Newspaper Page Text
ESTABLISHED
TheGhristianlndex
Publlihel Every Thursday
By BELL At VAN NESS
Address Christian Index, Atlanta, G*
Organ of the Baptist Denomination iu
Georgia.
Subscription Prick:
One copy, one year J 2.00
One copy, six months I.M
About Our Advertisehs.— We propose
hereafter to very carefully Investigate our
advertisers. We shall exercise every eare to
allow only reliable parties to use our col
umns.
"obituaries.—One hundred words free of
charge. For each extra word, one cent per
word, cash with copy.
To Correspondents—Do not use abbrevi
ations; be extra careful in writing proper
names; write with Ink, on one side of paper.
Do not write copy Intended for the editor
and business Items on same sheet. Leave
off personalities, condense.
Business.—W’rite all names, and post
Offices distinctly. In ordering achange give
the old as well as the new address. The date
Os label Indicates the time your subscription
expires. If you do not wish it continued, or
der It stopped a week before. We consider
each subscriber permanent until he orders
his paper discontinued. When you order it
stopped pay up to date.
Remittances by registered letter, money
order, postal note.
What If the little Jewish lad
That summer day had failed to go
Down to the lake, because be had
So small a store of loaves to show?
If from his home the lad that day
His five sma l loaves had failed to ake.
Would Christ have wrought ran any say?—
The miracle beslce the lake?
Margaret J. Preston.
Dogmatisms of Naturalism.
Scientific investigators claim
great fairness in their researches
and in their reception and use of
facts that come under their ob
servation. Men in other intel
lectual pursuits have been in
clined to grant most of these
claims, though sometimes com
pelled to object to the reasoning
employed and to dissent from not
a few of the conclusions reached.
In recent years, however, the
positions taken and the language
employed by skeptical investiga
tors have forced the conviction
upon not a few minds that the
results of modern scientific dis
covery are not always impartial
ly presented to the outside pub
lic. At all events, the suspicion
has been on the increase that
“the obscuring influence of a
S reconceived idea,” as Bacon
esignates the disease, has drop
ped a veil over the perceptions of
some of our scientific friends, or
that possibly a wilful intent has
concealed much of importance
that otherwise would make for
supernaturalism as opposed to
naturalism.
We do not, or at least ought
not, to censure too severely our
naturalistic leaders on account of
their intellectual crookedness;
for they are exposed with the
rest of the world to a common
depravity. Says the distinguish
ed author just referred to in his
“Novum Organum”: “If the hu
man intellect hath once taken a
liking to any doctrine, either be
cause received and credited or
because otherwise pleasing, it
draws everything else into har
mony with that doctrine, and to
its support; and albeit there may
be found a more powerful array
of contradictory instances, these,
however, it does not observe, or
it contemns, or by distinction ex
tenuates and re jects them. ” More
briefly Mr. Emerson expresses
the same thought thus: “Give
me the creed of a man, and I will
tell you what he will say.”
That we do not stand alone in
the opinion that the foregoing
observation is as true of scientific
as of other men is evident from
a remark of Professor Alpheus
Hyatt, who is a thorough going
naturalistic evolutionist, and
whose careful work, especially
among Jurassic ammonites, has
brought him into very favorable
notice at home and abroad. He
says, “A scientific man who has
a theory to support is as stub
bornly difficult to convince, even
on clear evidence, as any other
man.” In support of this charge
he gives an instance of a distin
guished German professor who
has tacitly admitted that if a cer
tain type of shell could be found
he would adopt Professor Hyatt’s
theory, though opposed to his
own.
After a ten days’ search among
the cabinets of Germany, Hyatt
made the discovery. He return
ed to the professor, stated wbat
he had found, and presented him
with drawings.
