Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

ESTABLISHED 1821. We Christian Index Publlihel Every Thursday «y BELL & VAN NESS Addreaa Christian Indix, Atlanta, Ua Organ of the Baptist Denomination In Georgia. Subscription Prick: One copy, one year 13-00 One oopy, alx months 10* ▲bout ova Advbrtibbrb.—We propose hereafter to very carefully Investigate our advertisers. We shall exercise every care to allow only reliable parties to use our col unni. Obituaribb.—One hundred words tree of eharge. For each extra word, one cent per word, cash with copy. To Oorrbbpondknts—Do not use abbrevi ations; be extra careful In writing proper names; write with ink, on one side of paper. Do not write oopy Intended for the editor and business Items on same sheet. Leave off personalities, condense. Busin res.—Write all names, and post Offices distinctly. In ordering achange 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,or der It stopped a week before. We consider •aoh subscriber permanent until he orders his paper discontinued. When you order It stopped pay up to date. Bbmittancbb by registered letter, monej order, postal note God’s Wondrous Word. BY L. M. WATKRMAN. Tby word O Lord, how wonderful Its wisdom and Its power; How manifold Its mightiness To meet our need each hour ! With sound of thy sweet promises How longing hearts beat lime: Thy messages waft melody Like bells at evening chime. Thy warnings sound, how solemnly, Alarms deep-toned and dark, Like fog bells on the rocky coast That guide the storm-tossed bark. Thv piloting, how sure, how safe, Until, all breakers passed, We triumph o'er each hurricane And ai ehor,home at last. —The Standard. What is Worth While? Only one life to live! We all want to do our best with it. We all want to make the most of it. How can we get best hold of it? How can we accomplish the most with the energies and powers at our command? What is worth while? We all ask ourselves this question when we Iqkve our college halls. But the firstyears out of college are apt to be anx ious, unsatisfactory, disappoint ing. Time slips away in further preparation, in experiment, in t useless or misdirected The world'does not prove to be - the same that it seemed Ixs be in the quiet college surrounditfgs. Duty is not so clear as then, nor work’ so well defined. Life is harder to handle than we thought. One finds that theories fail, and yet one has "hot had positive ex perience enough to know just where the difficulty lies. It is of a few simple things that “my own life has proved true” that I shall speak to day. Life is large. We cannot pos sibly grasp the whole of it in the few years we have to live. What is vital? What is essential? What may we profitably let go? Let us ask ourselves these ques tions to-day. To begin with, What may we let go? Who shall say? By what standard shall we measure? By what authority decide? Each ■ of us must answer that question for herself. In looking about for an answer, I find only one that satisfies me. It is this: We may let go all things which we cannot car ry into the eternal life. To me this is a deep truth, and a positive one. Surely it is not worth while for us to cumber our lives with the things which we can grasp at best for but a little time, when we may lay hold of things that shall be ours for ten thousand times ten thousand years. We may drop pretense. Eter nity is not good for shams. In its char light the false selves that we have wrought about us like a garment will shrivel and fall away. Whatever we really are, that let us be in all fearless ness. Whatever we are not, that let us cease striving to seem to be. If we can rid ourselves of all untrathof word, manner, mode of life and thinking, we shall rid our lives of much rubbish, rest lessness, and fear. Let us hide nothing, and we shall not be afraid of being found out. Let us put on nothing, and we shall never cringe. Let us assume nothing, and we shall not be mortified. Let us do and say nothing untrue, and we shall not fear to have the deepest springs of our lives sought out, nor our most secret motive analyzed. Nothing gives such upright dig nity of mien as the consciousness, “lam what 1 pretend to be. About me there is no make-be lieve.” We may drop worry. The eternal life is serene. It is not careworn, nor knows it any fore boding of future ill. Can we not take to ourselves its large spirit of serenity and cheer? For only the serene soul is strong. Every moment of worry weakens the THE CHRISTIAN INDEX. , 'iSCRIPTION, Pea Yiab.-.