Newspaper Page Text
THREE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
VOL. XXXIII. NO. 33.
'■* *
Contributions.
Beweficeiice—lVo. V.
BY A. M. CHRIFTZBERG, SO. CA. CONFERENCE.
Its Enlargement Absolutely Required.
Not on the ground of penalties human
law inflicts, but on the requirements of the
higher law of God himself. Much may be
done or left undone as the judgment or
taste cf an individual elects, but not in
building up Christian character according
to scriptural standards. For instance, one
cannot eliminate from the Christian life the
principle of faith, because, that is its mov
ing power. “The life I now live,” says St.
Paul, “I live by faith in the Son of God,
who loved mo and gave himself for me.”
Destroy this faith and the old sort of living
obtains, and life ends by tumbling down like
any old heathen to rest. Otherwise, he en
ters on a life of unparalleled sacrifice, crown
ed in the end with a most blissful immor
tality. It is the same absolutely with every
other Christian grace. So for one to sup
pose that he may be illiberal, churlish, un
loving, selfish, covetous, or their opposites,
just as inclination moves him, is to mistake
utterly the remedial agencies of. the gospel,
which are intended to make him like God; the
divine promises being given to this very end,
“that by them,” says St. Peter, “ye might
be partakers of the divine nature, having
escaped the corruption that is in the world
through lust.” Is this conformity obtained
by listlessness or indifference? Must there
not bo continual imitation, the more so lie
cause by nature we are so unlike God ? The
very nature of goodness is to communicate.
God is good and He gives. “He openeth
his hand and supplieth the wants of every
living thing.” All—shutting up its plente
ousness in itself, living for self only—denies
this goodness, becomes covetous, “whom
the Lord abhorreth.”
The utility of Christian liberality is the
only argument often used to enforce it—the
good done by the benefactions of the Church
—the great benefit to the poor. But this
utilitarian view is not the highest, the best.
The benefit to the giver is to be considered
as well. But how ? Asa sort of insurance
against loss, or as a sort of joint stock com
pany for increase ? Put it in that shape
and the most selfish considerations would
obtain, for good securities with largo re
turns always command a premium in the
markets of this world. Selfishness would
bo predominant as ever, and other-worldli
uess make the man no better than the com
mon-place worldliness of this. But let the
soul feel, down in the depths, the truth of
the Saviour’s declaration—the only one of
the many unrecorded sayings uttered, and
rescued from oblivion by any —“lt is more
blessed to give than to receive ,-” more blessed,
solely on the ground of its making him like
God; and at once you give the soul a motive
for action more imperative than any other in
the universe; for man’s chief good consists in
this assimilation to the divine nature.
This is the view Bt. Paul takes of it, when
lie begs the world to note “flic grace of God
bestowed on the Macedonian churches;”
how that in a great trial of affliction, the
abundance of their joy and their deep pov
erty abounded unto the riches of their lib
erality.” It is a graco, making the soul not
only useful, but loving like God. And then
observe its stimulating force—what are
“trials of affliction and deep poverty” to
souls, by “the graco of God” abounding in
joy V One may have all earth’s treasuries
at command and not one particle of joy.
Can a man’s wealth oven without trials and
afflictions do more ? Is it any wonder that
abounding in joy, the riches of their liber
ality should abound likewise ? If selfish
or covetous, then the wonder would be all
the other way. To my mind, this is the
only class from whom the Church can ex
pect an enlarged beneficence—men sitting
loose to earth, abounding in joy, and covet
ing the divine likeness. For ages it has
waited, and looked, and longed for the
wealthy to pour forth the riches of their
liberality. It looks in vain; increasing
wealth brings increasing love for it, and in
creasing expenditure as well. The lust for
gold is insatiable, the appetite grows by its
increase. Do not riches shut up the soul ?
Have the words of Jesus no meaning: “How
hardly shall they that have riches enter
into the kingdom of heaven ?” Who believes
it, how readily is it explained away, the
Church even helping on the delusion by the
deference extended to the rich. God forbid
we should speak of this class in a spirit of
bitter asceticism, or undervalue the grace of
God in saving them; but it cannot be de
nied, that they rarely give in proportion to
their means. What is done in the earth is
principally done by those of moderate abili
ty. This will not be controverted.
Jesus says—“ Take heed and beware of
covetousness, for a man’s life (/'. e. the good
of it,) consisteth not in the abundance of
the things he possesseth.” The world says
directly the reverse and ’tis only the grace
of God that brings us in accord with Christ.
The soul aware of this, feeling its chief good
is in enjoying God in all, and all in God,
and most earnestly desiring to be like Him,
though it meets with many trials and dis
couragements in the Christian lire, finds no
difficulty in bringing itself under the great
law of Christian charity, in its most extend
ed signification.
It is upon this we ground the hope of the
enlarged beneficence of the Church, and
assert that it is imperatively demanded. A
consciousness of individual stewardship, a
resolution to conform to the divine good
ness in feeding the hungry and clothing the
naked must lead to an approximation to
some Scriptural standard of giving. As the
tenth of one’s increase is the very lowest
amount named in the Scriptures as worthy
of consecration to God, it is not unreasona
ble to hope that tens if not hundreds in the
Church may adopt it. Already, within the
knowledge of the writer, more than ten
have responded, finding in its practical ap
plication a most blessed means of grace,
not the least advantage of which is in call
ing off their trust in “uncertain riches,”
and placing it more fixedly in God who has
said “I will never leave thee nor forsake
thee.” Ami it abler advocates—and there
are many such—could only be induced to
urge it, there is no telling how soon more
than 3200 communicants would qnadruj:>le
the revenue of the past year.
I believe there has been long wanting
some practical application of the great law
of Christian charity. Extremists on both
sides may hinder—have, in my judgment,
hindered its exercise. The result has been
a confusion of ideas, readily seized upon by
certain classes to excuse their want of lib
erality, and leaving chnrch revenues to bo
raised, not on the ground of high Christian
princple, bnt rather as a matter of chance
and feeling, as the money pressure of neces
sity may indicate.
if jflf * v>i A ♦ fi&k If , ! v 'd
Jjmllertt gfcmiian ~wiuaU\
The two extremet appear in your issue of
the ITtli June. My too kindly judging un
known brother It. F. Evans, of Bonth Geor
gia Conference, seems to err on the one
side, and your English correspondent on the
other. Both I would regard with the very
highest respect. The latter remarks, “Sys
tematic Beneficence is a very ■ admirable
thing, if it could be adopted largely. It is
the duty of every Christian to give as the
Lord has prospered him. But to regulate
and limit giving to a tenth is placing the
law of love in a subordinate position.”