Did thatdistinguished scientific
German naturalist thank Profes
sor Hyatt? Did he acknowledge
his error? No; he looked at
those drawings, laid them down,
then looked at them again. His
face colored slightly; he arose,
walked to the window, gazed out,
and while holding the fact in one
hand and his theory in the other,
emphatically replied, “I don’t be
lieve it!” That was dogmatism
with a vengeance. He was like
THE CHRISTIAN INDEX.
(SUBSCRIPTION, PeeYiae. --.52.00. |
Ito ministers. i. 00 .1
the v '//. <ruished scientific pro
fessor ’ua, who would not
look throng. the telescope lest
he should see the moons of Jupi
ter, which he did not want to see.
Naturalism has away of hypno
tizing not only the common peo
pie, but even the leaders of sci
entific thought.
Now, as these c s ever ai d
anon are cropping out, it ought
not to surprise any one that such
questions as the following are be
ginning to crowd on the lips of
those who but lately listened
reverently and in silence to the
high priests of the scientific
world:—Have not the inclinations
of skeptical scientists been moth
er to their opinions? Have they
not been questioning truth par
tially? May not their enthus
iasm, as too often is the case
with other men, have incapaci
tated them for making broad and
wholesome generalizations.
Hence when the scientist, or,
for that matter, the philosopher
or the theologian, approaches,
no surprise should be felt if the
command, “Hats off,” is not
obeyed as meekly and instantly
as it was a quarter of a century
ago. “Why should I take my hat
off?”, is a question that any man
has a right to ask in this iudepen
dent age of ours.
We hope, however, from these
remarks, no one will infer that
we are unappreciative of the val
uable and hard work done by
many of our scientific smiths.
Their patient and untiring inves
tigations are entitled to a world’s
grateful recognition. And per
sonally, we pledge our supreme
loyalty in this discussion to every
fact these men can establish.
But in all sincerity we add that,
with regard to some of the con
elusions reached by eminent nat
uralists, and for some of their
published opinions, we have the
most unqualified disrespect; we
are compelled to regard them of
no weight or importance what
ever.
Now it is doubtless the judg
ment of most of our readers that
the apparent lack of courtesy
shown in these remarks toward
those who have a world wide
reputation and great wealth of
materials with which to support
their opinions ought not, except
for the very best of reasons, to
be indulged, especially by one
whose time for original research
in these matters, of necessity, is
limited. We therefore venture
a word byway of personal ex
planation. At the Edinburgh
meeting of the British Associa
tion, 1871, Sir William Thomson
being for that year the president,
we were fortunately in attend
arc'.
Nearly all the distinguished
scientific men of the Brilish em
pire were there, also some of the
most noted men of all Europe
and America. We never can for
get the emotions almost of awe
with which that array of the
world’s learning was looked
upon.
But, on the other hand, we
never can forget the feelings of
surprise that came by reason of
the opening address of the pres
ident. His effort was to explain
on the grounds of naturalism,the
origin of life in this world. Al
ready the gravest doubts as to
the efficiency of spontaneous gen
eration to produce life had been
expressed, and therefore Sir
William sought, as could be ex
pected, some other naturalistic
way of introducing it upon our
planet. Hence he concluded to
bring it here from somewhere
outside. And, apparently with
the utmost seriousness and amid
the hush of that learned assem
bly, he advanced the theory that
life came to this planet on a me
teoric fragment from some other
planet.
At first the discussion seemed
a huge joke. But Sir William
was serious and earnest, and
those distinguished men listened
intently, and some of them nod
ded assent.
On second thought, how could
we help asking if scientific men
really are entitled to even a mod
erate measure of respect while
propounding in the name of sci
ence, with overwhelming odds
and nearly every well-established
fact in the realm of nature against
them, their narrow schemes for
building a universe and peopling
worlds, without recognizing the
intervention of the great Being
who, as we have a multitude of
reasons for believing, is the
source of all power and of all
life? From that day to this we
have been measurably irrever
ent in the presence of naturalists.