-B>.OO. I h 1.00. J soul for its daily combat. Worry is an infirmity; there is no virtue in it. Worry is spiritual near sightedness; a fumbling way of looking at little things, and of magnifying their value. True spiritual vision sweeps the uni verse and sees things in their right proportion. The finest landscape of Corot viewed a squint, or out of focus, would ap pear distorted and untrue. Let us hang life on the line, as paint ers say, and look at it honestly. Seen in their true relations, there is no experience of life over which one has a right to worry. Ruskin says, “God gives us al ways strength enough, and sense enough for every thing he wants us to do.” Sense enough: this thought comforts me. It is not the lack of ability that often wor ties us; it is the lack of a little savoir faire. It is not our failures that distress us so much as our idiocies. We may let go discontent. In all the eternal years there is no word of murmur from any rest less heart. In its vast silences, how trivial would sound the com plainings of our harassed days! In its great songs of praise, how our frettings would be over borne! In life I find two things that make for discontent. One is lack of harmony with one’s environ ment. The other is dissatisfac tion with one’s present opportu nities. Os these, the first may be overcome; the second may oe put out of one’s life. A conge nial environment is not one of the essentials of life: present op portunities, if rightly used, are as great as the soul need ask. Which of us can sit down at the close of a day and say, To-day, I have done all that was in my power to do for humanity and righteousness? Ah, no! We look for large things, and forget that which is close at hand! To take life “as God gives it, not as we want it,” and then make the best of it, is the hard lesson that life puts before the human soul to learn. One’s environment may be very disagreeable. It may bring con stant hurts of heart, mortifica tion, tears, angry rebellion, aid wounded pride—but there is a reason for that environment. To become strong; the soul must needs fight something, overcome something It cannot gain mus •cle on a bei? of eidei*spwn. A great part of the strength of life consists in the degree with which we get into harmony with our appointed environment. So long as we are at war with our town, our relatives, our family, our sta tion, and our surroundings, so long will much of the force of our lives be spent uselessly, aim lessly. A good way to get into harmony with one’s environment is to try to understand it first, and then begin to adapt our selves to it, so far as may be pos sible. We can never work well while there is friction in our lives, nor gain in our work that “beauty which is born of power, and the sympathy which is born of love”, of which Ruskin speaks Let us say, God put me among these scenes, these people, these opportunities, these duties. He is neither absent minded nor in competent. This is exactly the place he means me to be in, the place I am capable of filling: there is no mistake. My life is in its proper setting. But with this thought in mind we need not sit down in idleness. There are things in the circum stances of our lives that we can change; there are opportunities that our own efforts may enlarge. We can conquer many of the dif ficulties that beset our career, and, so conquering, be strong! I believe more and more that there is no impediment that cannot be overcome, no hindrance to use fulness that cannot be removed. If we go through life timidly, weakly, ineffectively, the fault is neither with our endowment nor our environment. It is with our selves. It is we that are not competent for life; we that are lazy, cowardly, idle. When one sets himself to live a grand life, man cannot interrupt him, God will not! As for our opportunities, we can make a heroic life out of whatever is set before us to work with or upon. Dr. Miller tells of a poor artist who was regally en tertained in a castle. He had nothing with which to repay his friends. But he shut himself up in his room for some days before he left them, locking the door, and refusing *o come out, or to let any one in. When he went away the servant found the sheets of his bed missing, and thought that he must have stolen them. But in searching further they were found in one corner of the room, and when unrolled were discovered to have a glo rious picture of Alexander in the tent of Darius painted upon them. — What is Worth While?— Brown. For tlie Index. Is it Desirable to Have Few Churches or Many Small Ones? BY .1. C. CALDWELL. 1 regret that it was not seen fit to assign this subject to some one with more experience and wider observation. I take it for grant ed that mere theorizing is not wanted. Most men have their theories for the solution of all questions. These are of little practical value whatever. They are valuable only as they direct investigation or experiment. The scientist risks little or nothing when he sets out to establish his theory by experiment. His chief object is to get more information about the things of nature; hence there is no possibility of loss, though his experiments be fail ures. We cannot thus experi ment with all things. We cannot do this with the subject in hand. It is one with which we cannot afford to experiment with any risk of loss. We ought not to think of attempting a change un less it is known to be for the bet ter. Hence I say, Away with all theory and experiment concern ing this important question. Let us consider what has been, what is,and what we are commanded to do, and ’draw practical conclu sions. This subject is a debatable one. I know some men who would readily argue one side of this question as preferable. But I am not prepared to say that one or the other is preferable. If we