Newspaper Page Text
THREE DOLLARS PER ANNUM.
VOL. XXXIII. NO. 34.
tfonfribufions.
Beneficence—.Vo. VI.
BY A. M. CHRLETZBERG, SO. CA. CONFERENCE.
As Seen in the Olden Times.
We have looked at the subject in modem
lights so long as really to be discouraged,
and almost led to wonder if the Church of
to-day can by any possibility be connected
with the past. It is just as if one had re
versed the telescope and whirled,into far off
dim perspective, all making Christianity a
glory and a joy. That a religion, the mov
ing force of which was a love to God and
man so controlling, as should lead not only
to the relinquishment of property, but even
of life itself joyfully, should in our day be
come so powerless as to induce the sacrifice
of almost nothing for its propagation, and
really requires the utmost force of entreaty
to obtain from its professed friends the
means of sustaining its very life, goes far to
show that it must be under some- baneful
supernatural influence. What can have de
faced its beauty and “changed the truth of
God”—-at least in the practical application
—“into a lie?” Nothing less than the
“working of Satan, with all power and with
all deceivableness of unrighteousness. ”
In looking back there will necessarily be
seen some dark shadows, but in no spirit of
reckless adventure would wo seek to mar the
beauty of “the bride, the Lamb’s wife,” but
that she might be “prepared as a bride
adorned for her husband. ” It would be re
freshing to turn to the past, and, appealing
to the holy oracles of God, if we speak not
according to them, “there is no light in
us.”
Turning then to Moses, “that was in the
Church in the wilderness with the angels
which spake to him in Mount Sinai, and
with our fathers : who received the lively
oracles to give unto us,” he shows the bene
ficence of ancient Israel in such a light, as
to throw into dark eclipse our own. Hu
miliating as is the contrast, and painful, as
it must be to the pious mind to admit the
degeneracy of the times, ’tis God’s own
means of cure, for. He wounded but to
heal.
Not dwelling upon Abraham’s ottering to
Melchizcdec, or liis still greater ottering of
his beloved Isaac to God, or on his grand
son Jacob’s gladdening vision of tlio “ better
country,'’ and the certainty of moans of
communication with it, and his vow con
cerning his gains in Mesopotamia, we come
to the offerings of Israel as ordained by God
himself. Ho was their God, and they were
“his people, and the sheep of his pasture.”
They were to prove it by continual sacrifice,
not that God, but that they might be bene
titted. He says himself, “If I were hungry
I would not tell thee, for the world"is mine
and the fullness thereof. For every beast
of the forest is mine and the cattle upon a
thousand hills.” He would not exact from
their store to be enriched by their loss, but
to impart unto ihem the true riches by the
itnpartition of ii : self, always best obtained
by man's submission to sacrifice and suffer
ing. It was the abiding conception of a
diseased nature that rest and comfort were
only found in ease and self indulgence; and
every false religion, from the first utterance
of the tempter, “ye shall boas God’s” have
promised this much. But the true religion
speaks differently, the real secret of human
happiness lay in directly the reverse. With
the obligation of giving, was connected a
sense of sacrifice and loss; for how could
one part with any good without impoverish
ing himself. 9 God might, possibly; ’twas
nothing for Him to communicate; He had
but to open His hand and supply the want
of every living thing. But the transcend
ent sacrifice of the cross proved otherwise.
There self-sacrifice culminated; the divine
mind itself experiencing the sense of loss,
in the only way divinity could, and the uni
verse mudc to know what giving meant; by
the Father’s giving the Son, and the Son
giving “his life a ransom for many.”
With reference to Israel, in remembrance
of the signal event, their redemption from
Egypt, the consecration of the first born of
every creature was required. The children
and such beasts as was not lawful to be
offered in sacrifice were to be redeemed.
Then came the consecration of the first
fruits of the field, the corn, the wine, the
oil. The corners of the field unreaped and
what dropped from the reaper's hand, left
for the poor. The first fruits of the wool,
the wheat, the dough kneaded, and the bread
baked in the oven were offered unto the
Lord. No fruit until the fourth year gath
ered for the owner’s use, but given to the
poor, as well as the spontaneous products
of the fields every seventh year; then the
varied offerings, then the tithe to the Le
vites, then a second tenth expended in
feasts nnd sacrifices of the temple and for
the poor. But why enumerate further ?