Men talk about the speculations
and dogmatisms of theology, but
even in their most extravagant
phases may it not be questioned
whether the speculations of the
ology are half so fallacious, and
whether its dogmatisms are half
so intense and irrational or illog
ical, as those of some of the men
who are regarded leaders of
scientific thought?— Evolution or
Creation?—Townsend.
For the Index.
Reminiscences of Georgia Baptists
NO. IX.
BY S. G. HILLYER, D.D.
REV. THOMAS CURTIS, D D.
There was, I suppose, over a
hundred Georgia Baptists in the
Convention that assembled in
Augusta in 1845. I spoke of two
of them last week. I wish it
were in order to give a full list
of their names. But I must con
fine myself to those whom I per
sonally knew. I will therefore
treat, in this paper, of Dr. Thom
as Curtis.
I became acquainted with this
venerable man in 1840. He was
at that time pastor of the Baptist
church in Macon. I was then
pastor of the church in Milledge
ville—only thirty miles from Ma
con. So I had the pleasure of
meeting him several times. I
was at his home, and he was at
mine. I met him also at several
Associations.
Dr. Curtis was a native of
England, and had lived the great
er part of his life in London. He
came to this country after he
had passed middle life. He stop
ped first, on his arrival in this
country, in New England, and
lingered there several years. My
relations to him were very pleas
ant I found him to be a man of
profound learning. The range
of his information embraced a
multitude of subjects, and as to
these subjects he might have
been called a living encyclope
dia. As far as I now remember,
he took no part in the public dis
cussions in the Convention at Au
gusta in 1845. 1 suppose his re
serve was due to the fact that he
had come so recently among our
people —too 'recently for him to
feel himself qualified to share in
the debates upon the question
which then engaged the attention
of the body. But he was not al
lowed to be a cipher. He was
placed upon two of the most im
portant committees of the Con -
vention. On these committees
we may well suppose that he
rendered valuable service.
Dr. Curtis was one of the most
impressive preachers that I ever
listened to. Not according to
my judgment only, but accord
ing to the judgment of the best
men among us. An incident will
illustrate this estimate of
power. Not long after he cam^ 1
to Georgia he attended a meeting
of the Baptist Convention at
Penfield—then the seat of Mercer
University. His fame had gone
before him. The committee cn
preaching thought it would be
just the thing to have Bro. Cur
tis preach at a time when all
could hear him. And as the
place was the seat of Mercer
University, where were gathered
some young men preparing for
the ministry, they thought it
would be very appropriate to
have him speak on theological
instruction as a necessary prepa
ration for the ministry. They
therefore appointed him to preach
on that particular subject.
But very much to their sur
prise he declined the appoint
ment, giving as his reason for de
clining that he had not expected
such a task to be assigned, and
had made no preparation for it;
therefore he could not consent to
discuss so important a subject
before the Georgia Baptist Con
vention in an off-hand speech.
This attitude of the doctor was
not favorably appreciated by the
committee, and fora little while
they were inclined to let him
pass; but, finally, they appointed
him topreach and left him at lib
erty to choose his own subject.
This he cheerfully consented to
do.
Only a very few of the dele
gates, and perhaps none of the
people about Penfield, had ever
heard him. There was, no doubt,
a widespread curiosity to hear
the old man from England. So,
at the hour appointed, the doctor
found himself confronted with a
large audience. When the hymns
were sung and prayer was made,
he commenced his discourse; and
here began his triumph. He had
not spoken many minutes before
the audience was fixed in wrapt
attention, and he held them so to
the end of his sermon. I was
not present on that occasion; but
the case was reported to me soon
after it occurred by an intelligent
eye-witness, and I have given the
facts, substantially, as he gave
them to me. lam not sure that
I remember who was my
first informant; but I believe
it was brother John E.