are to take the literal meaning of my subject (and IJsuppose we are), and understand that our strong city churches are to be divided into smaller ones that we may have many small churches, or that we are to unite the many small churches throughout the country into few central localities that we may have few strong churches, I-will say that I favor neither. I wish therefore to pre sent a few facts comparing some what the work of strong and weak churches. I ask your considera tion of some statistics which I have taken from minutes of the Georgia Association. This As sociation, covering as it does a large area, may be taken as rep resentative of the State. In 1870 the ten largest church es in this Association, with a membership of 2,712, made an in crease by baptisms of 71 per cent of the whole. In the same year the ton tmallset with a membership of 078, increased about 4 per cent of the whole. The ten largest churches in the same year contributed for religious purposes about 111 cents per member Ten smallest churches same year contributed about 80 cents per member. Os the ten largest churches, every one made somegain; of ten smallest church es, four reported no gain. In 1880 the ten largest church es, with a membership of 1,895, increased by baptisms 1| percent. In the same year the ten smallest churches, with a membership of 393, increased 8 1-7 percent Ten largest churches contributed about 75 cents per member. Ten smallest churches contributed 63 cents per member. Os ten larg est churches five reported no in crease; of the ten small churches four reported no increase. In 1890 the ten largest church es, with a membership of 1,668, increased by baptisms 3J per cent. Ten smallest churches, with a membership of 313, in creased about3 1-5 per cent. Ten largest churches contributed about $11.30 per member. Ten small churches contributed 68 cents per member. Os ten large churches three re ported no gain; of ten small ones eight made no increase. In 1895 ten largest churches, with 1,782 members, increased 7f per cent, of whole. Ten small est churches, with 382 members, increased 3$ percent. Ten largest churches contributed $1.70 per member. Ten small churches contributed 58 cents per mem ber. Os the ten strong churches every one reported a gain. Os the small churches three reported no gain. I think it will be seen from this that the strong churches are slightly in the lead of weak churches, both in growth and in works. As our churches are now distributed, it is well known that most of the strong churches are in the cities or villages and the small churches in the country districts. The large churches thus have an advantages over the small ones that must evident ly lead to better results by the large churches. The city and village people have better oppor tunities of attending Snnday school and church services than people scattered over the coun try have. They are thus made more active in the work; hence more good is accomplished. This convenience of attending church service country people cannot have, whether their churches be few or many. The result is they do not attend service as often and ATLANTA, GA., THURSDAY. OCTOBER 1. 1896. accomplish as much good, seem ingly as our city churches. The strong churches, too, have the advantage of more preaching services than weak churches can afford. This might be bettered were the weak churches united into strong ones It has been charged that some of our strong churches have so many members that there is noth ing for many *bf them to do; hence a large proportion of the membership is idle. I do not know whether tP.j be true. I rather think not. It may be pos sible to have too large a force in one body; it is certainly possible to have too small a force. Joseph E. Johnston did not have enough men when he to keep Sherman out of Georgia; Xerxes, when he had raised 2,000,000 of men, had too many to. conquer little Greece. Surely we all ad mire strong, -'Well organized churches, and would have them all such, would conditions allow. I can prove no disadvantage in a large membership in city and village churcl.es. With the knowledge I r</J w have of this question, , I m ist say, let the churches remai i as now distrib uted. Now, in the country districts we have quite « different condi tion. We must place churches in the reach of the people—both re ligious and irreligious—if we would have them attend the ser vices; yea, must be in easy reach. Often in sparsely settled districts it is nacessary, in order to have a church at all in reach of the people, to have one com posed of few members. 