Newspaper Page Text
4
r
KEY, A. J. RYAN, Editor
AUGUSTA, GA., MAY 8, 1869.
ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS AND
BUSINESS LETTERS FOR THE “BAN
NER OF TIIE SOUTH” SHOULD BE
ADDRESSED TO THE PUBLISHERS -
L. T. BLOME & CO.
TO OUR READERS-
To conduct a paper properly and
satisfactory to its patrons, requires, not
only a liberal patronage, but prompt
payments on the part of its patrons.
Every outlay is for cash. Type Found
ers, Paper Mills, Compositors, all re
quire immediate payments, otherwise
supplies and labor are stopped, and the
paper must dc discontinued, or else drag
its miserable length along, a bother to
its publishers and a valueless concern to
its subscribers. This is the teaching of
experience, and every newspaper pub
lisher in the land will corroborate it as
true and undeniable. If, therefore, the
patrons of a newspaper become attached
to the object of their patrouage, it be
comes their duty to do all in their power
to sustain it, and to place its publishers in
such a position, that they can make it more
and more worthy of that attachment and
patronage. This is best done by renew
ing subscriptions as soon as they expire,
paying up promptly for subscriptions
and advertisements, and using their in
fluence to get others to take the paper.
We submit these suggestions to the read
ers of the Banner of the South, as
worthy of reflection and adoption. We
have already, a very large and rapidly
increasing list of subscribers ; but not
near as much as we ought to have. Our
expenses are necessarily very heavy,
and must be met whenever the money is
required. Now, what we particularly
want to do is, not only to “pay our way
as we go”—that principle that John
Randolph described as “the Philosopher’s
Stone”—but to give employment to the
minds and talent of the South. There
are hundreds of intelligent, noble heart
ed women in the South who are strugglc
ing with heroic fortitude and endurance,
to support themselves and families. This
they could easily do, if Southern pub
lishers were able to remunerate them for
their literary and intellectual labors; but,
unfortunately, Southern papers are not
sufficiently patronized, to warrant such
outlays as this. While Northern pub
lications of inferior merit can boast of
their 20,000, 50,000, and even 80,000
subscribers, Southern journals are thank
ful for 5,000, 6,000, or may be 10,000
at the most. This will not enable them
to employ the pens of home writers of
merit, and they must, therefore, either
give their talents to Northern journals, or
reap no benefit from the possession of
them. Now, we want 20,000 subscri
bers at least, and if each one of our sub
cribers will go to work and constitute
himself, or herself an agent of the Ban
ner, and secure us only one additional
subscriber, we shall soon be able to
greatly improve the paper and employ
the yeas of the fair daughters of the
South, who have done so much for their
section and deserve so much from that
section. Just to show what can be done,
we may mention that in a small town, in
Mississippi, a young lady of scarce fif
teen summeis, in her play time in two
or three days, secured ten new subscri
bers loi us, and sent us the names and
the money together. Suppose that all
of our friends should take as much in
terest in the paper as this estimable
young lady, how soon we should be able
to compete with Northern journals in
point of quantity, and how soon excel |
them in point of quality. We appeal
then, to the friends of the Banner of
the South, everywhere, to use their in
fluence in its behalf. They will not on
ly be benefitting its publishers, and its
editor; but themselves, and more than
that, many Southern women who, would
have cause to bless them for thus secur
ing to the latter the means of adding to
their resources for support. Wo daily
receive the most flattering letters from
all sections of the TJnion; and while we
are striving and struggling to do all we
can to make our paper worthy of the
very liberal support which it already re
ceives, yet we want to make it the
Paper of the South—the organ of
Southern Literature—and the acknowl
edged Champion of Southern Prin
ciples.
- .... ■■■ ■
THE NEW RECONSTRUCTION BILL-
The new reconstruction bill is an un
mitigated fraud, and such of our readers
as reside in the States—Virginia, Mis
sissippi, and Texas—sought to be affected
by it are earnestly adjured to take no
action under it, neither to register,
nominate candidates, nor vote. Our
reasons for this advice are found in the
bill itself. The seventh section reads,
“And be it further enacted, That the
proceedings in any of said States shall
not be deemed final or operate a com
plete restoration thereof until their
action respectively shall be approved by
Congress.”
