Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

BAXNKK & BAPTIST. Mm “Holy Bible,—Book Divine, Precious treasure, thou art mine.” JESSE M. WOOD, Editor. ATLANTA, GEORGIA: Thursday, June 28, 1860. Our terms of Subscription, S 2 00 per Annum, always in advance. For our terms for advertising, see Ist column of Ist page. A WORD TO FRIENDS. The Editor of the Banner, and the book keeper, who attends to the business affairs of the office, are two persons. Will our friends, in writing us, remember this and address all business letters to the “Banner & Baptist” ? And if you wish to whisper a private word in borother Wood’S ear, at the same time, just write two letters : the a» abi'»ve stated, the otner uireci to r.iuer J. Al. Wood. Now, friends, don’t forget this, and you will save us a great deal of trouble and some con fusion. R. 4t. FOURTH OF JULY. Wednesday of next week being the fourth day of July, we shall issue no paper next week. We issue fifty numbers a year. The 4th of July week, and Christmass week we give our hands for recreation. And friends must not complain of this, for aside from being customary, it is absolutely neces sary that the Printer should have some re lief from his monotonous toil of type stick ing. July and Christmas is therefore the printers vacation. PASTORAL TALK—No. 38. GRACE. At all times, and under all circumstan ces, we need the free favor of God. It is impossible to conceive of a race of beings in more abject dependence, in a more wretched condition. In ourselves we have not the shadow of a claim upon the Divine Being. Condemned sinners were we, lov ing our sins and not regarding our con demnation, until grace, sovereign grace, interposed to save us. By this we were enabled to see the worst of our condition, and by it plucked as a brand from the eter nal burning, and a new song placed in our mouths, even praises to God. “Grace, 'tis a charming sound, Harmonious to the ear, Heaven with the echo shall resound, And all the earth shall hear. “Uratx* ii.wt vi.M Oi» wy - To save rebellious man, And all the steps that grace display, Winch drew the wondrous plan.” If we are in poverty, affliction, distress and anguish, we certainly need it to cheer and console us. If in prosperity, affluence, health, and surrounded with those who flatter us, we need it but the more. It is not the chastened child that likely becomes rebellious, but the one that is praised and caressed. The poor widow, at her cottage home, which barely affords shelter and sub sistence for herself and little ones, needs grace to bear with the ills of poverty, and the insults of the affluent; but the widow' who has her hundreds of thousands in gold, landed estates and servants, as a Christian, needs it vastly more. The orphan, among strangers, without food or comfortable raiment, needs it, in deed he does; but the orphan with mil lions, surrounded with flatterers, having spread before him the multiform tempta tions of the world, needs it yet the more. Yea, brethren, at home and abroad, upon land and upon sen, in life and in death, we need the grace of our Almighty Friend. “Amazing grace! how sweet the sound. That saved a wretch like me! I once was lost, but now am found. Was blind, but now I see. “'Twas grace that taught my roving ft-et To tread the heavenly road; And new supplies, each hour I meet While pressing on to God." SOUTH-WESTERN BAPTIST. In the issue of this paper of June the 7th are three editorials, two of which ap pear to have been intended almost wholly tnr our benefit, and the other partly so.— They were headed respectively as follows: “The Finality.” “Small things largely Mag nified,” “Vexatious.” These several arti cles we read when they first appeared, and decided to wait a few weeks before answer ing, for the simple reasons. Ist. That some times "haste makes waste,” and might pro duce excitement, which could be avoided by delay. 2. Because we could afford to wait without injury to the cause, and ourself. The first article was intended to show that there were three questions of some importance before the public—the Land mark question, the Board question, and the “Church Polity” question. The editor claims that the two former of these are pretty well settled, and that large majorities are on his aide. Let this be as it may, we suppose that the masses of Baptists of Alabama aad Georgia have never taken a vote upon the questions, and whenever they shall speak out, they may make a different impression, or at least may show thetnseh j* entitied to seme respect as re gards num lM»rs, even though, in the judg ment of some people, their position and in telligvDce may not be very commanding \’o <k>ubt th. ;- would compare favorably will th»u nctghb respecting s-uindness a doctrim*, church polity . cCMNbtency of practice, purity of life, &c., &c. “The church polity question,” is called the new theory of church polity, new