That is, Ist. It is a very good thing if it
could lie done, but it cannot: 2d. It is a
good thing, and ought to be done, but it
will not: 3d. If done, it would be wrong,
because of “placing the law of love in a
subordinate position.” Iteminding one of
the lawyer’s defence : Ist. The kettle was
cracked when borrowed : 2d. It was return
ed whole : 3d. We never had the kettle at
all. His conclusion seems to be, don’t en
courage Bystematic Beneficence at all, but
let the Church drag on as of old. Now,
“this placing the law of love in a subordi
nate position,” by thus “regulating and
limiting giving to a tenth, is precisely the
matter hard to be understood. There are
too many pooh-poohing at such illiberality,
and acting as if conceiving that consenting
to more, cancelled all obligations—precisely
the persons so anxious not to let their left
hand know what the right hand doeth, that
they cannot let the right hand do any thing
at all. Don’t let the law of love be in a sub
ordinate position—don’t give the tenth,
give the whole—and go away just giving
nothing whatsoever. I appeal to all right
judging persons, if it is not better to say- —
“I’ll give the 'tenth any how, and as much
more as the grace of God will enable mo to
give.”
My good brother B. F. E.’s words have
the true metallic ring; they stir one’s heart
like the sound of a trumpet, and mine leaps
exultantly—though I mourn in coming so
far short myself—when I see another so
readily counting all loss for the Lord. But
the trouble is, he seems looking forward to
the Church of the Future; while alas ! we
have to deal with the Church that is now.
The time will come when all above one’s ne
cessary living will be cheerfully given to
God; but it is not yet; and I fear such ex
treme views will frighten away many from
the proper consideration of tlio whole mat
ter. Just think of it, in tho Church of to
day, instead of tho tenth of increase being
devoted to God, more than 40,000 church
members are contont to let 3,200 of their
number by the payment of the pitiful sum
of $23.00 per capita raise the entire revenue
of the year for all religious purposes what
soever. Tell these of such enlarged views !
They are babes, and have need of milk, and
cannot bear such strong meat as that. And
for neither of us to move until wo get all to
see alike with us, will be like tho -fabled
countryman waiting on the banks of tlie
river for its bed to become dry. O ! no, let
us go on in the appointed work looking to
God’s blessing on the labor.
In tbo extension of Messiah’s kingdom
nil are. responsible. Borne think the “Wo
is me if I preach not tho Gospel” applica
ble only to the ministry. I think it takes
in the whole, every heart that the divine
spirit enligliteneth. The minister leaving his
proper work for the more lucrative walks of
life, must be adjudged faithless and punish
ed in the final day—are all else excused upon
like failure? I remember reading somewhere
of a council iu hell, where all its powers
were at fault as to the best means of stop
ping tlio revival under tlie Wesley’s. At
length a littlo insignificant devil pipingly
exclaims, “Make John a Bishop" —not of tho
Asburyan type, be sure—traversing a con
tinent at an annual salary of one hundred
thousand (not dollars, may it please your
reverence,) but mills —ten of which make a
cent —but rather with tlie ample revenue of
my Lord of Canterbury, or our Holy Father
at Rome. Now suppose it had been done;
or in any other way let Wesley have aban
doned his proper work, would be not have
been responsible for the failure of the
mighty revival that has blessed the earth ?
Take any other of God's creatures—and are
not all souls His ? Are not all, each in his
measure, equally responsible ? The day of
judgment will so reveal it. Our only safety
lies in obtaining the divine likeness, and
tlie more like Him we become, the moro en
larged certainly will our benefactions be.
And “Beholding as in a glass tlie glory of
the Lord, shall be changed into the same
imago from glory to glory as by tbo spirit
of the Lord.”
Aliss Olympia Nimbletoe.
1 wish to communicate to the friends of
tlie young lady whose name introduces this
article, her' great fight of afflictions, and
to bespeak for her their earnest sympathy.
As all know, Nimbletown, the residence of
our afflicted friend, has some excellent Chris
tian citizens, among whom there is an an
nually recurring revival. At these meetings
it is too often the case, that some shallow
minded people beeomo superficially “con
cemed,” and join the church. The next
month or two the effects of the revival are
very evident upon these light-headed Nim
bletown-ites. Their favorite amusements
abate; and a stranger would imagine no
place left for vanity among them. It usually
happens that as Christmas approaches signs
of recovery from their religions enthusiasm
may be seen. By the time tlie holidays are
on hand, a total recovery has been experi
enced, and they get over their shallow-root
ed religion in time to dance away the old
year and usher in the new year, with well
used, “light fautastic toe.”
Our dear friend, Miss Olympia, was seized
with the prevailing religious sentiment last
September, and connected herself with the
Church. The rustic people who knew Miss
Olympia hoped she might be an exception
to tlio general rule which had governed the
fashionable villagers, and very earnestly re
joiced at her connection with the church.
Their hopes, however, were vain. The Nim
bletoe blood was too strong for our friend’s
strength, and following the general example
of tlio family, she recovered from her relig
ious affection by December. Christmas
night slio celebrated the birth of the foun
der of her religion by waltzing till midnight.
Her good judgment and cultivated taste de
cided it very much in place to revel with re
velers, neglect her prayers and her Bible,
and taJko leave of even the semblance of
piety during the festivities of Christmas.
It so happened that an old fogy who
sometimes visited certain families related to
Miss Nimbletoe, heard of all this, and in
dignantly pronounced it wrong. He did not
mention it as an impropriety , he declared it
was asm. Tho old gentleman just mentioned,
Mr. Goodheart, said a good deal on hearing
the facts before stated, which did appear
to question Miss Olympia’s piety. Indeed
he said, “she had neither brains nor religion
enough to keep her steady in her shoes.”
Now he ought not, perhaps, to have spoken
so harshly; but once said he would not re
call it.
You know how wealthily, extensively, and
intelligently connected our friend Miss Nim
bletoe is. At once there was quite a breeze
of indignation against old Mr. Goodheart.
A heart less resolute than his, would have
been frightened at the threatening attitude
of the whole connection. Ho was as brave
as good, and did not seem at all disturbed.
Ho told me he expected just this result.
Such a breeze! Every store door and rum
counter rang with the affair. How could he
dare question the wit or piety of so elegant
a young lady as the persecuted Miss Nim
bletoe!
The up-shot of the matter was this: Miss
Olympia was “churched” for her conduct,
and determined to test her rights in this
matter.
When the day of trial came, a paper was
submitted by tlie young lady in question,
accompanied with a request that the whole
question be referred to arbiters, who should
act in the matter, and decide the point in
question. This proposition was aeceded
to by all concerned, and a committee of three
was entrusted with the affair. Mr. Good
heart proposed a very great Bible reader in
the community, old Mr. Orthodox, as one
of the committee, and Miss Nimbletoe,
through a friend, requested that Mr. Lotha- i
rio, a member of the Nimbletown Church,
have a place on the committee. No one ob
jected, and the arrangement stood thus, the
two choosing a third party. There was some
difficulty about this third party. Mr. Lo
thario insisted that his Church ought to
supply that party, and Mr. (Orthodox argu
ing that Mr. Goodheart’s Church had the
precedence, owing to his age and position.
At last they settled down upon Miss Gaspipe,
a lady of poetic proclivities, whose religion
caught the hues of the last beau she dared
to hope her own. Mr. Orthodox thought
this the best he could do to avoid further
difficulty.