All conversant with the Scriptures know the
amazing amount, before which our offerings
in this Christian day appear but as the dust
in the balance. Such utterances as these
were heard and heeded. “None shall ap
pear before me empty.” Ex. xxxiv. 20.
“Speak nuto the children of Israel, that
they bring me an offering : of every man
that giveth it willingly with his heart ye
shall take my offering. Ex. xxv. 2. The
willing heartiness made it precious in God’s
sight. “If ye offer a sacrifice of peace of
fering unto the Lord, ye shall offer it at
your own will. Lev. xix. 5. “Honor the
Lord with thy substance and with the first
fruits of all thine increase. ” Why? that ye
might be impoverished, and mourn under
the sense of oppressive loss ? Ono ! “So
shall thy barns be filled with plenty and
thy presses shall burst out with new wine.”
Under such rule, could you conceive of a
devout Jew, looking over his flocks to select
the meanest for sacrifice ? If yon could—
and found him —he would be met with the
stern rebuke, “ye shall not offer unto the
Lord that which is bruised op crushed or
cut.” It must be “without blemish;” the
“lame and the blind” were indignantly re
jected. I have known it otherwise in Chris
tendom, and the offerer pass scathless, on
the principle one must suppose “the small
est favors thankfully received.” For a poor
Levite to be hungry and near starvation
was an unheard of calamity in Judea. This,
too, I have known otherwise. But the
other day I drew out from a preacher the
fact that he had been feeding his horse six
weeks out of his garden, and his family
likewise—meat being an exceeding rariety
on his table.” Horrible ! you say, “why
did he not make his wants known ?” Hor
rible ! I reply, that he should have been un
der any necessity of so doing.
Idolatrous offerings were rejected with
scorn. I read of Josiali, “He took away the
horses the kings of Judah had given to the
sun at the entering in of the house of the
Lord, and burned the chariots of the sun with
fire.” 2d King xxviii. 13. “A dreadful
waste of good material,” I fear some church
ftnttfltert! f hmltaw '
officers of our day would think, who calcu
late so largely on outsiders aiding them;
“putting it heavily on the goats, you know,”
that said outsiders are verily disgusted, not
at religion, but with such wretched expo
nents of its true character.
See this beneficence as exhibited to the
poor in the olden times : “Thou shalt not
harden thine heart, nor shut thine hand from
thy poor brother; Thou shalt surely give
him, and thine heart shall not be grieved
when thou givest unto him; because that
for this thing the Lord thy God shall bless
thee in all thy works, and in all that thou
puttest thine hand unto. For the poor
shall never cease out of the land.” Hen.
xv. 7. Let Job farther illustrate it. “When
the car heard me then it blessed me; and
when the eye saw me it gave witness to me :
Because I delivered the poor that cried, and
the fatherless, and him that had none to
help him. The blessing of him that was
ready to perish came upon me; and I caused
the widows heart to sing for joy. Job xxix.
11. “If I have withheld the poor from their
desire, or have caused the eyes of the
widow to fail; or have eaten my morsel my
self alone, and the fatherless have not eaten
thereof; If I have seen any perish for
want of clothing, or any poor without cov
ering; If his loins have not blessed me,
and if he were not warmed with the fleece
of my sheep; Then let my arm fall from
my shoulder-blade, and mine arm be broken
from the bone. ” Job xxxi. 16.
u Ecce Homo.”
Ecce Homo is an attempt to analyse the
Christian character by a careful examination
of the acknowledged facts in the life of Jesus
Christ. In this examination, the author
tacitly postulates that the divine source of
the principles and motives of Jesus need
not be taken into the account. The ques
tion is not concerning the origin or source
of these principles, but their character.
Taking Jesus as the model or type of Chris
tian manhood, he proposes to seo wherein
this man differs from other men, not merely
in the external condition and tenor of his
life, but in the inward spirit which actuated
him.
Now, the point of objection taken by the
generality of the orthodox readers of Eoce
Homo against this method is, that it ignores
the very center and' kernel and key of the
character of Jesus, by loaving his divine
origin and nature out of view. They urge
that to examine Jesus as a mere man is the
surest way to misunderstand him. This is
the point, then, that is first to be settled be
fore we can be prepared to judge of the
merits of the book. Is the method of Ecce
Home a legitimate method as applied to
Jesus Christ. I maintain that for certain
purposes, it is legitimate.