polity, new theory, &c., in contradistinction to the old church polity, old theory, &c. As this same thought runs through the other two articles we shall say more of it after awhile; and only say now that we have been watching this game for some time. If the public can be made to believe that Landmarkers have adopted a new system of church polity, of course they are driven from the ranks of old-fashioned Baptists. If you cry “mad dog” the people W’ill run from him, or turn about and kill him, without taking time to inform themselves whether he be really mad. Who does not know that we deny adopting a new theory, and that we claim to plant ourselves upon the time-honored principles of the Bible, and of the denomi nation. “Corrective Church Discipline,” indorsed by the S. W. Baptist, claiming (as we understand it) that there is no remedy for unscripturally excluded members, and minorities, contains a theory decidedly new, and adverse to the past teachings and prac tice of brother Dawson. So that he does not do all that is usually implied in an in dorsement, or has found a theory new to him, though it may be old to brother Mell. To our mind it is new to them both, and new to the denomination. “SMALL THINGS LARGELY MAGNI FIED.” This article, is mainly da voted to some me Manner in relation to breth ren Meli and Mallary. We do not com plain at what bro. D. says, but he evidently is under misapprehension and so others ap pear to be, especeially in Charleston. April the 12th there appeared in the Ban ner an article headed, “Corrective Church Discipline—Special Notice.” In said arti cle it was our purpose to show that the course pursued by four or five Baptist pa pers (in publishing bro. Mell’s articles, and refusing to publish the review by A. S. Worrell, although repeatedly and respect fully requested to do so, while they were clamoring for the publication, of bro. M.’s series, in book form, by S. B. P. Society,) was calculated to raise certain suspicions. The clause which referred to brother Mell was as follows: 3. With honest, thinking men, it will place brother Mell in an unenviable, mis erably awkward position before the public. The conduct of these papers raises the belief that brother Mell’s articles were pre pared expressly to meet a certain case, and to accomplish a cherished end ; and that it was a master stroke of policy to use the entire Southern Boptist press at the same time, and that those who desired this end accomplished, should publish nothing ad verse to his articles, but simply to be ad vertising mediums until the series should pass the S. B. P. Society, in book form, having thereby the denominational sanc tion. Brother Mell has not publicly made even an intimation that his articles were so designed. Surely he is not afraid to avow his purposes. As an act of justice to him, these papers should have pursued a differ ent course, and have shown “fair play.” But if he is willing to let the course of these papers fasten this suspicion, of course, the Banner should not complain. He will not say that it has not given him a fair ——— — ■— The article was written deliberately, and intentionally, just as a marksman would take deliberate aim at a distant mark.— We, with aforethought, wilfully intended to place the onus upon those papers, com mencing with the Standard, which had pub lished everything they could get hold of against a certain minority, and persistently refused to publish any thing to the contra ry. We distinctly stated that Prof. Mell had not avowed what he was suspicioned of, and that justice to him demanded a dif ferent course; that both sides should be published. In publishing brother Mell’s disavowal, we have been credited by some for changing the force of the article of April 12th, and blamed by others. The public is now informed that we are entitled to neither blame nor credit in that respect. We neither intended, nor did we change the article in any particular. We had not charged, at any time, bro. M. with design, but showed that the surroundings placed him in an awkward position and raised cer tain suspicions. This we knew to be true, and now know to be intensely true. But as an act of justice to him ujx>n his disa vowal, we published the subetance of the interview in Macon, thereby placing the onus more emphatically where our article had already located it. Anybody can see this who wishes to see the truth. Nor did we say that “de facto" there was complici ty with these editors, but that their unfair, one-sided course, all seeming to drive to one point, raised the suspicion that a certain end was to be accomplished. We said so then, we say so still, and repeat our pro test against it. We regret exceedingly that in the mind of some there is a discrepancy between our self and Professor Mell. There is none but what can be explained, but as some use is made of it we shall set the matter at