Upon reading the paper submitted by the
accused young lady, it was found of no
weight in the matter. The committee there
fore, by unanimous agreement, announced
that the question at issue was a simple one.
“It is,” said the speaker, “this: is modern,
promiscuous dancing right ? They appointed
a day to hear tho question, and left tlie two
persons, Mias Olympia and Mr. Goodheart,.
to sustain their respective positions before
them. I will not keep the friends of the
young lady in suspense as to tlio issue.
The report of tlie committee in the case
of Miss Olympia Nimbletoe is as follows:
Os all tlie evidence introduced by tlie
prosecution, we are compelled to admit, that
from tlie Bible is tlie strongest. It says
nothing explicitly on the subject. There
are, as Mr. Goodheart says, genet al principles
laid down in the Bible, the bearing of which,
seems against tlie amusement of dancing.
One of these is, “Do all in the name of tlie
Lord Jesus.” We are compelled to say that
the modern, promiscuous dance, with its
waste of time, its danger to health, and its
sensual (Air. Lothario enters his protest
against the use of this word,) excitements,
is such as to make it impossible to enter into
it, without violating this law. Then, the
commaud “bo ye not conformed to this
world,” seems to bear with considerable force
in this direction also. The general tenor of
Scripture submitted by Mr. Goodheart is
unquestionably against tlie dance.
It is also true, that tho voice of the church
expressed in her legislative capacity, and by
lier individual ministry and membership for
these centuries condemns this amusement
as wrong.
On the other hand, the evidence submit
ted by our young friend in defence shows
that one minister out of every one hundred
cannot see much harm in it; and two mem
bers of the church out of every one hundred
agree with these ministers. Also the unani
mous opinion of all the dancers out of the
church sustains her positions.
The committee having examined tlio case
fail to agi-eo upon a verdict and, therefore,
beg to submit tlieir individual opinions.
Mr. Orthodox is forced to tlie conclusion
that the general principles alluded to, the
voice of tho different churches, officially ut
tered, the convictions of their ministry and
laity, ought to be conclusive. All these say
dancing is wrong; and lie therefore pro
nounces against the accnsed.
Mr. Lothario, while be admits tlie force
of tlie evidence as presented by Mr. Ortho
dox, at the same time eaunot resist tlie force
of the opinions expressed by so many wit
nesses in favor of dancing; and must pro
nounce in favor of Miss Olympia Nimbletoe,
the persecuted heroine of the dancing ring.
Miss Gaspipe regrets her inability to de
cide between the differing parties, and begs
to be excused from giving an opinion, since
she has none. All whk-li we respectfully
submit, etc., etc.
Now the trouble of my young friend Miss
Nimbletoe begins just at this point. It is
what ‘ ‘they say” that is depressing her spirits,
and wearing her life out. For example, it
is said that when she wanted to prove from
David’s example the piety of dancing, she
searched the New Testament through with
out finding the Psalms! She did, however,
find out all about David’s case; bnt she saw
at a glance that she must have something
better than a midnight revel, and must dis
pense with the exhilerating condition of the
dance, a partner of the opposite sex, before
David’s example would justify her own case.
It is said also that those clergymen —one
out of one hundred —who expressed them
selves as seeing but little, if any, harm iu
tlie matter of dancing, accompanied their
opinion with a hope of very soon seeing her
and her friends out of tlie pale of so close a
a sect as the one that at present held her in
bondage. Some uncharitably surmised that
this hope gave them moral ophthalmia, and
led to their opinion.
They say again that Mr. Lothario had
good reason of his own for protesting against
the expression “sensual excitement," in the
committee’s report. Somo say that, mem
ber of tlie church though he is, he discussed
this whole matter over three glasses of wine,
after he had finished his game of cards at
Jack Suckuuiup’s dogger}’ the night after
the trial.
Others say, that he didn’t know, and Miss
Olympia could not inform him, which one
of the prophets Paul was.
Now all these things trouble Miss Nimble
toe, and indeed, all Nimbletown. I earnest
ly commend this sufferer for the dance’s
sake, to tbo sympathy and -well wishes of
her friends. May none of them become in
volved in such inextricable perplexity ns
she! Thanking the Editor in her name for
permission to state, at length, tlie circum
stances of lier case, I am,
Yours fraternally,
Aug, Ist, 1870. G. H. Wells.
PUBLISHED BY J. W. BURKE & CO, FOR THE M. E. CHURCH, SOUTH.
MACON, GA., FRIDAY, AUGUST 19, 1870.
Gone.
List to tlie midnight lone!
The church-clock apeaketh with a solemn tone,
Doth it no more than tell the time ?
Hark, from that helfry gray,
In each deep-booming chime, which, slow and
clear.
Beats like a measured bell upon my ear,
A stern voice seems to say:
Gone—gone ;
The hour is gone—the day is gone;
Pray.
The air is hushed again,
But the darkness wbos to sleep in vain.
O soul! we have slept too long,
Yea, dreamed the morn away,
In visions false and feverish unrest,
Wasting the work-time God hath given and blest.
Conscience grows pale to see
How, like a haunting face.
My youth stares at me out of gloom profound.
With rayless eyes black as the darkuess round,
And waiting lips which say:
Gone—gone ;
The mom is gone—the morn is gone;
Pray.
Wo for the wasted years
Botli bright with smiles but buried with sad tears;
Their tombs have been prepared
By Time, that gravesman gray—
Soul, we may weep to count each mournful stone,
And read the epitaph engraved thereon
By that stem carver’s hand.
Yet weep not long, for Hope,
Steadfast and calm, beside each headstone stands,
Gazing on Time, with upward,pointing hands.
Take w r o this happy sign,
Up! let us work and pray. , •
Thou in whose sight the hoary ages fly
Swift as a summer’s noon, yet whose stern eye
Doth note each moment lost,
So let me live that not one hour misspeut
May rise in judgment on me, penitent,
But, tiff the sunset Lord,
So in Thy vineyard toil,
That every hour a priceless gem may be
To crown tae blind brows of Eternity. .
— Chambers' Journal.
The Right Way of Preaching.
In the July number of tlie Princeton Re
view, the opening paper is a translation of
the preface to a second series of sermons
published by the eminent Dr. Tholuck, and
entitled “Counsels to tlie Modern German
Preacher.” It is very interesting, as con
taining tlie mature judgment of a man at
once so thoughtful and so devout upon a
topic of so great importance, and very sug
gestive in reference to the religious con
dition —particularly the neglect of Church
attendance—of the higher classes in Ger
many. It is paiufnl to be forced to believo
that there is a constant approach to a some
what similar condition of things in this
country. Public men tilling conspicuous
positions, literary men controlling tlio press
of the country and providing its intellect
ual food, and men whose wealth or educa
tion give them a prominence iu society, are
becoming more and more accustomed to
neglect the stated services of the Babbath,
and to esteem lightly the ministrations of
the pulpit.