This freedom is granted to all philosophi
cal inquiry in every department of knowl
edge. We do not arrest the scientific inves
tigator, seeking for the causes of phenomena,
or the laws of forces, by telling him, “This
is of God, and it is useless and sacreligious
to ignore the fact.” The scientific botanist
seeking to unfold the process of germina
tion, the physiologist inquiring into the
changes that take place in the blood as it
passes through different portions of the
body, or the meteorologist seeking to find
out the laws that govern the rain and wind
all these are dealing with facts which have
divine relations. God is hidden behind and
under every phenomenon, every change. It
is by the power of God that the seed sprouts.
It is by the power of God that the blood
courses, and is changed as it courses through
the body. It is by the power and ordering
of God that the winds blow and the rains
come. But will any one contend that there
are no laws (so called) governing all these
processes? Is the scientific investigator
bound to combine the power of God and
the purpose of God with every part of the
process he may investigate? Will not the
general acknowledgment made, once for all,
that God orders every thing suffice for truth?
Nay, is not the scientific inquiry made sim
pler and surer, by disconnecting the phen
omena from all previous opinions, prejudices,
(pre-judgments) and faiths whatsoever ?
Every well informed man knows that this is
so. In science, we deal with facts; we ask
for facts, and nothing but facts; and the
more facts we have, before we begin to form
any opinion, or guess about the matter, the
better. Tho adjustment of these facts with
our faiths is a different thing altogether; the
work of a different operator. The less the
man of science is hampered with this work,
the better for him as a scientific inquirer;
whether good for him as a man or not, is a
different question. But this is what scien
tific men do claim, and their claim is gener
ally allowed by men of Protestant culture.
Now, cannot the same singleness of method
be allowed in the investigation of character?
To know what a man is, are we obliged to
know of what race he is born, what ances
tral traits may be in him, what surroundings
stained the light in which his childhood was
passed? If the question were: How came
the man to be so and so? or, How much
credit, or how much blame does he deserve
for his conduct? then such subordinate in
quiries into his antecedents would be, not
only legitimate, but demanded. But this
is not the question. The question is: What
kind of a man is he? To answer that, all
we need to know is his actions, public and
private, and his words.
Applying these remarks to the subject be
fore us: the question is—What manner of
man was Jesus of Nazareth? Was there one
purpose that ruled him, or was he a man of
unsettled, vacillating, varying impulses? If
the former, what was that purpose? What
affections characterized him? What did he
love? What did he hate? What companions
did he seek? How were those companions
affected by him? Now, I hold that all these
questions can be investigated, and in a man
ner answered, without at all referring to his
origin, his parentage, or his education. —
When we frame the answers, we must bear
in mind that they are the results of a par
tial inquiry, and good only for so much.
Subsequent investigation in different direc
tions may lead us to reverse or amend the
results thus attained; but inasmuch as they
shall have been acquired by so single a meth
od, they will have an intrinsic value, that no
results of promiscuous and possibly con
fused inquiry could have.
And really, it seems to me that those who
hold to the divinity of Jesus Christ ought
to be the most anxious to have this investi
gation made. It is claimed for Jesus that
God was in him. Well, then, let us see just
what kind of man it is in whom the fulness
of the Godhead dwells. He comes, it is
said, to bring us the fullest, and truest mani
festation of God in his own life, deeds, and
spirit. Well, then, let us divest ourselves
all pre-conceived opinions as to what man
ner of man he ought to be, and see what he
is. It seems to me that this method is not
only legitimate, but eminently desirable.
Whether the author of Ecce Homo has
worked out the problem correctly or not, is
another matter. Possibly in some points
we might differ from him; but that is to be
expected in view of the fact that he is a pio
neer in this method of inquiry. It is diffi
cult in a matter which has been the subject
of violent controversy, for one to place him
self exactly at the point of indifference be
tween the two sides. ' v
But it is my opinion, that the author of
Ecce Homo has, in the main, arrived at very
just results. His psychological rendering of
the Christian character is exceedingly happy.
I cannot say that I admire the phraseology
in which he embodies it, but it is hard to
substitute a better. He finds Jesus to be a
man ruled by one purpose; that purpose
itself the offspring of one intense affection.