rest, so far as we are concerned, by drop ping a personal card giving an unvarnished statement of the matter, to the best of our recollection. THE DISAVOWAL. While in Macon attending the Georgia j Baptist Convention, by invitation I went to I dine with brother J. Deloache. When 1 ! entered his parlor there were present Gov. J. E. Brown, Eld. R. Holman, Eld. Rus sei, (I believe) Agent Revision Association, Eld. Toon, Sec. S. B. P. Society, and Eld. IJ. P. Boyce, of South Carolina. By some j means the conversation turned upon the de > nomination*! agitations, and I said to bro. ; Toon that the S. B. P. Society would be • come involved. He asked me how or j why. I told him that the Society had pule j lishovl "Corrective Church Discipline” with ! out bro. Worrell’s Review, which, as many thought, ought to accompany it; that the i Review would probably be offered, and if ' rejected the Society would feel it; that ‘ Corrective Church Discipline was regarded | as having been written in reference to the < Nashville difficulties. After bro. Toon had made some reply, brother Boyce observed that he had heard brother Mell say that his work was not written in regard to that or any particular case, nor had he had any cor respondence with certain editors, prior to commencing the series. In reference to its not having been written to meet any partic ular case, I replied to bro. Boyce with some emphasis, “O, bro. Boyce, the case is too plain /” About this time bro. Mell came in, and I told him the topic of conversation, and that we could talk over such matters calmly. He replied yes, that he had re peatedly said I had acted fairly towards him, and that he did not think me capable of doing him intentional injustice, but that in a recent number of the Banner I had in a single clause, done him injustice, yet was satisfied that I would correct it when point ed out. After thanking him for his good opinions, I asked him what it was. He said it was the charge of complicity with editors and others to accomplish a certain end. I replied to him that I had done no such thing, that he had misconstrued the article, and stated distinctly that the article would show that 1 had placed the onus upon certain editors; that their one-sided course would raise certain suspicions, and place him in an awkward position. The article was then produced, and by the plainest, easiest, only possibly legitimate construct ion, sustained my position. Brother Mell then said that he was not responsible for what these editors did ;>for the coincidence*, which happened among them ; that he was perfectly willing for both sides to appear, and that there had been coincidences in the Tennessee Baptist and the Banner calcula ted to raise suspicion of collusion, &c. All which I granted. He then made a disavowal, as . I under stood him, as brother Boyce had made for him before he came in. Whereupon I told him that upon his disavowal I would pub lish it in the Banner, never once intending to change my own article in any particular, for the sufficient reason that I had made no charge upon him, but on the contrary claimed that justice demanded that the press should have pursued a different course. It is proper to say that in all this I did not understand brother M. to design to reflect upon any editor or the Publica tion Society. This is left for others. I have thus attempted to give an unvar nished statement of all important particu lars of this conversation and disavowal.— If my memory is at fault there were enough brethren present to give a correct version of the whole matter. In more than one paper, it has appeared to me that there is an attempt to make my veracity suffer, which really has induced this card. Il is worth more to me than gold, or diamonds, and the future must have temp tations, forces, and emergencies, beyond what the past has had, before the public or any living man shall have occasion to call it in question. On the other hand brother Mell knows better than 1, brother Boyce or any one else what he intended to disavow, and what he did not. J. M. WOOD. So much then for thin pas t of tbo m+ivle of brother Dawson. Do we now, bro. D., understand you to think that brother Mell did write “Corrective Church Discipline” in direct reference to the Nashville difficul ty ? And do you understand brother Mell to admit it ? If so, that troublesome ar ticle of April 12th has increased impor tance. If so, then the four papers have given publicity to a series of articles in tended to sustain the majority at Nashville, and have not bad the fairness, the soul to publish a line in favor of an oppressed mi nority. If so, the S. B. P. Society has published a work thus designed, thereby becoming partisans to this affair. He eith er did or he did not have that case as a model. Surely the editor of the S. W. Baptist is not afraid to say whether he thinks he did or did not. If he is, per haps the bold brother “M.,” while he re mains “incognito'' will not be. As regards brother Mallary, we only say, if he has any real complaints, we stand ready to meet them even with penitence, if need be. Bro, D. also wishes us to define the ec clesiastical position <>f this famed minority, but is willing to wait until we get into our new building in the center-of the world.