The effect, of this pernicious example is
seen not. simply among the poorer and un
educated classes, but it is manifesting itself
among all ranks iu the community. We are
sorry to see that men whose position gives a
power to their example, and whoso nominal
relation to Christian institutions renders
their desecration of the Lord’s day even
more grievous, habitually pursue such a
course.
Tholuck takes rather a gloomy view of
tlie prospect iu Germany. “Will those
times ever return,” he asks, “when, at the
sound of tlie bell, the father, bearing his
hymn book under his arm. hastened with all
his family to the liouso of God? when every
pew contained a household? when it was a
matter of common remark if, in the seats of
the Church officers or magistrates, there
was a single vacant place? Will those
times return when tlie faithful pastor shall
find, not a scanty representation from dif
ferent sections of the town, bnt his whole
flock collected as one man before him?
Many a preacher now stands in his pulpit
who is forced to cry out with Harms, ‘Ah,
Lord, one thing only I ask of thee, that I
may not preach to empty seats.' "
The chief inquiry of the great and good
Professor is, by wliat means the educated
classes can be induced to join in public
worship. Hero it is well to consider that
special intellectual and esthetic efforts to
meet tho requisition of this class to the neg
lect of the humbler orders, have never been
attended with any marked success. Paul
preached a sermon of marvelous propriety
to liis cultivated hearers thronging Mars
Hill, but only one Areopagite believed and
“clave unto liim.” His sublime discourses
made a Roman Governor tremble, and a
Jewish King sigh faintly for liis faith; but
that was all. Our Lord held tho rulers of
the Jews silent during his discourses, but it
was the “common people” that “heard him
gladly.” It is a significant fact that those
preachcrs»who have been most successful in
attracting the ear of the masses, aiuTwin
ning disciples to tho Master from those,
have also, like Wliiteiield and the Wesleys,
been most successful in arresting the atten
tion of the so-called higher classes, the edu
cated and prejudiced minds of the commu
nity, and drawing from their ranks faithful
and humble followers of tho Lord Jesus.
It is also worthy of remark that the suc
cess of such men lias arisen from no eccen
tricity of manner or matter, from no pecu
liar appeals to the imagination or address to
the purely intellectual or emotional nature,
but from an unmistakable faith in tho gos
pel which they preached, and a simple,
clear, and earnest presentation of its funda
mental truths. The successful men with
speculative and doubting minds have not
been those who have grappled most man
fully with the religious problems of the
hour, but those who, with the clearest ap
prehension of tlie spiritual wants of all men
and the divine provision made for them,
with a generous breadth of illustration,
have most sincerely uttered the positive
words of a divine revelation.
Many of tlie suggestions of Dr. Tholuck,
however, are adapted to all hearers, and to
all the conditions under which the truth of
the Scriptures is to be declared.
1. The Gospel must be presented in terms
that can be understood. There are religious
phrases, well understood by believers, that
convey no idea, or a false one, to unregene
rated persons. A minister from the circle
of faith may speak to those standing within
it so that they may comprehend him, but
be entirely unintelligible to tlioso without it.
An unprofesssional address, clothing the
truths of the Gospel with the language of
common life, approaching men in the same
words and tones that they use with each
other, divested of all false sanctity of man
ner or mysteriousness of expression, natural,
manly, sincere, even homely—such an ad
dress will be most likely to arrest the atten
tion and hold it to a favorable consideration
of the truth set forth in the sermon. Few
things are more oflensive than holy tones,
sacred mannerisms, or cant phrases to gen
eral or casual attendants upon public wor
ship.
2. Dr. Tholuck sets forth with great full
ness and beauty of illustration the impor
tance of a clear and attractive exposition of
Scripture. He intimates that the custom of
making a few words of the Bible a matter
for the essay that follows has had no small
influence in bringing about tlie low estimate
in which tlie sacred volume is held by cer
tain educated men. The best defense of the
Bible is the Bible itself.
It is one of the most difficult forms of
preaching to render an extended exposition
impressive and profitable, but it is one of
the highest and most admirable. It cannot
be done purely extemporaneously. It re
quires careful study, and will call into requi
sition all the natural and acquired abilities
of the studious minister. But such a habit
of ministration will greatly enrich pulpit
discourses, present the word of God in such
a manner that it will exert its own native
and divine fore© over the intellect and con
science, and relieve it of those difficulties
with which prejudice, ignorance, and science
falsely so called, have invested the Scrip
tures.
Essay preachers must often be at a loss
for subjects. Sensation preachers depend
upon the passing events of the day, which
constantly repeat themselves and exhaust
their own power. The Bible, if it be thor
oughly studied and made the theme of pul
pit ministration, will be found to be an in
exhaustible mine of intellectual and spirit
lual truths. The true interpretation of God’s
message to. man is the prime, as it is tho
very responsible, work of the minister of
the Gospel.
3. Dr. Tholuck thinks one of the pressing
necessities of tlie times is to prove that di
vine service does not consist in the sermon
alone. He advocates a careful adaptation of
the devotional parts to the wants of a cul
tivated taste. He thinks the Protestant lias
come to undervalue the other services as tho
Catholic has the sermon. So far as the Pro
fessor refers to a reverent and intelligent
reading of the Scriptures, a cultivated and
hearty union of the congregation in the
service of song, and a general worship in tlie
public prayer, we heartily accord with him.
If he refers to elaborate liturgical forms, or
to the artistic performance of difficult mu
sic by professional singers, we do not hesi
tate to express the opinion that such servi
ces will not add to the devoutness of the
worshipers, or render the house of God
more attractive intrinsically to irreligious
men. In several of the popular churches of
our city, where the finest musical perform
ances precede the sermon, there is quite a
rush for the door after the concert of the
singers closes. So serious a nuisance has
this become that the sexton was ordered in
one instance to bar the door until the ser
vice closed, but a threat of arrest for false
imprisonment has opened wide the door
again to the enjoyment of a gratuitous con
cert at the expense of the quiet of a wor
shiping assembly.
We readily admit, however, that there are
grounds for criticising the manner in which
the service of worship is conducted in many
of our churches. We would not sink the
sermon into an incidental part of the exer
cises of the hour, for it is the great divine
ly ordained means of the world’s evangeliza
tion ; but every other service should receive
its duo proportion of time and honor.
We heartily aecord with the Professor’s
sentiment as to the manner of preaching as
uttered in the words of Harms : “The source
of right preaching is the Spirit, the Holy
Spirit, aud he who preaches by his assis
tance preaches in the way I mean—preaches,
as I call it, with tongues.” The chief reason
why many sermons do not reach the mark,
Tholuck thinks, is because they do not grow
out of the fullness of the heart iu the pres
ence of God, but are made. For the same
reason he advocates preaching, after full
and careful preparation, without manuscript
or memorizing. The production of the ser
mon, he says, should not only bo inspired
by tlio Holy Spirit, but its delivery also. “It
is difficult to express tho vast difference be
tween the effect of a sermon delivered from
memory, excellent as it may be in other re
spects, and that of one born for the second
time in a more living inspiration. The ser
mon must be a creation of the preacher in
liis study, and a re-creation in liis pulpit;
aud when he descends he should feel a
mother's joy, tho joy of one who, under
God’s blessing, has borne a child. Only
when the sermon is thus a double creation
of the preacher will it become a reality to
liis hearers.”— N. Y. Christian Advocate.