A man in whom anyone affection, or passion
or purpose becomes so intense as to overtop
all the rest, sway all the rest, and bring the'
whole nature into subservience to it, we
generally call an enthusiast. And because so
many enthusiasts have appeared whose en
thusiasm was spurious, or illegitimate, based
on some principle that has no right to rule
in man’s heart, and therefore distorting the
character and vitiating the life, the word
enthusiasm has come to have a bad meaning,
a kind of ill od,or attached to it. But en
thusiasm is not necessarily bad. There is
one passion in the human nature which (as
we find in Jesus) can be aroused to enthu
siasm without distortion or vitiation to the
nature or character.
On the contrary, such an enthusiasm is
found to be the surest bond of all virtue,
and purity and justice, and puts the whole
frame-work of the human soul, not only into
proper adjustment, but kindles all through
it a heavenly glow, an intrinsic radiance that
convinces every beholder that this is the nor
mal condition of the human soul. This affec
tion is the love of man as man; an affection so
weak in the natural man as to be scarcely dis
cernible there, (its very existence has been de
nied;) but tvliich brought forth into emi
nence and endued with strength, is found
to be the very throne of the soul. This is
the distinctive trait of the Christian charac
ter as found in Jesus by the analysis and in
duction of the author of Ecce Homo. The
fact that this style of character is the result
of the indwelling of God is not asserted or
denied. It is not his purpose to regard that
fact. Theologians may discover what they
can of the designs of God in assuming hu
man nature. They may trace as far as they
can, or think they can, the result of these
counsels in the intuitious and utterances of
Jesus. This does not invalidate the picture
that a correct master may draw of his hu
manity. The very Atlianasian creed is care
ful to teach that the divine nature did not
overwhelm the human nature in Christ, so
as to dehumanize it—to coin a word. The
man Christ Jesus was very man to the last
moment of hisjeartldy life. “Ecce Homo”
finds him to be a man who loved his fellow
men with all the ardor of an inflamed pas
sion; loved them with a strength of affec
tion that eclipses all the noble loves of
•friends for friends, lovers for lovers, patriots
for country, or even parents for children.
This is the key-note of the Christian char
acter. Every other virtue and grace falls
into happy accord with this. The reverence
for the Father and implicit submission to
his will is there, and some might wonder
that this is not made the foundation of the
immaculate structure of Christ’s character.
Foundation it might be in oqe sense; but
distinctive trait it is not. Other men had
reverenced and obeyed God before, but
Jesus came manifesting quite another prin
ciple in predominance within him. Another
principle seemingly, it is the human side of
the one principle of holiness; the side that
men can most easily see, and seeing, love.
It was this peculiar trait of Jesus which the
author of Ecce Homo finds to be the magic
of his power over men. All enthusiasm is
contagious: a right-minded enthusiasm is
eminently so. Depraved men and selfish
men needed but the actual revelation of such
a character to make them love it, and insen
sibly copy it. His loving purity made men
loathe themselves to love him. His loving
truthfulness made men confess their sins to
make room for him in their hearts. His
yearning love to save men transformed his
disciples into self-saerificin'g redeemers of
men.
I cannot think that Ecce Homo is the off
spring of an evil mind. Ido not think it
will lead any one to skepticism as to the di
vinity of Jesus, or confirm any one in the
disbelief of that doctrine. It had the very
contrary effect on myself, as I read it.
There are some things in the book that I
do not like. The author’s unfair exegesis of
the remarkable words of Johu the Baptist,
“Behold the Lamb of God that taketli away
the sin of the world;” his unhappy illustra
tion of the Eucharist by a club-dinner, and
one or two other matters, are decided blem
ishes. But the book as a whole,*l judge to
be a help to the lovers of truth. There are
many points of view from which a great
mountain may be studied and copied, every
one truthful, every one adding something
to what we know. The geniuses of this age
are finding in the character of Jesus just
such an attractive and exhaustless study.
Freeman.
A Safe In vestment.