1 have heard people talk of going six, eight or ten miles to church in former days; but that custom seems to baVA declined. The brethren all know the difficulty of attending church three or four miles from heme. They know, too, this is '.he excuse of so many for net attending Sun day sehool, and even for not attending the monthly preach ing service. People will not at tend church if put to much in convenience to do so. If people will not come to church where we would like to Eave the churches, there is but one thing left to do, and that is cai'iy the churches to them. I think Christ must have had the* smal church in mind when he said. “Where" two or three have ml together in my name there wjAl be ahso.” Aguin U. 3 bi’p' ti people would nbt go far to hear the Gospel when he said, “Go preach the Gospel everywhere.” He knew they would not go to any trouble to hear the truth or he would have said preach where you are, and people will come to hear you. A prominent minister talking with me once on this sub ject, said that weak churches and Sunday-schools held elsewhere than in churches ought to be abolished. It is needless, breth ren, for me to tell you that no Sunday-school except at a few ch urches means no Sunday - school at all to thousands of children throughout the land. And what is true of these small Sunday schools is true of small churches. The farther we live from church the worse for us. You show me within the bounds of this district the square mile farthest from a church and I will show you the square mile that has the least re gard for the present and the fu ture. On the other hand, a church is surrounded by a hallowed influence. Invaria bly there seems to exist around a church a moral sentiment that you would not find otherwise. I would have churches in reach of the people, though small some may be, but not one unnecessary church. In conclusion, I will say that I do not think it better for the cause that we have none but strong churches, nor better that we have all small ones; but that we have strong churches where we can and weak churches where we must. Not all kindness is all kind. Much that passes for it, and that is indeed kindly and generous in its intention, is, in the view of our larger obliga tions, unkind. The boy who of fers a cigarette to his companion may, so far as the open-handed generosity of the moment is con cerned, be credited as kind. But in the view of his larger obliga tion, both to his companion and to the race, he is unkindly work ing damage. The man who would shield his neighbor by tell ing a lie for him, however kind ly his motive seem, is yet unkind, because he has set in motion an evil force for which all human kind must suffer. The true spir it of kindness grows out of the universal kinship of men. If we cannot stop to weigh the relative value of all our generous impulses, we can cultivate the habit of giving our larger obligations the larger place among those motives which easily grow to be habits of the daily life.— B. 8. Times. For the Jndrx. Reminiscences of Georgia Baptists BY S. a. HILLYER, D.D. ORGANIZATION OF THE SOUTHERN BAPTIST CONVENTION, MAY 8-12, 1845. The organization of the South ern Baptist Convention was an epoch in the history of the South ern Baptists The cause which led to it is clearly set forth in our But the antece dents of that cause are not so well known by the present gen eration Hence it may be well to allude to’some of those antece dents. For more than a score of years, the anti slavery sentiment, among the Northern people of our country, had been steadily growing and becoming more and more intense (and aggressive). The religious press and pulpit indulged in severe invectives against slavery and slave-hold ers. In this hostility to slavery the Baptists of the North gener ally shared. But, for a long time, no overt action of hostility was taken by any official body of Northern Baptists which seemed to call for any counter action on the part of the South. At length, however, such a case did come. The Board of Mis sions of the Triennial Baptist Convention, including in its con stituency all the missionary Bap tists of the South, refused to ac cept, as a missionary, a worthy brother from the South, on the ground that he was a slave-hold er. Due remonstrance was made against this action by intelligent brethren. But to no avail —the Board adhered to its refusal. This fact soon became known throughout the South; and this was the cause that led to the great convocation of Southern Biptistsat Augusta in May, 1845. The number of delegates en rolled must have exceeded three hundred. They included many of the most able and best men found among our Southern Bap tists. All were deeply impressed with the responsibilities that they were about to assume. A deep Christian spirit pervaded the de liberations of the body. The re suit of their deliberations was the organiz ition of the Southern Baptist Convention. They closed their work with a manifesto addressed to Baptist brethren throughout the United States, explaining the origin, the principles and the objects of ’tffeu acotohiwvfunutng the Sfuib- < ern Baptist Convention. This document speaks for itself and deserves to be held in perpetual remembrance by every Southern Baptist. I had a personal acquaintance with only a very few of the dele gates who came from other States. But I was well acquaint ed with many of the members who represented our own State. Among these I may mention Hon. Wilson Lumpkin. He was one of Georgia’s historical char acters. He was first a member of Congress, then governor of our State, and lastly he was for six years a Senator of the United States. I was, at one time, his pastor. He was attentive to the interests of the church, and