From tlio Presbyterian and Index.
Fashionable Amusements.—No. 11.
AN ESSAY READ REFORM THE PRESBYTERY OF
TUBKALOOSA, AND PUBLISHED BY ORDER OF
PRESBYTERY.
Little incidents sometimes clearly show
tho current of public sentiment on this sub
ject. Take the following as illustrative:
(1.) Many years ago a prominent minister
of the gospel, and the 2>astor of one of the
most important churches of tho denomina
tion to which lie belonged, while making the
tour of Europe took occasion to visit tlie
theatre iu one of tho great cities through
which lie passed. Tho winds soon wafted
the report of it across tho ocean to his abode,
and spread it all abroad through the coun
try. And the writer well remembers with
wiiat amazement it was heard, and wliat a
damaging effect it had, not only upon liis
ministerial usefulness, but upon his Chris
tian character, both in tho Church and in
the world. It led many to doubt, especially
amongst the ungodly, whether indeed lie were
aeonverted man. Wo do not pronounce upon
tho justice of this. We simply state tlio
fact. It clearly shows that the world, as well
as the Church, instinctively feels that the
theatre is no fit place for a minister of the
gospel—nor for any other consistent, godly
follower of the Baviour.
(2.) An otherwise exemplary member of a
certain Church, wlio faithfully attended
upon its ordinances, and wlio led tho devo
tions of his fellow-worshippers in tho meet
ings for social prayer, was inordinately ad
dicted to card-playing. Frequently, and
often to a late hour in the night, lie engaged
with worldly and ungodly men in this amuse
ment. Not only did this grieve his Christian
brethren, but those very men of tlio world,
who were glad to liavo liis countenance and
complicity in tliis worldly amusement, did
not scruple to speak of bis course in terms
of ridicule and to the prejudice of religion.
It is needless to say that this one indulgence
greatly impaired liis Christian usefulness.
It was tlio dead fly in the pot of precious
ointment.
(3.) A young lady wlio for many years was
leader of the dance in tho community ill
which she resided, was hopefully converted
during a revival of religion, which occurred
in the church that she attonded. Iu view
of her union with tho church, we asked if
she felt that she could relinquish ber favor
ite amusement. “Oh yes,” she replied; “I
expect to give up daneiug. I always thought
that it was wroug for a Christian to dance.
I danced because I was a sinner; but I never
saw a Christian dance but 1 despised him in
my heart!"
(4.) At a circus lately held in an inland
town, to which great crowds liad resorted—
many professors of religion, as well as others
—the master of the ring, in the course of
tlie exhibition, proposed to elialk tlio size of
tlie clown’s feet upon a board near by. The
clown, mounting the board, stood firm nutil
the master bad drawn a line around one of
his feet, but when about to begin the opera
tion with the other, lie suddenly jerked it
away, exclaiming iu aloud tone, “Oh no!
you can’t chalk that foot here —that foot be
longs to the Church /” The clown well knew
that sucli scenes were no place for a pro
fessed follower of Christ. He well knew
liow tlio ungodly world regarded sneli incon
sistency; and how keenly this thrust at re
ligion, through its unworthy professors,
would be relished by tlie ungodly multitude
around liim. Nay, tlie professor of religion
can never engage iu any ono of these fash
ionable amusements without, to a greater or
less degree, forfeiting liis Christian reputa
tion, aud incurring tho secret derision and
contempt of tlie world.
But admit for argument’s sake that these
tilings are not clearly contrary to the spirit
and tenor of God’s word, and therefore not
positively condemned by it, still there can
be no dispute that participation in them is
of doubtful propriety. No one will venture
to argue that they are clearly sanctioned by
tlio word of God—else why the division of
sentiment which every where exists on the
subject?—tlie world and worldly professors
of religion on the one side, and the great
body of God’s most faithful and devoted
people on tlio other? Admitting that the
Church is not clearly and indisputably right
in its opposition ami censure, still it cannot
be shown that sho is clearly wrong. It must
be admitted, therefore, on all sides, to be a
disputed question; and lienee it follows that
indulgence in these tilings by tlie professor
of religion, is, to say the very least, of doubt
ful propriety.
And where, lot ns ask, ought the professed
follower of Christ, with the solemn vows
and weighty responsibilities resting upon
him, anil with tho earnest admonitions and
entreaties of liis Saviour ringing in his ears,
to be found on these disputed questions?
Ought ho to stand on doubtful ground
ground which the vast majority of his Chris
tian brethren regard as forbidden and dan
gerous; or on ground which all admit to be
lawful and safe? Can any true child of God
hesitate to decide? Ho is solemnly required
not only to avoid evil, but the very appear
wice of evil. And tho professor of religion
who, in tho face of these things, will per
sistently venture on this disputed territory,
indicates by that very course that he has
less regard for the honor of liis Master and
the opinion of his brethren, and for his own
spiritual safety and welfare, than for liis
carnal gratification, and he thereby gives
just occassion, not only for his good to be
evil spoken of, bnt for doubt as to his Chris
tian character. No mere amusement, which
is doubtful in its nature, can be consistently
indulged in by a professed follower of the
Lord Jesus Christ. No loving, dutiful child
will voluntarily and persistently engage in
doing what he has reason to apprehend may
be offensive to liis parent.
On tho ground, therefore, that these
things are of doubtful propriety; that there
is and always has been, and we may confi
dently predict always will be, at least a di
vision of sentiment on this subject; and that
the world, and worldly, gay, pleasure-loving
professors of religion aro found on tho one
side, advocating them, and the vast body of
tlio Church—and amongst them tlioso most
distinguished for their piety and usefulness
—on tho other side, opposing them; on this
ground, if there was no other to bo urged,
we say tho Christian should deny himself, if
self-denial it costs him, and stand firmly and
decidedly aloof from these fashionable
amusements. Ho cannot sin by abstaining
from them; he may sin by participating iii
them. And verily it behooves one bearing
his vows and responsibilities to bo, if possi
ble, always on the safe side.
(to be continued.)
Names Applied to Ministers.
BY REV. R. WEISER.
Ministers of tho gospel are known by va
rious names, all of which are significant of
the functions pertaining to their office. In
the New Testament they are called apostles,
disciples, bishops, elders, ministers, angels,
evangelists, deacons, teachers, shepherds,
pastors. The term disciple, that is, a schol
ar or learner, means simply a follower of
Christ; an apostle was one sent out by
Christ himself, tho office having terminated
with the last of the men whom Christ had
chosen. We now have popes, cardinals,
patriarchs, metropolitans, archbishops, bish
ops, deans, pastors, parsons, priests, rectors,
ministers, preachers, elders, deacons, vicars,
curates, missionaries, and evangelists. These
all come under tho generic name of preacher,
for the duty of all is to “preach the Gos
pel,” and minister to the spirital wants of
the Church. The terms pope, carninal, pa
triarch, metropolitan and priest, belong to
the Roman Catholic Church. Pope is noth
ing more than a corruption of papa, father,
for in Greek the name of father is also papa.