Dawson, for I know he did
talk to me about that sermon, and
made a remark to this effect, that
Dr. Curtis, by that sermon, had
placed himself, in the estimation
of his audience, among the very
best preachers in Georgia. Sure
ly then he must have been a most
impressive speaker. The Con
vention, before it adjourned,
voted to appoint Bro. Curtis to
preach the educational sermon at
ATLANTA, GA., THURSDAY. OCTOBER 8. 1896.
its next session. This appoint
ment he accepted, and accord
ingly he delivereJ, the ensuing
year, an able discourse before the
Convention on ministerial educa
tion, which, if I remember cor
rectly, was published either in
the Minutes or in the Index.
Some readers may think that
Dr Curtis was a little too fastidi
ous in declining, at Penfield, to
preach an off hand sermon on a
subject of so great importance as
the one assigned him by the com
mittee. But the incident evinces
the very high estimate which a
very learned man placed upon the
importance of due preparation
for the pulpit. A younger man,
with less learning and less expe
rience, might have been rash
enough to comply with so flatter
ing a request, but his effort, in
all probability, would have ended
in disappointment to his audience
and in mortification to himself.
The caution of Dr. Curtis at Pen
field affords a valuable lesson
which all our preachers would do
well to heed. The sermon which
he did preach on that occasion
had, no doubt, been thoroughly
prepared before he reached Pen
field, upon the supposition that
he might be invited to preach.
And, as already shown, it was a
brilliant success.
About 1844 Dr. Curtis left
Georgia and went to Charleston,
S. C., where he became pastor of
the Wentworth Street Baptist
church. And it was from that
church that he was sent, as a del
egate, to the Convention at Au
gusta in 1845, that organized the
Southern Baptist Convention.
In 1856 I met- Dr. Curtis for
the last time at a meeting of the
Georgia Baptist Convention in
Savannah.
It only remains to tell the sad
story of his death. Not many
years after I last caw him he set
out on an excursion towards the
North. Either on his way or on
his return, he was on board a
steamer in the Chesapeake Bay.
It came to pass that the steamer
was wrecked. How the catas
trophe occurred I do not now re
member. The captain tried to
run his boat ashore, but it went
down in water deep enough to
cover it. A majority of the pas
sengers and crew were able to
escape by the small boats and by
were
and
good man. And I also remember
his noble sons, Thomas and Wil
liam, who, while they lived, did
good service in the Master’s
cause. William, I know, has
passed away and I have not heard
of his brother in many years. He
too is probably dead.
563 S. Pryor St., Atlanta.
For the index
Mercer University and Her Alumni.
BY X. SQUARE.
In your editorial about the dis
cussion of Mercer University at
the Stone Mountain Association
you express sentiments about our
beloved institution for which
every Georgia Baptist ought to
thank you. My thanks are most
sincerely tendered you for those
expressions, here and now.
Your suggestion that we must
look only to the future has much
of wisdom in it. Yet I cannot
believe that we would act wisely
if we ignored the past entirely.
The discussion at Stone Moun
tain was one which will prove of
great value to Mercer. It brought
to light many things which have
affected Mercer unfavorably in
the past, and which ought not to
be repeated. I think those facts
were presented at a time and in a
way that cannot fail to work
great good to the institution.
Yet I agree with you that it
would not be wise to keep those
things that belong to the past be
fore the people now.
Let us rather make up our
minds that in the present and in
the future, we will carefully avoid
those things which have adver
tised Mercer’s rivals, and that we
will use all practicable means to
control the sentiment of Georgia
Baptists, and combine that senti
ment in an earnest, widespread,
continuous effort to unite the
whole brotherhoood upon the
support of our University.
To this end I would most ear
nestly appeal to my brethren of
the alumni. You are scattered
over the entire State. You oc
cupy positions of importance and
prominence in every walk of life.
In your respective communities
you wield an influence second to
none of your neighbors. I would
include in this appeal not only
the alumni, but those men who
attended the University but who
did not graduate.