This proves that it there is no finality
in anything done under this bill until,
by another bill, Congress shall make it
a finality. Nothing is to stand until
arproved by Congress, and now we
would ask if there is any sensible man
who believes that Congress will ap
prove a result contrary to Radical inter
ests ? Suppose the pretended Constitu
tion in any of these three States was de
fended, or a Conservative Governor, or
a Democratic Legislature, or State offi
cers, or United States Senators and
Representatives elected, is it to.be sup
posed Congress will approve such defeat
or such victory ? And yet, unless it
does approve nothing is “to be deemed
final or operate a complete restora
tion.” This then is the first objection,
that the cards arc stocked aud that, by
no possibility, can the citizens of our
sister States decide anything by their
action under this bill because, by the
very terms of the hill, the decision is
with Congress and not with those citi
zens at all.
The second objection is, that, even
though there were a prospect of the
popular voice being respected in these
forth coming elections, the liberty of
choice allotted that voice is so circum
scribed as to be in reality no liberty at
all. It is said that Mississippi, Texas,
and Virginia have now a chance of
being represented in Congress. But how
represented? By test-oath men, is it
not, or else by “white-washed rebels,”
to whom a Radical Congress is sufficiently
friendly to grant an enabling act ? Os
what value are such representatives ?
There have been from the other Southern
States certain persons of that stripe in
Congress, and when or where has one
single one of them ever stood up on
that floor and pleaded the cause of a
wronged and suffering people ?
But it is said that the obnoxious sec
tions of the pretended constitutions are
to be submitted separately, and even if
the rest of those instruments are fastened
down upon the States, those sections, at
least, may be escaped. How does any
one know that they may be escaped ?
Their defeat is not to stand unless Con
gress approves that defeat. More than
this. These obnoxious sectioas are the
suffrage sections. Suppose them voted
down and out of the so-called constitu
tions, what is to be put in their place
and who is to make the substitution ? A
constitution, to be a constitution, must
have a suffrage section—otherwise it is
Ilamlct with the Prince left out —aud
now where is the new section to come
lAISII ©F 188 l©im
from ? Is it not easy to perceive that !
Congress will solve the difficulty by put
ting the obnoxious sections back in the
bogus instruments ? Still further than
all this, the pending fifteenth, or negro
equality, amendment before these States
can come in. When they enter the door
they must come with the hand-cuffs on,
and on by their own act!
There is one way to meet all this—do
nothing. Stay at home. Preserve a
masterly inactivity. These Radical
villains will not dare to reconstruct you
on an exclusively negro vote. Wise and
good men, Henry A. Wise, of Virginia,
Governor Jenkins, of Georgia, General
Clanton, of Alabama, have advised this
course in the case of their own States
and the lamentable evils following in the
train of a disregard of that sound ad
vice should be an incentive not to fall
into more like evils by another such
like disregard. Stand still, and see the
salvation of God.
ROMANISM EXPOSED-
We have been greatly surprised and
mortified to find in a recent number of
the Macon (Ga.) Christian Advocate, a
paper which we have always respected
for its courtesy and fairness, a letter
from a Minister in this City, for whom,
also, we have entertained the kindlest
feelings and regard, in which letter such
unchristian, unjust, and unmanly lan'
guage as this is used :
“Mr. Editor: —I believe that so far
as regards the final result of the attempts
of the Roman Catholics to get posses
sion of the United States, we have noth
ing to fear, and that the absurd super
stitions and persecuting spirit of tha
sect will never receive, from this ChristJ
ian people, sufficient favor to give such
supremacy.
“But this fact does not allow, much
less compel, Protestants to maintain a
‘masterly inactivity’ in those sections
where the Romanists are making a
‘death struggle’ for the ascendancy. The
ignorant and unstable—from which class
they mainly get their converts —whom
they ‘spoil through philosophy and vain
deceit, after the tradition of men, after
the rudiments of the world, and not of
fer Christ, ’ will never, until it is too
late, find out their error, unless Protes
tants, who are acquainted with the
‘bloody history of the Roman Catholic
Church,’ understand its monstrous teach
ings and comprehend its design, instruct
and convince them.”
We had thought that Know Nothing
ism was fully exploded; for the late war
proved very conclusively, that it was not
Roman Catholicism which the United
States had to fear, but that spurious
Christianity, which was represented by
the 3,000 New England Clergymen, who
sapped the foundations of the Govern
ment, and paved the way for its destruc
tion, through oppression of the South.
If Catholicism had desired political pow
er, it would have made a successful at
tempt to get it during the war, because
both sides then courted the now hated
Church, and both sides respected her
numbers; but she was true to principle,
true to justice, and the influence of her
Priests, her papers, and her venerated
Head was given to the weak and down
trodden South. The gratitude of some
Southern patriots is best exemplified in
such letters as the one we are reviewing.