— We are glad to have that much time allow ed us; but as our new building is not yet done and as some may Im? anxious to see an intimation, at. an earlier day, we give it as follows. The ecclesiastical position is just such a one as lias always been assigned minorities in the right that withdraw from majorities in the wrong —just such a one as brother Dawson, and many others of his way of thinking, have assigned to minori ties holding the truth of Jesus firmly for conscience sake, against majorities who have oppressed and non-fellowshipped them —just such a position as Baptists have ap proved since the days that Catholicism came into power, and the order of Pruvi- I deuce has made minorities the depository of the truth, while still, as a matter of fact, ■ majorities existed, who have resisted the - plain teaching of Christ. As regards the ' case at Nashville, it is significant that all, i or nearly all, of the churches of Christ, ; over a large scope of country around them, who know the facts. recognize the minority ! as in the right, and consider the majority i in gross disorder —just as we have said —while it has been the work of foreigners J to demur, and take an adverse position. Yet as a matter of fact, as a matter of • history, the two parties do exist. After all | we cannot see why A., who honestly thinks as we do of this matter, should non-fellow ship 8., who as honestly differs with us.— This i* the true issue between brother D. and oaraelt, and between “M." and the public. Baptists can not divide, unless one shall disallow tin* right of opinion to the other, in which event a division can be had vary promptly. We have written calmly, without feeliag other than that which urges to maintain the truth. THE UNKNOWN. An article appeared in the S. W. Bap tist, June 21st, over the famous signature “M.”— He modestly claims that,“the disclosure of his name would give additional force to his article.” We supposq'he means the disunion article which a short time since. All we have to say to this, is that he should give his article all the force of his name, or he should not have written it. Possibly if the arHfffe had appeared with this additional we should have said less than we did. As to guessing, we have no disposition to make the third, un til the second guess is denied. Bro. D. has intimated.jhat the author is in sight of our-office (then at Rome,) but we can safely say that if he lives North of Atlanta, in Georgia, his sentiments hitherto, like his name, have been kept in the back ground. As regards division arising from what he calls “New Theajy,” we say —Ist That we have seen no such theory as he presents, except as it has been tortured into existence by the Standard and S. B r . Baptist. 2nd It will bedtime enough to divide when a new theory has been origin ated by somebody, and endorsed by others. We are opposed to counting chickens be fore they are hatched. We have no disposition to say aught against the personal clams of “Al” but it is delicate in him to put|>efore the public an odious theory as k • Bap t i 10 M!H L\'l t .ITI oi. FOR THE HANNER & BAPTIST. THE LONE BAPTIST. ARTICLE 1. “The testimony of the Lord is sure, mak ing wise the limple." Ps. xix, 7. “Every word ofGod is pure.” Prov. xxx, 5. “The word of G«d is quick and powerful.” Heb. iv, 12. “Not my will, Hit thine be done.” Jesvs. Luck xxn, 42. To all who desire to know and do the will of God, the writer of these pages sends Christian salutation. Blezsed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who by his eternal spirit hath enkindled this desire within you. “And this desire is something good Por which our praise is due.” It is an indication of your heavenly Father’s willingness to fillfill the promise of his well beloved Son. and “guide you into all truth.” (Jno. xvi: 13.) Cherish it as you would the breath of life. Breathe upon it with the breath of prayer, that it may be increased in intensity. Daily delve for truth as for hidden treasure. As the tiny limbs of the little infant by daily exercise acquires strength, so will the holy impulses within us be strengthened by being daily exercised aright. Beware that you do not act like the man who, sitting by the side of a gushing fountain with a cup in his hand, says, “I thirst,” and yet sits still —stretches not forth his hand to catch the waters of the profluent stream. The word of God is a fountain of “living Waters.” From itjowa streams of divine truth, unmingled with the wild speculations of the scholiast, and