Many a man is sorely perplexed how to
safely invest his money. We can inform
such anxious inquirers of the experience of
one individual, a native of Massachusetts,
and for many years a missionary in Western
New York. The Rev. Mr. Hubbard, a Con
gregational minister, was remarkable for his
piety, his communion with heaven, his faith,
and his generous sympathy. According to
his means he was exceedingly liberal, so
that the more calculating regarded him as
going beyond the bounds of reason. But
he had what they deemed a strange answer
to give, namely, that this was the way in
which lie wished to invest his money. “We
differ,” he would say, “only in the way in
which we seek to invest our money. You
prefer to have yours in a farm or mortgage
securities; 1 prefer to have mine, if I have
any, invested in doing good. If any man
has money to put at interest, let him do
good with it. He will thus have the largest
income and the safest capital.” And we are
told that he looked upon the treasury of the
Lord as a bank of deposit, a bank that
would never fail, where property and inter
est were both safe, and that he never thought
himself the poorer, but rather the richer,
for giving.
Evidently he took God at His word; which
should not be accounted a very strange
• thing, though, alas, it is too rare. He be
lieved God when He said: “He that giveth
unto the poor shall not lack.” “He that hath
pity upon the poor lendeth unto the Lord ;
and that which he hath given will He pay him
again."
When will the great body of Christians
come to the same simplicity of faith? Must
it not be so, ere the Millenium dawns?—Ex
aminer and Chronicle.
Pkocbastination is fatal to all plans for
reformation. Whoever intends to repent
and seeks the Lord to-morrow, or next
week, is in the broad road, that leads to per
dition.
The man who is venial himself believes
that everybody has his price.
PUBLISHED BY J. W. BURKE & CO., FOR THE M. E. CHURCH, SOUTH.
MACON, GA., FRIDAf, AUGUST 26, 1870.
Justice and Mercy: Or, the Sin
ner’s Defence.
Lo! Justice with a brow severe.
With eyes that never shed a tear,
Upon Mount Sinai takes her stand,
With the stone tables in her hand.
As she descends, the lightnings flash.
And thunders roll and roar and crash:
Thick smoke and clouds are round her head,
And the Mount trembles at her tread.
The two-edged sword she sternly draws,
And points it to her broken laws ;
Then sounds her trumpet through the Mount,
To summon all to their account.
And can I bear her piercing eye
Fixed on my heart, without a sigh ;
Or see her lift her awful scale,
And yet not tremble and' grow pale ?
She calls for me, with voice severe,
I dare not, yet I must, appear;
Oh, whither can a sinner fly ?
Lord save me, save me, or I die.
Heaven opens, and 1 see above
Mercy fly down on wings of love;
Upon her face, sweet smiles aiise,
Though tear drops glisten in her eyes.
She comes, arrayed in robes of light,
Surrounded by a rainbow bright;
The lightning’s flash, the thunder’s roar,
As she descends, prevail no more.
She passes o’er the barren sand,
And lo! it blooms a fruitful land,
She lights upon the Mountain’s brow,
And flowers adorn its summit now.
Her placid face and beaming eye
Forbid my dark despondency;
While sweetly in my trembling ear,
She whispers, •‘Child, no longer fear.”
E’en the stern face of Justice smiled,
As Mercy spoke, in accents mild,
.“Stay, elder sister come with me,
We’ll try this cause at Calvary.”
Forth they proceed, I closely cling
Under the shade of Mercy’s wing,
They bear me to their Sovereign Lord,
And state my case for His award.
First, Justice with her charge begins,
And shows the reeord of my sins;
And then from God’s unchanging laws,
Sentence of condemnation draws.
I tremble—all the charge is true;
What can a guilty sinner do?
Yet, ere the Judge my fate decree,
Oh, Mercy wilt thou speak for me ?
She hastened to the Judge’s side,
She pleaded that for me lie died;
Fulfilled the law my sentence bore,
And J ustiee could demand no more.
Who could resist this wondrous.plea?
Justice now turned and smiled on me.
Her sword and terrors shall, from hence,
Become my safeguard and defence.
The holy sisters then embrace
And bear me to the Saviour’s face;
His glories ever more to view,
Aud praise His loye aud justice too.
From the Western Methodist.
The General Conference of 1870.
ON THE TRIAL OF LOCAL PREACHERS.
