Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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