uncorrupt ed by the vain and false traditions of erring mortals. He who drinks thereat—and thereat only —shall never die. He shall find its truths springing up within him as a well of water, (Jno. iv: 14.) affording quietude amid the cares of life, consolation amid its discomforts, strength to bear its ills, courage to encounter the fiercest of his foes, skill to overcome every enemy, triumph in death, and glory, honor, and immortality beyond the boundaries of time, in that blissful world “where the wicked cease from troubling and the. weary are at rest.” Observe that I predicate what I affirm upon the supposition that the individual seeks for divine truth from the word of God, and from that only. Many recur to the word of God and drink in its truths, then turn to the polluted fotifltains of world ly wisdom and drink in error. But these— truth and error—like the law of the spirit, and the law in our members, of which the Apostle Paul speaks (Rom. vn. 23) are contrary the one to the other. They mutually repel each other. They can never coalesce. We cannot act under the influence of both at the same time ; and, as frail human na ture ever imbil»es error more readily than ' truth, the consequence is the latter is too i often expelled, and the former is left to rule within and reign OWT us to our serious injury, whether we are aware of it ■ or not. Error is congenial to our depraved na tures. Men prefer darkness to light, error to truth. (Jno. m: 19.) They we represent ed as going forth from t lierrt&Otlier's womb, speaking, not truth, but lies. (Ps. lviii: 3.) The human heart stands ever oj>en to er . ror; but it is barred, and doubly barred, against truth—barred by an evil nature, and barred by sinful practice. “The carnal mind is enmity against God ; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither, indeed, can be.” (Rom. vni: 7.) “The natural man reeeiveth not the things of the spirit of God ; for they are foolishness unto him : neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.” (1. Cbr. ii: 14.) These are very common place remarks, some may say, and the inquiry may be made, Why do you repeat them here? I answer, l*?cause it is evident that they have not yet made a due impression upon the hearts of all, even of God’s eiart. If the mind assent to their truth, the heart rejects it, and the lives of too many unequivocally deny that. THE WORD OF SOD IS TUE ONLY SOCKCE OF FIRE AND rNADVLTERATED TRITR ACCES- SIBLE TO rs. Tliat even Christians are not duly con vinced of this truth, is evident from the means to which they not unfrequently re sort to satisfy their minds, when involved in doubt in reference to any d<x-trine taught or duty enjoined in the ward of God. Instead of vbeiug the divine command. to “search the Scriptures,” (Jno. v: S 9) and testing every thing by “the law and the testimony,” (Js. vn: 20) they recur to the writings of men as frail and fallible as they are, and are very sure to read first the writings of those authors whose views are known to be congenial to their own pre dictions. “And loud they extol the man who routs The thoughts that till’d their minds with doubts. ’Tis ease, not truth they anxious sought: They obtain it—but ’tis dearly bought.” Alas! they know not what they do. — Their error may not prove an unpardon able one—it may not bar them out of heaven —but the smallest error imbibed impairs one’s moral vision, and bars out of the heart much of that peace and consola tion of which the man who is betrayed into error knows nothing. Error may act as an opiate to a troubled conscience. It is truth alone that excites an inward rejoicing in a full assurance of faith. The man who adopts error may possibly say, I believe I am right. He who embraces the truth and acts it out can say more: He can say, I know I am right. In our belief we may err ; —in the as surance of truth there can be no mistake. Such an assurance is as attainable in the present day as ever it was. Job could say, t“l know that my Redeemer liveth,” &c. — Job xix: 25. Solomon declares that “the lips of the righteous know what is accept able.”—Prov. x: 32. Jeremiah said, on one occasion, “Then I that this was the word of the Lord.”