Our Christian Pastor in these para
graphs, also endeavors to cast a reproach
upon those who, following the doctrine
of his Church that the right of private
judgment belongs to every individual,
and all that is required, is to “search the
Scriptures,” have done so, and been led,
as all unprejudiced and candid seekers
after Divine truths must be led, into the
bosom of the Catholic Church. We
deem his slur unworthy of further no
tice than to protest against its unfair
ness and unchristian character, and to
point to the loDg list of illustrious names,
both in England and America, who
have lately returned to the bosom of that
one Fold with which our Divine Lord
has promised to be and abide “for all
time, even to the consummation of the
world.”
We pass over in silence some inter
vening paragraphs, alluding to certain
Lectures on Romanism, recently deliver
edin this City, and content ourselves
with one additional extract. It is of so
startling and monstrous a character, that
it requires no comment from us. Its
object seems to be to stir up strife in
this community, and is that mean subter
fuge for argument, which the ignorant
and intolerant ever use towards their
opponents. As such, we protest against
it, and believe that the good and the true
inen of every denomination will join,
heart and hand, with us in that protest:
“And the good, resulting from this
clear, logical, and able exposition of the
doctrines and worship of this church, is
already apparent. The tide of antago
nistic thought and feeling is rising aud
flowing with great rapidity. A few
more denunciations and anathemas from
Catholic priests —and their impudent
insinuations into Protestant families will
be quite sufficient to raise a storm, aud
the sooner Roman Catholics learn this,
the better it will be for them.”
And thus we leave our Clerical cor
respondent to his conscience and his
God, exercising towards him that charity
which the Catholic Church ever teaches
and practises —that Charity which is
found in a certain “controversal work,”
which we have read, without any “writ
ten permission from the Bishop aud In
quisitors of the Church” (if anybody
knows what all that means—for we do
not), sometimes called the Holy Bible —
that Charity which the Saviour of the
world himself proclaimed from the
mount: “Love your enemies, bless them
that curse you, do good to them that
hate you, and pray for them that des
pitefully use you and persecute you.” —
( Prot . Bible, Matt. v. 44.)
In the spirit of this Charity we com
mend the Reverend Author of the letter
under review to the mercy of God ant
the intercession of the Blessed Mother,
that the scales may drop from his eyes,
and he be led into that glorious old
Church which, through ignorance and
misunderstanding, he now maligns and
despises.
THE ORIGINOF ThTbAPTISTS.
NUMBER NINE.
Banner of the South:
Although we have shown from Dr-
Ford’s own authorities, wheu fairly quoted
—historians of his own choice and to
whom he calls our attention—that in the
fifth century the Church of the Donatists
dwindled away to nothing, so that after
that period no traces of it can be found
in History, inasmuch as he places the
Church of the Montruses in the seventh
century, and says that it was made up
of Novatians and Donatists, we will
pause in our survey to show that these
Montruses would not regard the Baptist
brethren of to-day their co-religionists.
Dr. Ford says, that the Montruses
were made up of Novatians and Donatists,
aud were also called Eucbites, Messa
iians, Melchedecians and Anabaptists,
but on looking into Mosheim we find
that the Messalians arose in the fourth
century, according to the Grecian and
Oriental writers, although he states that
their doctrines and discipline were much
more ancient, and subsisted, even before
the birth of Christ, in Syria, Egypt, and
other eastern countries, but who until the
end of the fourth century had not been
formed into a religious body. If their
doctriues and discipline arose before the
days of Christ they surely could not
have
teach the doctrines and discipline of the
Saviour, they could not be accepted as
the ancestors of those who profess to be
lieve aud practice what Christ taught;
and it certainly cannot be pretended that
they taught Christianity before Christ
taught it himself The Messalians and
the Euchites were one and the same peo
ple. They were called Messalians or
Messalinians from a Syriac w r ord signi
fying prayer, aud they were called
Euchites or Euchitians by the Greeks
for the same reason. Theodorct gives
the following account of these worthies
whom the Baptists claim as their ances
tors ; “about the same time (367 to 371)
the heresy of the Messalians sprang up.
Those who have rendered their name
into Greek call them Euchites. Besides
the above, they bear other appellations.