Let us, my brethren, recognize
the fact that for more than twen
ty years the institution has been
presided over by men who were
not of us. They have not known
us, and they have worked at great
disadvantage, because they have
not been able to reach the mighty
power which we, as alumni,
could have exerted. It may be
that others, and not ourselves,
are to blame for this. However
that may be, the power is yet in
our reach, and wt» should not
wait for those who are strangers
to us, but whom our Convention
has put in charge of the Univer
sity, to seek us out. We should
unite as one man in the cordial
and earnest support of the col
lege. Let us go to the Conven
tion. Let us meet and, if neces
sary, organize. Let us, in the
language of the constitution of
the Southern Baptist Convention,
“elicit, combine and direct’ the
power of 160,000 Georgia Bap
tists ip behalf of our Alma Mater.
To many of us the history of the
University is familiar. We know
now that many things were done
in the past that were not wise.
Let us profit by that knowledge,
and throw all our power into the
future work of the Convention
and of the Board of Trustees, that
similar mistakes may not occur
again. We cannot afford to stand
off and see Mercer suffer for the
aid which her sons ought to give
her. I have heard that Prof.
Pollock will make an effort to
bring about a large attendance of
the alumni at the next com
mencement. That effort should
meet with a hearty response from
us. We ought to attend, we
ought to go and put on the
badges of our old societies and
mingle with the boys, and make
them feel that we are in full sym
pathy with them. We should
try to bring to the alumni meet
ing the old enthusiasm that was
apparent at Penfield every year.
Then, my brethren, let us re
member that, if in the past Geo'r
gia Baptists have not been united
on Mercer University it was not
our fault. Let us reflect that the
new men who have come into po
sition of power and influence are
no more responsible than we are.
But we will all be alike responsible
if we do not overcome the oppo
sition, and to this end every one
of us should put forth his utmost
efforts.
Much was said in that debate
about the conferring of honorary
degrees. Doubtless many worthy
men among us have been neg
lected, and possibly many others,
not more worthy, have been hon
■■L. Such mistakes are likely
anywhere. It is quite
likely that the principle which
has controlled the trustees in this
matter has been that they have
sought thus to bring into the
alumni,by honorary degrees, men
who could not be counted with
the alumni in any other way, and
in pursuit of this method the sons
of Mercer have been neglected
because they were already al
umni. And maybe it has been
thought that to be an A.M. “ in
course ” of Mercer was as much
of an honor; almost, as to be an
honorary D.D. or LL.D. How
ever that may be, admit that
mistakes have been made in
this respect. Yet it does not be
come us to complain. I am one
of the Penfield alumni; I am an
A.M., but beside that, I have
never been the recipient of any
distinction or honors. Yet I do
not withhold my support. I do
not turn my back upon my alma
mater, and none of us should do
so.
Let us now urge upon the
brethren who have been intrust
ed with Mercer’s life and welfare
to take in good part what was
said at Stone Mountain by her al
umni and old students. Remember
that they love Mercer as much as
you can. They sought to point
out to you the dangers that lay
in your path, and they did it for
the sake of the cause in which
you are engaged. Don’t fail to
use every means in your power to
call out the best energies of the
alumni wherever you make an
effort in behalf of Mercer. And
you who have been honored with
degrees of distinction from Mer
cer must not belittle the honor
which you have received, and
sneer at those who have been less
fortunate.
Let us all profit by the expe
rience of the past and come to
gether now in a mightier con
certed effort ,to place Mercer in
the position that the school which
represents 160,000 of the best
people in the world should oc
cupy. We need not forget the
past. In it are stored up the
struggles, the prayers and the
sacrifices of sixty years. Every
mistake that has been made has
a good lesson in it, and every
achievement something to en
courage and inspire. Let us to
whom the past is dear profit by
it and cherish it. But let every
Georgia Baptist devote himself
to the future advancement and
prosperity of Mercer.