The Pope, being looked upon as tlie head of
tho Church, is therefore called papa.
Cardinal, from the Latin cardinalis, chief,
principal, an ecclesiastical prince in the
Church of Rome, who has a voice in elect
ing the Pope. Tho Pope must bo taken
from tlie cardinals. Cardinals are mostly
also bishops. Patriarchs are archbishops,
or those offleers in the Greek Church who
have the duties and privileges of archbish
ops. Tho head of tho Greek Church is a
patriarch. A metropolitan is also an eccle
siastic, who rules over a large city with tlio
dignity of an archbishop. A priest is a
common preacher, from the old Saxon
preost, one who stands before, or is pre-emi
nent. Tn the Protestant Church we need no
priest., as there are no sacrifices now to be
offered, and no incense to bo burned. Tlie
Roman Catholics and Episcopalians still use
this term to designate a minister of tlie gos
pel.
We will now notice the terms used among
Protestalits:
1. Bishop comes from tlio Saxon biscop,
formed, probably, from tlio Latin bis, twice,
and the Dutch cop, a head, and may meau
twico-liead or chief. The Greek word epis
copos from epi, around, and scopeo, to look,
to look around, to oversee. In tho New
Testament tho cpiscopos, overseer, and tho
presbuteros, elder, is one and the same oili
cer. Tho words aro very nearly synony
mous, with perhaps tlio difference that the
presbuteros was older than the episcopos.
Now, however, this order is reversed. There
aro no different grades of ministers recog
nized in tho New Testament. All stand up
on an equal footing—one, even Christ, is
our Muster, and we are brethren. Peter was
a bishop, and yet ho calls himself an elder.
(1 Peter, v, 1.)
2. Pastor, from the Latin pasco, to feed,
to nurse, to care for. In Greek poimen, to
feed, to rule, to lead as a shepherd. This is
tho most appropriate, significant, aud beau
tiful name for a minister of Christ.
3. Preacher comes from the French pre
cher, which is evidently derived from tho
Latin grtrdico, to speak before, or in advance.
The Greek word is kerusso to proclaim as a
herald, who goes before tho king, when on
a journey, announcing his approach. This
indicates the office of a public teacher of re
ligion.
4. Minister, from tho Latin minislro, to
serve. Tlio Greek word is diaconus, a dea
con, from din aud keneo, to servo in tho
lowest capacity, to work about iu the dirt.
This does not point out a different officer
from a bishop or a pastor. It only shows
us a different phase of the same office, for
Paul tells us in Epli. iii, 7, that he was a
deacon, and surely uo ono will contend
that he, who was the chiefest of the apos
tles, occupied an inferior position in tho
ministry.
5. Parson, from the German pfarrer. This
word does not occur in the Bible. It may
be a corruption of tho Latin word £ persona ,
a person. This is a favorite name for a
minister among tlie Germans. Herr Pfarrer
is equivalent to “Bir Parson,” and indicates
respect, reverence, affection.
C. lleclor means a ruler or governor, and
is only used in tho Episcopal Church. This
term is not found in the Bible.
7. Vicar. From tho Latin viearius, ono
who takes tlie place and performs the duties
of another.
8. Curate. From curator, ono who watches,
or takes care. It is uo easy matter to dis
tinguish between these two offices. The
vicar seems to be employed by the rector,
and the curate by tlio vicar to do tho hard
work of the ministry. This entire proxy
business is, however, wrong, and can only
exist in a state of the Church when men ob
tain high positions without either piety or
learning. This is one of the great abuses
resulting from a union of Chnrch and State.
9. An evangelist is one who goes about
from place to place preaching the gospel
without settling as a pastor, recognized by
Paul in Ephesians iv, 7.
10. A missionary is a minister who is sent
to distant parts to preach to the destitute.
Provosts, deans, canons, primates, and arch
deacons are offices that the Churches iu
America do not recognize, aud aro not found
in tlio Bible. Different denominations in
this country seem to have adopted different
names for tlieir spiritual guides. Thus the
Roman Catholics call their ministers priests;
the Episcopalians, rectors; the Lutherans,
especially tlie Germans, parsons; the Presby
terians, pastors ; the Methodists, preachers ;
the Baptists, elders, but all meaning tho
same thing.— Lutheran Observer.
Funeral Sermons.
The Christian Observer gives some timely
and true thoughts on this subject:
How often are our clerical brethren called
upon to officiate at the funeral-ceremonies
of persons with whom, in life, they were
not even acquainted! How strong the
temptation, in dwelling upon the noble
traits of character of the deceased, to exag
gerate or overstate them! When a public
man dies, who has held a high position in
the community, or a party leader, to whom
his party has been in the habit of yielding
almost idolatrous worship, there is never
wanting a clergyman to laud his greatness
aud his Christian character. Men of money
or position, who have never yielded their
hearts to the Saviour, men who liavo died
in disgraceful haunts, or who have perished
tlie victims of unnamablo vice or disease,
have sometimes been lauded to tho skies by
Christian ministers in funeral orations!
Men who have been killed in drunken brawls
liavo been almost canonized as Christian
martyrs. Is this right V Is there not some
thing wrong either in the head or the heart
of the clergyman who will permit himself
so to be carried away by popular enthusiasm
or tho desire of favor, as to utter falsehoods
respecting tlie character of the deceased, in
the .solemn ceremonies nt liis interment ?
Let Htm that Hicatsettt Sat “Come.”— lt
is tlio duty of every one who knows tho good
nows of salvation through Christ to tell the
good news, as be has opportunity and ability
to his companion who does not know it,
that lie too may bo saved. It is the duty
of every Christian wlio can, to tell the good
news to a Bunday-scliool class of children,
or of young men, or adults, or to a meeting
of prayer and conference, or to any other
appropriate meeting, where it will promoto
the glory of God and tho good of men, and
to exhort men to come to Jesus. These du
ties aro done daily by earnest, working
Christians. They are dono in accordance
with the divine injunction; “Let him that
lieareth say, Come.”
Hible-Rea«ling in Clmrcli.
Much has been said of lato on tlio subject
of Bible-readiug in our public schools, and
a very excited discussion lias arisen there
from. We offer a few words on a subject of
even greater importance, though it does not
create any controversy—that is, Bilile-read
ing in church. In theory, nil agree on this
subject, but in practice there is unfortunate
ly considerable difference.
There are some preachers who frequently
omit the reading of the scriptures in con
nection with public worship. With them
the sermon absorbs in interest everything
else. We cannot speak for other parts of
tho country, but iu Now York and its vicini
ty, it is quite rare until within a few years
to hear the Bible read in connection with
the Babhatli-evening service in our Methodist
churches. This was probably owing to tho
fact that up to tho year 18(14, the discipli
nary directions on tlio subject of public
worship scorned to assume tlireo services in
tho samo church on the Babbath, aud while
provision was mado for reading selections
of Scripture in the morning aud afternoon,
there was uo such provision for tho evening.