—Jer. xxxn: 8. The Savior said to his disciples, “It is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven,” (Matt, xn: 11.) and again : “If a man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God or whether I speak of myself.” —Jno. vn: 17. Paul speaks of those who not only “believe" but “Jtnow the truth”; (I Tim. iv: 3.) and this is spoken in reference to some of the practical duties of the Chris tian. If I could I would write indelibly in flaming capitals, on the retina of every man’s eye, the declaration of the Savior last cited, so that, let him turn in whatever direction he might, he would see before him: “If a man will do his w.ll, he shall KNOW OF THE DOCTRINE, WHETHER IT BE OF God.” Revolve this declaration of the Savior in your mind. Seek to comprehend its full import. If a man will do his will—the will of God—if he will faithfully conform to that will, as far as it has been revealed to him, he will know assuredly that it is the will of God and not the will of man that he is doing. So, too, with reference to any future act. The man who is ready both to learn and do the will of his God—whose heart responds, when the Lord calls to him, “speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth thee”—will never find it necessary to sit down in idleness, or to inquire of the pas ser by, what shall Ido next? If we look alone to God, he will “reveal even this unto us.”—Phil, in: 15. “Then shall we know, if we follow on to know' the Lord.” Hos. vi: 3. “If our gospel be hid,” says the Apostle Paul, (2 Cor. iv: 3,) “it is hid to them that are lost.” It may be laid down, therefore, as an incontestable truth, that if the truths of the gospel (or God’s will in reference to us) are hid from us, it is because we have lost our w'ay —have strayed from the path of duty—the path of God’s commandments. HABKKEBB, DOUBTS AND FEARS NEVER OPPRESS ONE WHO IS LIVING IN THE Dlll < lIARGF. OF HIS DUTY. * To the disquieted wanderer, God says, “() that thou hadst hearkened to my com mandments, then had thy peace been as a river, and thy rightehusness as the waves of the sea.” —Is. 48: 18. His peace, instead of dying out, would have continued to augment; as the river deepens and widens as it rolls onward toward the ocean; and there would have been no cessation, no halting in his duty for the want, of light. His acts of right eousness, like the waves of the sea, would have followed each other in one uninter rupted succession. Hear the word of the Lord again: “Oh, that my people had hearkened unto me, and Israel had walked in rny ways! I should soon have subdued their enemies, and turned my hand against their adversaries. The haters of the Lord should have submitted themselves unto him: but. their time should have endured forever. He should have fed them also with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock should I have satisfied thee.” Ps. lxxxi: 13, 16. While we keep the words of the Savior, and do the will of God, we will have the spirit of Christ, the Comforter, within us. Jesus w ill manifest himself unto us as he does not to those who stray from the path of his commandments; and he and the Father will take up their abode within us. Jno. xiv: 23. Such is the purpose of God, and such are the promises of the Savior; and every purpose and every promise shall assuredly be fulfilled, even though “The seas may waste, the skies in smoke decay, Rocks tarn to dust, and mountain.’ melt away.” Dear reader, what think you ? May we credit the words of the Savior ? Can you say with the Apostle Paul, “I believe God, that it shall be even as it was told me;?” (Acts xxvn: 25.) Answer not hastily.— Reflect, well, and let your nets report your answer. But allow me to ask a few more ques tions: Will the Father and the Son take up their abode within us and neglect to give assurance of their presence? What would their presence avail us if not mani fested to us ? Will they take up their abode with us, and hold no communion w ith us? If they hold communion with us, mav we not have the same assurance of i i their presence with us that we have of the i presence of those wbo commune with us in our fiimily circle? If present, will they not I communicate to us their will when we ask to be taught it? Will the Savior not re spond as readily to us as he did to Saul of Tarsus, when we inquire, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do ?” Reader! reader! deceive not yourself. If you are in doubt about the presence of God in your heart—about the path of duty —about the will of God in reference to you; or if you lack the assurance of faith, or the “answer of a good conscience,” it is because you have neglected faithfully to keep your Savior’s sayings. “He that loveth me not, keepeth not my sayings.”—Jno. xiv: 24. “If a man love me, he will keep my words.” (v. 23.) “And he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father; and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.”—v. 21. Our departure from Christ and neglect of his sayings is the cause, I repeat, of all the doubts and fears that mar our peace. I dismiss you for the present. Retire to your closet,Tand upon your bended knee, with the Word of God open before you, inquire honestly, “Lord arc these things so?” Let the language, of your heart be, “ O that the Lord would guide my ways To keep his statutes still! O that my God would grant me grace To know and do his will!” Commit that entire hymn to memory. Repeat it daily, not to yourself, but to your God. Throw, as it were, your whole soul into it, and be very sure that you have in your heart every desire of which the words of that hymn Divine guid ance, when sought sincerely, wns never sought in vain. Allow me. to group together important truths brought to view in the foregoing ar ticle, that you may the more readily store them away in your mind, and retain them in memory. 