The hypocrite is guilty of the
folly of supposing that it is
worth while trifling with God in
order to secure the applause of
men.
For the Index.
Bible and Colportage Work.
BY REV. T M. GALPHIN.
A careful canvas of the homes
of our people will reveal three
facts about books: 1. A lament
able destitution of good, whole
some religious and denomination
al literature. 2. That our people
will purchase books when their
attention is called to them and
the matter is properly presented.
For you will find in almost all of
these homes a few books that
have been bought of agents at a
big price. These books have been
manufactured to sell and most of
them are either worthless or in
jurious. 3. That there are many
in these homes, both young and
old, who are fond of reading and
who will read. “The Bible and
colportage work” is an effort
under the direction of the
churches to supply the need in
dicated by the above facts. The
colporter is not a book agent, and
should never be so considered.
He is not selling books to make
money but to supply a felt want.
He is appointed by the churches
and is responsible to them for
the work he does. His is a re
ligious visit; he brings into the
home only books that are help
ful, and he sells them at the low
est price possible; he distributes
evangelistic, doctrinal and mis
sion tracts free; he prays with
the family when practicable and
learns as far as he can their re
ligious condition; he preaches as
he has opportunity. It is a ben
ediction to any association for a
devout, godly, energetic, conse
crated man, engaged in this
work, to visit from house to
house within its bounds. The
man who is thus employed is do
ing the best and most important
work of his life. I am persuaded
that our colporter, brother W. J.
Stockton, is accomplishing more
for the Master in our Associa
tion than any of us pastors. I
believe that this “Bible and col
portage work” is one method by
which many of the perplexing
problems in our religious work
may be solved. Take for ex
ample the mission problem,
namely: How to get our people
to contribute more liberally and
systematically for missions. Let
the Mission Boards supply the
colporter with missionary litera
ture —leaflets, statistics, facts,
incidents, etc. As he canvasses
the Association from house to
house, let him distribute this lit
erature free, let him be full of
missions himself and talk mis
sions wherever he goes, pray for
missions in the homes at family
worship, and preach missions on
Sunday and during the week. In
less than twelve months there
would be a great missionary re
vival in every association where
this plan was adopted. The
same would be true of other de
partments of work—education,
development and indoctrination
of our young people, etc. But
some one will say, “Where is the
money to come from for this
work? ” This can be raised very
easily in the following way: In
every association ’in the State
there has lived some brother
who was widely known, whom
the brethren delighted to honor
while living, whose memory they
still fondly cherish, and whose
beneficent influence they would
gladly perpetuate. They can ac
complish the latter most effi
ciently by raising a permanent
“Bible and Colportage Fund” to
his memory, which “Fund”
should be used only as capital
for the purpose of carrying on
the work. In the Hephzibah As
sociation we are engaged in rais
ing such a fund in memory of our
lamented brother, W. L. Kilpat
rick. Our people are charmed
with the idea and have laid hold
of the matter with great enthusi
asm. If all the associations
would engage in a similar work,
we could soon put into the hands
of Dr. Gibson a business capital
large enough to enable him,
through the colporters, to work
a marvelous improvement all
along the line.
Augusta, Ga., Oct. 2d, 1896.
Nothing is worthy of the name
of comfort that is not strength
ening, invigorating, inspiring.
Life is a struggle, and he who
lacks courage lacks comfort in
life’s contests. He who would
comfort must in some way give
strength and courage, and he
who would have comfort must
avail himself of aids to courage
and strength. The promise of
our Lord to his disciples was of
the Holy Spirit as the “Comfort
er” in all their tribulations and
conflicts. All of us ought to have
comfort —strength and courage—
in the consciousness that the di
vine Stander-by is ever at our
side and is sure to sustain us to
the end. And if we ourselves
are comforted we shall be a
means of comfort to others.— H.
Clay Trumbull.
VOL. 76--NO. 41
For the Index.
