reported from Kentucky, Virginia, the Indian Territory, and Southern California. The rest of the Southern States were not represented except by in dividual visitors; but these being such men |ot sterling stamp as Dr. J. B. Gambrell of Georgia, Dr. Cran fill of Texas, and others, were hear tily welcomed. Some of the States represented sent very small delega tions, but from first to last, tho deep VOL. 70-NO. 29. moral earnestness of the convention was conspicuous. There was com paratively little absenteeism; nobody seemed disposed to trifle; and throughout the slow hours, in the hottest of weather, this mass of young people sat, steaming, panting, fanning, yet patiently trying to hear addresses but partially audible. There was talent on the platform and appreciation on the floor. Gen. T. J. Alorgan in defense of the com prehensive character of his address on “Perils of the Republic,” said, “I am not teaching a primary class,” and it would have been well if some of the funny and frothy speakers had borne in mind the maturity of the audience. The addresses were generally quite up to the standard of the men who delivered them; and when such men as Drs e Lorimer and P. S. Henson grace the platform no further praise need be offered. The programme presented a great variety of exercises, well arranged and almost uniformly interesting. There were set addresses on the character and relations of the Bap tist Young People’s Union, on Bap tist history, on the value of religion to the state, and on the practical ac tivities of Christian life. There were special meetings in the interest of particular lines of work, junior, local and federative. There were state and provincial rallies, numerously held. There were “open parliaments” on important topics. There were “rousements” in the form of a salu tation of the flags of the several states and provinces, and of a pres entation of three prize banners to the states making the best record respectively “in the study of the life of Christ,” in following the daily Bi ble readings” and “in conquest meet ing observance.” There was a gfeat convention chorus and orchestra led by Prof. Smock, of Indianapolis. There were sermons by grea preachers in different churches on Sunday. There were early morning prayer-meetings each day, attended by crowds of young people. There were reports of things achieved, attempted and proposed. The writer, having shared the mis giving of many conservative Baptists at the beginning of this organized movement after observing two years of its progress, finds a peculiar sense of delight noting the lines of empha sis in this convention. Already the / reaction against a false liberar?em has f’lly j.inci, ; ; our yo.'ug people. The ohains that hold to the old moorings of doctrine and polity are being tightened and secured more finally. Loyalty to the per sonal Christ, to the inerrant script ures, to the local church, and to ex isting denominational organizations, is the very atmosphere of the Union. It would be hard to find an organi zation of Baptists with a more clean and orthodox conservatism. Even the daily papers found no suspicions of heresy to furnish material for a single headline. Moreover, the edu cational plans now perfected and in operation, provide for a thoroughly scriptural and baptistic training. The fact that a majority of the baptist churches of the South have not been ready to welcome the Union, was the subject of frequent allusion ; and some inquiry into the cause of such hesitation resulted in the adoption of the following resolu tions : “Resolved, That we regard the Southern Baptist Convention as one of»the most powerful, aggressive and loyal bodies of Baptists on earth, and we declare that any man, north or south, who in any way seeks to disturb the autonomy of the Southern Baptist Convention, places himself out of harmony with the Baptist Young People’s Union of America. Resolved, That we urge the Bap tist young people’s societies of the South, to send all of their contribu tions through their local churches to boards ot the Southern Baptist Con vention. One of the healthiest indications of this two years old child, is the ea ger turning of its eyes and the stretching of its hands southward. A southern reenforcement of the en influence now at work will make it possible to rear about the younger generation of Baptists a wall of in telligent conviction, which German liberalism and Pedo-Baptists namely —pambyism, can never surmount. In addition to the foregoing reso lution several others of greater or less value were passed. One advo cates prohibition; another excludes collections, for any other purposes than those of the Union from the an nual meetings. A rosewater para graph or two concernig Sunday clos ing of the Fair, scarcely expressed the sentiments of the convention; for, when at the early morning prayer meeting on Saturday, the leader announced tho triumph of the Sunday closers, the great cougrega tion lost all sense of proprieties of the meeting, went wild and yelled as if they had just named a candidate for mayor. For tho coming year, the Presi dent is Air. John H. Chapman, and the General Secretary, Rev. F. L. Wilkins D. D., both of Chicago, and both reelected. The educational plans are comprehensive, and will ba published in the organ of the society. —the Young People’s Union. A n active effort will be made to extend