1. The word oLGod is the only source of pure and unadulterated truth accessible to us. 2. God is as willing in the present day, as ever he was, to make his will known to those, who desire to learn it. 3. In the path of God’s commandments there are no clouds of doubt to ob struct our view, no fears like fiery serpents to assail us. Inference. If we meet with these, we may rest assured that we have wandered from that path, and should make haste and delay not to regain it. 4. Error is more congenial to the natural man than truth. Inference. Os a creed •: r act that is congenial to our natural feelings, we should ever be suspicious; and be care ful to withhold our sanction from it, until we have subjected it to the rigid tests of God’s word, and found it to be correct. ♦ For the Banner & Baptist. THE LAND MARKB.-NO. 4. Dear Brother Wood : I have promised to call attention to the fact that, Pedo Baptists themselves admit, nay, earnestly contend for the main princi ples advocated in this series. That Baptism is a pre-requisite to Church fellowship—to the Lord’s Supper, and to the Gospel Min istry. I have already alluded to the de claration of the Presbyterian Elder in 1858, that they, (they Presbyterians,) would not admit any one as a Minister, nor in any way recognize him imeh, it+tiess in their estimation he had beer, baptized. Is the position of this Elder sustained by the recognized authorities of the Pres byterian denomination? I open the Con fession of Faith, and, page 144, I read as follows: “Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, for the solemn admission of the party bap tized into the visible Church." Here it is affirmed that, “without baptism there can be no such thing as admission into the vis ible Church." So say Baptists. Now, where does this Confession of Faith locate the Ministry? On page 135, I read the following: “ Unto this Catholic visible Church, Christ hath given the Ministry, Oracles, and Ordinances of God, for the gathering and perfecting of the Saints in this life, to the end of the world.” (Italics mine.) Here we see it plainly and une quivocally set forth in the recognized stan dard of Presbyterianism. That “the Min istry, Oracles,” and all the “ Ordinances of God," are given to the Church by Divine authority. Not to the invisible Church— if such a thing exists —but to the visible Church. That visible Church into which baptism solemnly admits the party baptized. There is no such thing as mistaking the Confession of Faith on this subject. Ac cording to its plain teachings where there is no baptism, there can be no visible Church. Again, where there is no visble Church, there can be no “Ministry," nor any of “ the Ordinances of Gods." For these are all the gifts of Christ to the visible Church. The most ultra Baptist never took higher grounds than this. If infant sprinkling as practiced by Presbyterians, is not Gospel baptism, then, according to the honest Con fession, Presbyterianism is not the Church of Christ, nor a branch of the Church.— Neither are her Ministers Gospel Ministers. Neither has she any of the Ordiances of God. The same may be said of all Pedo Baptist sects. Savs Dr. Griffin, a distinguished Pedo Baptist, “I agree with the advocates of close communion in two points: 1. That baptism is the initiatory ordinance which introduces us into the visible Church, of course where there is no baptism there is no visible Churches. 2. That we ought not to commune with those that are not baptized, and of course are no Church members, even if we regard them as Chris tians. Should a pious Quaker so far de part from his principles as to wish to com mune with me at the Lord’s table, while he yet refused to be baptized, i could not re ceive him, because there is such a relation ship established between the ordinances, that I have no right to separate them; in other words, I have no right to send the sacred elements out of the Church. The only question, then, is whether those asso ciations of evangelical Christians that call themselves Churches, and that practice sprinkling, are real Churches of Christ.