Hence, in those churches where there was
no ufternoon son-ice, the Bible was read but
once a day—that is in the morning.
Tho General Conference of 1804 very
wisely changed this by providing for one or
more scripture lessons, iu the afternoon or
evening, as well as in tho morning. In
some of our churches, however, the old cus
tom of omitting tho reading at the evening
service still prevails. We do not believo
there ought to be a public service in which
reading a portion of tlio scriptures does not
form a part. We would have this reading
in tho weekly prayer-meeting, as well as iu
tho larger assemblage on tho Sabbath. In
somo denominations, this is an invariable
custom; in our own, as far as our observa
tion extends, it is tho exception and not tlio
rulo. Tho word of God ought to bo read
in tlie hearing of the people. If there is
in it that divine life and power which we
claim for it, we do wrong to keep it from
tho multitude, substituting for it our own
liooi- words.
Wo ought not to bo satisfied, however,
with a mere formal reading of the Bible.
There are ministers wlio need to have their
attention, called to tlio manner of reading
the Scriptures. Some hurry through in a
loose, slipshod manner, as though this part
of tho service was one which should be got
out of tlio way as soon as possible; some
aro indistinct iu tlieir utterance, so that it
is hard to catch the words; somo arc mono
tonous in their stylo, so that the reading
fails to get the attention of tlio audience;
some go tho opposite extreme, strike an at
titude, put on the airs of a professor of elo
cution, and strive to read dramatically,
very little to the edification of tho saints,
and very much to tho amusement of the
sinners. All the people ask is that the Biblo
shall ho read without affected tones, or
nasal drawls, or fanciful pronunciation, or
oratorical gesticulation, but easy and natur
ally, so that every word may bo heard and
understood, tho attention arrested, and the
mind fixed not on the reader, but on wliat
lio reads.
Scripture-lessons may bo rendered moro
valuable by being selected with reference to
tlio subject of the discourse to be preached.
The (place for their selection is anywhere
lmt iu tho pulpit. Tho thinking portion of
tho congregation are apt. to ho prejudiced
against tho preacher who, in their presence,
fumbles over the Biblo in search of some
thing to read; they may suspect that the
samo want of preparation extends to tho
sermon. Many of our most successful
preachers carefully seloct their scripture
lessons in their studies, finding those which
aro appropriate to tlio subject on which
they are to preach, and reading them over
before entering the pulpit.
The interest in tho public reading of tho
Scriptures would ho still further increased
if every pew were furnished with Bibles, so
that tlie entire congregation, children as
well ns adults, might find tho lessons when
announced, and accompany the reading with
tho eye as well as with the ear.
Tlioso are somo of tho methods by which
we would give to the word of God that
prominence in our public services which its
great importance demands. —The Methodist.
“Moses’ Hock” sit Mount Sinai.
Those who have liad tho opportunity of
visiting tho peninsula of Sinai will remem
ber that about two miles up the Wady El
Leja, which runs along tho northwest baso of
tlio Horeb group of mountain heads, there
lies an isolated, irregular cube of coarse rod
granite, which has evidently fallen from tlio
cliff above, and which tlio monks and Be
douins declare is tlie identical “rock in
Horeb” which Moses smote, and out of
which bo bronght a stream of fresh water
to supply tlie Israelitish host at Repliidim.
In confirmation of tlie fact, they draw your
attention to wliat is evidently only a seam
of softer and filler grauito running through
the wliolo mass, which presents a weather
worn appearance. This they say, was caused
by the action of tlio miraculous stream of
water, and that several horizontal cracks or
fissures iu it are the marks of Moses’ rod!
Although no intelligent man believes a
word of tlieir silly legend, yet this stone lias
been regularly shown to and visited by trav
elers for centuries as “Moses’ Rock,” no one,
apparently, over supposing it possible that
there could be auy other “rock” in the
vicinity which, from its character and posi
tion, would fulfil the conditions of “the
rock in Heroli,” referred to in Exod. xvii.
It is to the existence, and I think also to tlio
discovery, of such a “rock,” that I would
draw the attention of past and future travel
lers to that interesting region.
On tlio northeastern face of Mount Sinai
(Jebel Bufsafeli,) in the Wady Shubeib, at
the head of which stands tho Convent of
St. Catherine, and closo to “Aaron’s Hill,”
is a protruding mass of rock, about fifty feet
iu diameter, much water and weather worn,
and presenting a smooth and striking ap
pearance. It forms a portion of tho solid
granite cliff, which rises 1,200 feet above it.
In tho lower part of this protuberance is a
fissure of a semicircular or rather horseshoe
shape, about four feet long aud four inches
wide. Out of this fissure, inside which a
small shrub is growing, runs a perpotual
stream of tlio purest spring water, clear as
crystal, and of delicions coolness and flavor,
which, according to the testimony of tho
Arabs, lias never been known to fail. When
I found it with a travelling companion in
the beginning of January last the stream was
small, as a drought was afflicting tlie land,
but tho dark green moss which clings to tho
rocks around seems to indicate tlie perennial
character of the spring. The water thus
flowing out of the very heart of the living
rock of Binoi is received into an artificial
basin, hence it descends to a succession of
small and rudely constructed terraces, Jwliero
tlie Bedouins cnltivato a few fruit trees and
vegetables; and is ultimately absorbed in
the gravelly hollow at the base of the moun
tain. When tlie stream is large it must run
down the Wady Esh Sheikh, which is the
pebbly bed of tlie mountaiu watercourse,
and tlio only wady which runs downhill from
Mount Sinai; tho others, El Raliab El Leja,
and Shubeib, running uphill to the base of
that mountain. These trees and terraces, to
gether witli a natural gravel mound of con
siderable elevation, in tlio Wady Shubeib,
and immediately opposite tho fountain, pre
vent the latter from being visible from the
usual camping-ground of travellers, and can
only be seen by climbing up over terraces to
it. Were all these artificial obstructions,
removed, the fissure would lie probably six
or seven feet from tho ground at the base of
the natural cliff, which hero is nearly perpen
dicular.
This is the fountain from which all travel
lers who camp under Sinai obtain their sup
ply of water; hut as it is out of sight, and
the water is always drawn and brought to
camp by natives who are ignorant as they
aro poor, it appears entirely to have escaped
their notice. Had such not been the case,
I think: t highly improbable that so remark
able a fountain, in so remarkable a spot,
E. H. MYERS, D. D., EDITOR
WHOLE NUMBER 1814.
should not have been referred to by such
intelligent travellers and trustworthy authors
as Robinson, Stanley, Porter, and Tristram.