Baptist Position Stated and Contrast
ed—lnflexible Principles—Flexi
ble Methods.
BY G. A. LOFTON, D.D.
X.
The Legal Dispensation pre
sented a system of religion and
worship which was not only in
flexible in precept but invariable
in every form and practice. It
was symbolic and ritualistic, and
hence, in order to be consistent
and effectual, it had to conform
to the specific and complicated
pattern which was formulated in
the Mount. The system was one of
shadowy form and of multitudi
nous observances; and in the
yearly round of performances the
same forms and ceremonies were
perpetually repeated without va
riation. So of all systems of rit
ualism. The Romish Missal and
the Episcopal Prayer Book con
tinue their ceaseless cycles of
annual observance; the same
things to be done over and over
again, respectively, as each day
for some particular form rolls
around. So to some extent with
every otherdenomination,accord
ing as it has a book of services,
more or less limited in forms of
worship, or written observances,
according to fixed methods of
practice.
The New Testament knows
nothing of ritualism, except in
the observance of two simple or
dinances—baptism and the Lord’s
supper; and even in this observ
ance there is nothing which, in
the least, smacks of sacrament
alism. Jesus Christ utterly over
turned the whole system of sym
bolic formalism in the worship
and service of God. “ Neither
in this mountain nor yet at Jeru
salem,” said he, “shall ye worship
the Father;” and this forever put
and end to the idea that there was
any fixed place, form or method
essential to the worship and ser
vice of God. Since Calvary there
are no altars for any form of sac
rifice or devotion; and there are
no longer any priests and offer
ings, except in a spiritual sense.
It may be said that the Lord’s
prayer is a ritualistic form of
worship; but Christ only taught
his disciples to pray “after the
manner” of this prayer, as a mod
el for their guidance in earlier
stages of their development. It
is well enough for churches and
individuals to coij'crm to usual
and proper modes >f v orship and
service, at usual* and proper
times and places; but variation
and flexibility enhance such wor
ship and service according to
conditions and circumstances.
God never intended, under a
spiritual dispensation, for his re
ligion to run in groovesand ruts,
or by routine; and this fact is
abundantly demonstrated in the
variability and flexibility of the
methods and measures of Christ
and the apostles in their work
and practice both in private and
public.
One thing there is in which
the New Testament is scrupu
lously inflexible, and that is in the
fixedness of doctrine and prac
tice set up in the Gospel for the
government of the churches. We
dare not add to,take from, multi
ply, divide,or reduce to fractions
what Christ has revealed in moral
truth, positive institution, ritual
observance, official order, or pre
scribed duty. Christ has left us
to our sanctified judgment,
guided by the Holy Spirit, with
in the limit of fixed principles as
to the 7iow or the method of do
ing ivhat he has commanded us
to do; but we dare not alter a
doctrine, an institution, an ordi
nance, an office, or a fixed prac
tice of the Gospel. An angel is
to be accursed if he preach, or
practice, any other Gospel; and
we have no right even to liber
ally construe God’s word to suit
our fleshly inclination, or to
please the world. Especially
must we place a strict construc
tion upon the positive institu
tions and requirements of the
Gospel in which the letter is our
only guide. I may be left to my
own mode or manner in im
mersing a believer in water; but
baptism must follow the symbol
of a watery burial and resurrec
tion. I may be left to my own
method of administering the
Lord’s Supper; but the rite must
be observed in church capacity
and it must consist in eating un
leavened bread and in drinking
the fermented juice of the grape,
a purified wine. There may be
some flexible methods of church
government as to the manner of
performing church functions,
but the church, with its bishop
and deacons, must not vary from
the New Testament ideal of a lo
cal self-governing body, after the
manner of the Greek ecclesia The
church may have flexible modes
of administering discipline; but
as at Corinth, the church,as such,
must exercise the authority and
power as Paul directed, when
“gathered together,” “to deliver
such an one unto Satan for the