— In other words, whether baptism by sprink ling is valid baptism.” (See Landmark Reset, page 7.) Dr. Griffin further ad- mits that, “Il nothing but immersion is baptism, there is no visible Church except among the Baptists.” AX hat Dr. Griffin has said in reference to the C'ommw/ifon, i 8 equally applicable to the Ministry. He here admits that he would refuse to commune with the unbap tized, even though he esteemed them as Chris tians. This is precisely what Baptists do. We refuse to commune with Pedo Baptists, or recognize their Ministers as Gospel Min isters for the reason that we regard them as wabaptized, and consequently not Church members, although we esteem many of them as Christians; as regenerate persons, and would rejoice to see them follow Christ into the liquid grave. And the same rea sons assigned by Dr. Griffin are urged by Baptists. “Because there is such a rela tionship established \wt\veen the ordinances, that I (we) have no right to separate them. In other words, I (we) have no right to send the sacred elements out of the Church." And we may add, neither have we any right to look out of the Church for the Gospel Ministry. Dr. Wall says, “No Church ever gave the Communion to any persons before they were baptized. Among all the absurdities that ever were held, none ever maintained that any person should partake of the Communion before they were baptized.” AVill not the same remarks apply to the Ministry? Has any Church ever admitted the unbaptized to the Gospel Ministry?— “Among all the absurdities that, ever were heldf has it ever been maintained that any one should be recognized as a Gospel Min ister “before he was baptized?" I might multiply quotations almost in definitely, showing that the main princi ples advocated in this series, is admitted bv Pedo Baptists, as being correct. They admit—l mean all candid Pedo Baptists—that the landmark principles are the legitimate results of our principles as Baptists. They acknowledge that we are consistent—that ours is the on ly consistent position sot Baptists to occupy. Now, will Baptists be consistent? Are we willing to follow our principles to their legitimate results? Or will wo sacrifice principle to expediency? Or, rather, is it not most expedient, all things considered, to do right? Do we p ace a higher esti mate upon the flatteries of the world, or of false friends, than we do upon the smiles of Jesus? Will He not approve us if we observe all his precepts? Os what we have written, this is the sum: 1. That the work of the Ministry be longs to the official acts of the Church, and that there is a manifest impropriety in re cognizing any one as an officer of the Church before he becomes a member. 2. We have seen that all who were au thorized to preach the Gospel were also authorized to partake of the Lord’s Sup per. 3. We have seen that our Saviour hath by precept and example recognized the principle that Baptism was a pre-requisite to the Ministry, as well as the Comniun ion. Tho Saviour himself never went out. as a public teacher, to preach the Gospel until after his baptism. 4. We have seen that all those commis sioned by the Saviour to preach the Gos pel, were first baptized. 5. We have seen thnt the inspired Apos tles, under the great commission, first Preached the Gospel, second, Baptized the believers, and, third, Taught them all oth er duties commanded by the Saviour. 6. We have seen that the Ministry is the gift of Christ to His Church, and con sequently, that the Minister must be a. member of the Church. 7. We have seen that the Confession of Faith, and distinguished Pedo Baptist wri ters, acknowledge the soundness of these principles. 1. That where there is no Bap tism there is no visible Church. 2. Where there is no visible Church, there is no Min istry; no Ordinances of GOD. In reasoning with Baptists, I have a right to assume that., immersion alone is Baptism. And Dr. Griffin has admitted that “If nothing but immersion is Baptism, there is no visible Church except, among the Bap tists.” By communing with Pedo Baptists, and recognizing their Ministers as Gospel Min isters, we are called upon to acknowledge, and virtually do acknowledge: Ist. That Pedo Baptist Societies aru Gospel Churches. 2. If Pedo Baptist. Societies are Gospel Churches, then infant Baptism is a Gospel institution. 3. Thon, also, sprinkling and pouring are to lie recognized as Scriptural Baptism. Are Baptists prepared to make these concessions? For one, my answer is »«- tensely NO. I now' drop this subject, humbly praying for the influences of the Holy Spirit; that all who love the Saviour in sincerity, may be led into all truth. That we may all lie of the same mind, and of the same judg ment. WM. NEWTON. Elder W. T RUSSEL. This Brother is Agent for tho Revision Association, and will visit the people (D. V.) at — Cedar Town, on the Ist Sab. in July; Mt. Zion, Cass Co., on Tuesday ; Kingston, on Thursday; Cartersville, on Saturday & 2nd Sab.; Cassville and neighborhood, the week fol lowing ; Rome, on Saturday & 3rd Sab.; Pleasant Grove, Chattooga Co., Ga., on Tuesday following; Bush Arbor, Floyd Co., on Thursday ; Pisgah, on Friday; Cave Spring, on Saturday and 4th Sab. He is engaged in the greatest work of the age, and we ask for him full congrega tions. Eo. 4t. “I’m in the wrong,” is said to be the most difficult sentence to pronounce in the English language.