They are sometimes called Enthusiasts,
because they regard the agitating in
fluenees of a demon by whom they are
possessed, as indications of the presence
of the Holy Ghost. Those who have
thoroughly imbibed this heresy shun all
manual labor as a vice; they abandon
themselves to sleep, and declare their
dreams to be prophecies.” He speaks
of them as a sect existing in this time
he having been born about the year 3871
He writes of them in the present tense!
Another account given of them,' taken
:’rom the treatise of St. Epiphanies on
Heresies, is that they were of two classes;
the most ancient were Pagans, and had
no connection with Christians or Jews.
Those who called themselves Christians
began to appear about the reign of
Constans, but their origin is doubtful;
they came from Mesopotamia, and were
established in Antioch in 376. They
led an idle, vagabond life, begging and
living in common, both men and women,
so that, in the summer time they used to
sleep together in the streets. They re-
fused to do work of any kind, as they
considered it wicked. How will Dr.
Ford receive this description of the early
Baptists ? Will he recognize in them
the principles of the brethren of whose
Church he is a member ? We think not.
But what of the Melchedecians or
Melchites claimed by Dr. Ford as some
portions of the line through which he
would trace the descent of his Church,
in order to connect it, through them
with the Church of the Apostles? Will
their connexion serve his purpose ? We
will see ? We take the following ac
count of these people from Buck’s Theo
logical Dictionary : “ The Melchites,
excepting some few points of little or no
importance, which relate only to cere
monies, and ecclesiastical discipline, are,
in every respect, professed Greeks; hut
they are governed by a particular pa
triarch, who assumes the title of Patri
arch of Antioch. They celebrate Mass
in the Arabian language. The religious
among the Melchites follow the rule of
St. Basil, the common rule of all the
Greek monks.”
In Maclaine’s note to Mosheim the
following account of them is giveu:
“The Melchites were those Christians in
Syria, Egypt, and the Levant who,
though not Greeks, followed the doctrines
and ceremonies of the Greek Church.
They were called Mulchitea, i. e. Roy
alists by their adversaries, by way of
reproach, on account of their implicit
submission to the edict of the Emperor
Marcian, in favor of the Council of
Chalcedon.” Do the Baptists pretend
that their forefathers came from the
Greek Church; or do they desire to have
it said that the early Baptists celebrated
Mass in any language ? The Melchit- 1
were a branch of the Acephali. This s
clear from Dr. Ford himself, who, in
speaking of the Montruses, says:—“The
Montruses or Mountaineers, were made
up of those two classes of Dissenters—
Novatians and Donatists. Among them
also mingled what were called by the
Greeks Melcbedicians. ‘They had
neither beginning nor end,’ said a Greek
Father; neither head nor tail.” The Greek
Father here alluded to is St. Epiphains.
“They professed the error of Entyches,
that Christ suffered in the flesh, and ad
ded other errors to this; they do not mix
water with the wine in the celebration
of Mass; they celebrate Easter with the
Jews; they do not venerate the cross
until it is baptized the same as a human
being; when they make the sign of the
cross they do it with one finger alone, to
signify that they believe in one nature
This description of them we
take from St. LigourVs History of He
resis, 169. Will our Baptist friends
claim them as a branch of their family,
too ? Will they take them with their
veneration for the cross, their celebra
tion of Mass, and their signing them
selves with the sign of the cross, even
if it be but with one finger ? W e think
not. The fact is, Dr. Ford set out on a
voyage of discovery without rudder or
compass, chart or quadrant, and has met
with the usual fate of such improvident
voyagers—he has found himselt flound
ering on the rocks on the shores ot “ the
stream of time.” He struggles man
fully with the adverse winds, however,
and still his cry is “where did the Bap
tists come from ?”
Dr Ford seems to have lost sight, en
tirely, of the effect of the condemnation
of councils in his survey, while searching
for the Church and posting his mile
stones in the track of time. The errors
of the Christian Messalians were con
demned in the first Council of Ephesus.
What inference might not be drawn from
this which Dr. Ford overlooked'.'' Ihey
certainly belonged to the Church; be
lieved what was taught by the Church;
and practised its discipline until the
time of their defection; and that in ml
else, except the errors and irregularities
which they desired to introduce, thev
conformed to its requirements and neic
its faith; and that these errors alone wcie
condemned. Testing the Messalians by
this rule, how can they be claimed as
Baptists unless they be taken together
with all the errors of Rome, f hey
lieved and practised all that Bonn
taught. They added to what was i<-
livered, and Rome discarded bhem tr
what was regarded by her as an mn on