If Rophidim wore situated somo miles down
tlio Wady Esli Sheikh, where Robinson
places it, and where from the sacroil narra
tive it probably was, then Moses with the
elders of Israel ascended Esh Sheikh to the
“Mount of God,” and thero directly facing
him at tho head of tho valley was this rock
fountain, with which he was probably al
ready familiar from his former long resi
dence in this vicinity, and from which now,
by God’s command, ho drew forth an abund
ant stream of water, which, pouring down
tlie wady, would in a short time reach tho
Israelitis'h camp at Rephidim.— ll. U. Wot
laslon.
Noble Answers.
‘You ask,” said tlie famous William,
Prince of Orange, to Bonoy, the Governor,
“if I have entered into a treaty, or mado a
contract for assistance with any powerful
king ? I answer, that before I ever took up
tlio cause of tho oppressed Christians in
tho provinces I had entered into the close
alliance with the King of kings; and lam
firmly convinced that all who put tlieir
trust in him will be saved by liis almighty
hand.”
Afterward, when offered every personal
and family favor if he would but give over
bis lifo-long endeavors to securo religious
freedom to tho poor Notherlanders, tlio
bravo Prince replied lie regarded tlio wel
fare and security of tlio public before liis
own, having already placed his particular
interests under his foot, and was still resolv
ed to do so, so long as life should endure.
Geleyn de Mater, school-master, being
found addicted to reading liis Bible, was
nccused of heresy. Being summoned be
fore tlio Inquisitor, lie was commanded to
make instant recantation. “Do you not
lovo your wife and children?” “God
knows,” answered Geleyn of Audernarde,
“that if the whole world were of gold and
my own, I would give it all to have them
with me, even had Ito live on bread and
water, and be in bondage.” “You have
them,” said the Inquisitor, “only renounce
the error of your opinions.” “Neither for
wife, children, nor for all the world can I
renounce my God and religious truth.”
Thereupon lie was strangled and thrown
into the flames.
“Do you believe in Christ V” said an infi
del to John Jay. “I do, and I thank God
that I do,” was tho statesman’s noble reply.
Two years before liis death, when eighty
two years of age, ho was down by disease
and liis recovery despaired of. When mgi -i!
to tell liis children on what foundation he
rested liis hope, and from what source he
drew his consolation, liis brief reply was,
“They have the Book.”
A king and somo noblemen were once
going out for an early morning’s ride.
Waiting a few moments for Lord Dartmouth,
one of the party rebuked him for his tardi
ness. “I have learned to wait upon tho
King of kings before I wait on my earthly
sovereign,” was his calm roply.
A pilgrim to Mecca onco complained to
tho Caliph Omar because ho had received a
severe injury from tlio hand of Jaballah,
king of Gassan. “Bnt lam a king,” re
plied Jaballah proudly, “and he is but a
peasant.” “Ye are both Moslems,” answer
ed tho fearless Omar, “and in tho sight of
God, who is no respector of persons, ye are
equal.”
Irish Methodism.
The past year has proved a blessed and
truly memorable one to many. Probably,
since the great revival of 1859, wo have had
no year iu Irish Methodism in which so
many precious souls were born of God. It
lias been truly a year crowned with “show
ers of blessingand if tho net increase,
after filling up all vacancies, is apparently
small, it is, nevertheless, considerable, when
wo take into our account that tlio tide of
emigration which has borne so many to
other lands, and our peculiar difficulties, to
gether with the fact that iu our case our
population is steadily declining from year
to year, whereas in England and America the
population is steadily rising. Have wo not
abundant cause for gratitude that wo have
not only maintained our numbers, but actu
ally increased by several hundreds, notwith
standing a decrease of several hundred thous
and in the population ? It is comparatively
an easy matter to securo an increase where
tlio population is increasing by millions an
nually : it is altogether another and a higher
thing to secure an increase where tho raw
material with wliich you have to work is
steadily declining from day to day. But
let us not make too much of our difficulties.
They aro real, no doubt, and formidable
also ; but do wo not make many of them for
ourselves ? For examplo : one of our most
formidable difficulties arises from tho largo
number of cliapcls—probably some hundreds
—which are closed, iu whole or in part,
every Sabbath day, owing to the want of ad
equate ministerial labor; and this again
owing to the want of more money. This
very day wo received a letter from ono of
our aged ministers, who is alone on a circuit
where we have several chapels, and multi
tudes willing to hoar, to say that some of
his membors have actually declined to be
regarded as Methodists, as tho Methodist
Church gave them and tlieir children no op
portunity of worship on tho Lord’s day !
How long is this kind of thing to go on ?
The letters of our general missionaries,
which have appeared in this journal during
the year liavo amply proved that Ireland is
as open to tho gospel in many places as it
ever was, or as wo could even wish it to bo;
and wo have the mon, aud might reap a
glorious harvest all aronnd, if we had but an
adequate supply of money. Surely, when
our friends liavo the means, this ought not
long to prove a difficulty.— Recorder.
Tire Most Alarming Sin. —ls I were alli
ed to point out the most alarming sin to
day—those which aro most deceitful in f heir
inilnenco and most soul-destroying iu 1 heir
ultimate effects—l would not mention drun
kenness with all its fearful havoc, nor gam
bling, with its crazed victims, nor liarlotry,
with its hellish orgies, but tho lovo of money
on tho part of men, and lovo of display on
the part of women. While open vice sends
its thousands, these fashionable and favored
indulgences (send tlieir ten thousands to
perdition. They sear tho conscience, iu
crust the soul with an impenetrable shell of
worldliness, debauch tho affections from
every high and heavenly object, and make
man or woman tlie worhipper of self. While
doing all this tho poor victim is allowed by
public opinion to think himself or herself
a Christian; while the drunkard, the gam
bler or tho prostitute is not deceived by
such a thought for a moment.— Dr. Crosby.
A garden is a beautiful book, writ by tlio
finger of God: every flower and every leaf
is a letter. You have only to learn them—
and ho is a poor dunce who cannot, if ho
will, do that—to learn them all and join,
them, aud then to go on reading and mul
ing. And you will find yourself carried
away from tho earth by tho beautiful story
you are going through. You do not know
wliat beautiful thoughts grow out of the
ground, and seem to talk to a man. And
then thero aro somo flowers that seem to
me like over-dutiful children: tend them
bnt ever so little, and they come up and
flourish, and show, as I may say, their
bright and happy faces to yon. —Douglas
Jerrold.
He -who truly loves God delights to medi
tate of him, aud to discourse of him, aud
to hear the mention of his name, and is
weary of the conversation where God is sel
dom, slightly, or never remembered.
No man can tell whether he is rich or poor
l>y turning to his lodger. It is tho heart
that makes the man rich. He is rich or
poor according to what ho is, not according
to wliat ho lias.
Instead of torturing yoursolf on account
of your sins, throw yourself into the Re*
deemer’s arms. Trust in him, in tho right
eousness of his life, in tho atonement of his
death.
Mohammedans say that ono hour of jus
tice is worth seventy hours of prayer. One
act of charity is worth a century of elo
quence.
Bigots ever think others most perversely
and wilfully wrong headed.