proved himself to be a wise coun sellor in all its movements. Another Georgia delegate was Dr. J. L.Dagg, at that time Pres ident of Mercer University. He was a native of Virginia. In his early manhood he served his country as a soldier. The force to which he belonged occupied the cijy of Baltimore at the time that the British fleet was bom barding Fort McHenry. He was an eye-witness of that terrific scene; and the account which he gave to me of that bombardment verified the glowing description given of it in our national song— “ The Star spangled Banner.” But Dr. Dagg was not long a sol dier in an earthly war. He soon laid aside his carnal weapons, and clad in “the whole armor of God”, he went forth to do battle against the Powers of Darkness for the glory of our great Immanuel; and many a trophy did he lay at the Master’s feet. Dr. Dagg was pre eminently distinguished by the dignity of his manners. He impressed all who approached him with pro found respect. I never had the pleasure of hearing him preach, for I did not kno w him till after he had lost his voice. But as a conversationalist I never knew his superior. He was cheerful but never light. Without the least ostentation,his words were words of wisdom. Hence he was a wise and safe counsellor, and his influence over those with whom he associated was almost oracu lar. He loved the Bible and his mind glowed with the light of its revelations. Os the brethren from other States, I had the pleasure of meeting Bro. J. L. Burrows. He came as “a corresponding dele gate from the American Baptist Publication Society, and the Pennsylvania Baptist Conven- tion, and was invited to partici pate with us.” He was the fath er of our gifted brother, Dr. Lansing Burrows, now pastor of the Baptist church in Augusta. In representing the Publication Society, Bro. J. L.Burrows made an earnest speech in its behalf. The speech was followed by some discussion in which several took part, notably, Prof. Mell, Dr. J. B. Jeter, and Judge Junius Hillyer. Bro. Burrows had ex pressed the desire that the Con vention would not withdraw its support and patronage from the Publication Society. No action, however, was taken at that time either for or against the Ameri can Baptist Publication Society. So the minutes fail to mention the discussion. Some time in the “seventies” I saw Bro. Burrows, again, at a meeting of the Southern Baptist Convention in New Orleans. He had then identified himself with the South, and, I think, was a delegate from Virginia. I had the pleasure of hearing him speak. His text was: “Why stand ye here, all the day, idle? and they say unto him, because no man hath hired us.” (Matt. xx:6-7.) He used the text to illustrate the condition of many church members who are idle as to church work, not because they are unwilling to render service bnt simply because they have failed to find any opportunity to doit—no man hath hired them. So they stand, like laborers in a market place, waiting for a job. He then showed, with great force, the duty of pastors to go out and hunt up these idle ones and find for them some depart ment of work suited to each one’s gifts, where he may render some profitable service to the Master. The sermon was practical and very instructive. I have never forgotten it. He is a wise pas tor who knows how to utilize the moral forces of his people. There were other brethren at the Convention in Augusta whom I hope to notice in a future pa per. I close this one w’ith a gen eral remark about our Southern Baptist Convention. As already stated, it had its origin in the action of our North ern brethren towards us in re fusing to accept as a missionary a Southern brother, because he was a slave-holder. This cause of separation has passed away, but time and experience have de veloped other reasons that now justify the continuance of the Southern Baptist Convention. It was organizea that we might more effectually combine our Southern churches in the propa gation of the Gospel at home and in foreign lands. Subsidi ary to this primary work, have found it needful, in addition to the other Boards, to establish a Sunday School Board, to pro mote by its influence and its lit era ture, the training of our young people in the knowledge of the Bible which, by the grace of God, may make them wise unto salvation. For the same reason we have found it necessary to build up for ourselves a Theolog ical Seminary where our candi dates for the ministry may be qualified for any work to which the Lord our God may call them. We rejoice in the work of the fathers at Augusta in 1845. And we rejoice in the subsequent ex pansion of that work in the hands of their successors. And we would render thanksgiving to God for the success which has crowned our past efforts. God has made the Southern Baptist Convention to be one of his chos en instruments for the accom plishment of his own purposes of mercy and of grace towards all mankind. In view of these facts, let every Baptist in the South look to his colors; let him intensify his loyalty to Christ our King, and do his best to glorify his name by supporting the efforts of our glorious Convention. 563 S. Pryor St., Atlanta. The Distinction Between Catholics and Baptists in Regard to Church Succession. J. L. D. HILLYER. Catholics prove identity by heredity and infer validity. Baptists prove identity by valid ity, and infer heredity. The question between them is as to the meaning of “identity.” Cat holies 1 say it must be physical. Baptists say it must be dec trinal. If the New Testament shows that physical identity is the es sential element of church per petuity, and that the teachings of Christ may be altered or aban doned, then the Catholics are right. If the New Testament shows that doctrinal identity is the essential element of church perpetuity, and that the physical structure is merely to preserve and enforce the teachings of Christ, then the Baptists are right. VOL. 76-NO. 40 For the Index. Baptist Position Stated and Contrast ed—Visible Headlessness. BY G. A. LOFTON, D D. IX. The New Testament teaches that Christ is head over all things to the church. He is the head and we are the body. He is the bridegroom and we are the bride, and the bride is subject to the husband, who is the head of the woman. For the purposes of Christ’s headship the Father has turned over to the Son the scepter of the universe; put all things, except himself, under his Son, and this special transfer of authority and power in heaven and earth will continue until Christ shall I ave put down all rule and authority now in re bellion against God’s king dom. The last enemy that shall be conquered is deith; and when this victory has been achieved amid the transcendent revolution of the last resurrec tion, then, it seems, the trans fer of the scepter is made back io the Father who rules over all. The theology of every denomi nation teaches the invisible head ship of Christ over the church. The Romanist maintains this cardinal doctrine; but the cardi nal heresy of the Romanist con sists in the claim that the bishop of Rome is the successor of St. Peter, the vicar of Christ and |;he vice-gerent of God, and hence is the visible head of Christ’s church on earth. This heresy was fully developed 606 A. D., when Boniface 111, by the author ity of the Emperor Phocas, was declared universal bishop, or pope, in the chair of St. Peter. This “diabolical” usurpation of Anti-Christ, as Gregory the Great, who succeeded Boniface, called it, had been in embryo for five centuries in the gradual ex altation of the bishop over the church, and in the special claim of the superiority and supremacy of the Roman see over the other patriarchates of the Roman em pire; but it was not until 606 A. D. that the blasphemy was consum mated under imperial authority and edictof the infamous Phocas. It is hardly necessary to affirm that the claim of the papacy to the vice gerency of God and the visible headship of the church on earth is the most blasphemous assumption and the most mon strous usurpation diving au thority which can be conceived; or that the claim has been char acterized by a whole train of dog matic heresies essentially de veloped from the assumption. .The key power of St. Peter and the sword of the secular arm naturally followed the assump tion, and the doctrine of papal in fallibility became the significant badge "of the “man of sin”, who sits “in the place of God” and exalts himself “above all that is called God.” The Bible itself is of no authority beyond the in terpretation of his infallible holi ness, and the traditions of Rome, the decrees of councils and the ex cathedra decisions of popes are of equal authority with the Bi ble. Mary is before Christ, and Peter is before all; and hence all the auxiliary superstitions and dogmas which have made the Romish church the synonym and the symbol of paganized Christi anity. Hence, too, the iron heel of absolutism and despot ism which Rome has put upon the neck of the nations and the centuries, and hence the horrid brood of corruptions and persecutions which have blighted the ages and put 50,- 000,000 of human beings to death for the assertion of the rights of conscience in matters of faith. The Woman in Scarlet sat with blackened face and bloody hand for twelve centuries upon the seven-headed and ten-horned beast of Revelation, with undis puted sway over the world —the legitimate outcome of Papal headship over the visible king dom of God, as claimed by Rome. In a modified form, other de nominations which came out of Rome make the same claim of headship over the church of God-] Episcopalians and Methodists are very much like the old mother in their episcopal ideal of church government. Episcopacy in any form is modified Romanism; and there is absolutely nothing n God’s Word, even by inference, to encourage the usurpation. Neither in the New Testament form of church government nor in the nature and qualifications of the New Testament minister, can there be found the remotest conception of the office of the Episcopal bishop, nor of apostol ic succession. Not even the most dazzling apostle —noteven Peter or Paul—ever dared to in terfere with the functions or au thority of a church of Christ; or as said before, there is not the slightest authority for a general church organization or a general