A great improvement iu ecclesiastical ju
risprudence was made by tlie General Con
ference of 1866. As an accused member
may be tried by a select committee, and not
occupy the whole “society” with the details
and determination of the case, so it was or
dered that an accused traveling preacher
should be tried before a select committee,
and not the whole Annual Conference. The
time and feeling (not to say scandal) saved
in this way, is important; while the jury
trial is so guarded, that justice is as likely
to be done by it, as by the larger and more
popular assembly. Appeals are also sent
before Committees, in the Annual und Gen
eral Conferences, since 1866.
Another step was to guard against un
reasonable and malicious prosecutions. For
merly, any member 'could be put upon liis
trial, even for an infamous offense, upon
the presentation of a complaint. And so
with a minister. A person of ordinary sen
sibility, though finally acquitted, suffers in
feeling, if not in character, upon formal ar
raignment. It is a mortification, if not dis
honor, to stand on the record as the ac
cused party, in connection with certain
charges and specifications. To this, how
ever, all were exposed, until 1866, when the
General Conference required a true hill to be
found by a committee of investigation, be
fore a member could be put on his trial for
such offenses. This protection against has
ty or malicious prosecution was extended to
traveling preachers also. An Annual Con
ference cannot send one of its body before a
jury for trial, on accusation of crime or
gross immorality, until a committee of three
elders, has investigated the case, aud decid
ed that there is cause for trial.
The Committee or jury trial is unnecessa
ry and inapplicable in the case of local
preachers; because the body to which they
ale amenable—tlie Quarterly Conference —
is comparatively small, often not exceeding
a dozen. But, for some cause unexplained,
the provision of uu investigating Commit
tee, was not made in their case. A local
preacher, until 1870, was liable to arraign
ment and trial, even for an infamous of
fense, upon the appearance against him of
any accuser. He might establish his inno
cence; but the trouble and mortification of
a formal trial, he was exposed to. The law
of 1870, as seen in the new Discipline, ex
tends the protection to local preachers,
that private members and traveling preach
ers enjoyed before. And this is right. No
local preacher can now’ be put on his trial
for crime or gross immorality, until a true
hill has been first found by a Committee ap
pointed to investigate the case. We need
these wholesome guards. Much harm and
hurt have come to the Church from the neg
lect of discipline ; and, on the other hand,
we have know r n the cause of Christ to suffer
from needless prosecutions, instigated by
weak-minded or hard-hearted persons.
The following is the new Rule, on this
subject:
“Qnes. What shall be done when a local
preacher is accused of immorality ?
“Ans. 1. When a local preacher is under
report of being guilty of some crime ex
pressly forbidden in the Word of God, the
preacher in charge shall appoint a commit
tee of three local preachers to investigate the
report, and if they judge a trial to be neces
sary, they shall appoint one or more of their
number to prepare a bill of charges and
specifications, and present it before the en
suing Quarterly Conference.
“2. The committee of investigation shall,
in every case, make a report to the Quarter
ly Conference; and if the Conference differ
in judgment, anew committee may be ap
pointed to inquire into the facts and to re
port.
“3. A local preacher who has been noti
fied by the Presiding Elder, or preacher in
charge, of a bill of chatges and specifica
tions thus found against him, shall not be
allowed to exercise the functions of his of
fice until the case has been presented to
and determined by the Quarterly Confer
ence.”
That quasi trial and formal Suspension
before a Committee, in the interval of Quar
terly Conferences, is done away with. There
is no need of it, as in the case of traveling
preachers, where the body having original
jin i.-.diction sits only once a year.
But, -while the rights of local preachers
have been secured, their amenability under
certain contingencies, has been more strict
ly defined, by the General Conference of
1870. An unacceptable traveling preacher,
though guilty of no outrageous conduct,
may be located, without his consent. The
Annual Conference which cannot use him,
may get rid of him. What, if he continues
idle and unacceptable and useless as a local
preacher ? Must the Quarterly Conferences
always endure him, because he has in his
pocket deacon’s parchments, or elder’s ?.
The Church honors the local ministry as
a class, and they are worthy of honor. Many
of them are her strong and willing work
men, and have contributed to her conquests,
and strength, and glory. And yet, it must
be admitted, that among our four thousand
seven hundred local preachers are some who
have the name only. They do not get
drunk, or commit any gross, outbreaking
sins, so that the administrator of Discip
line can lay an indictment against them;
but they don't preach; they do none of the
work of a preacher. Or may be, if they are
willing to preach, nobody is willing to hear
them, so unacceptable are they. Now what
is to be done with such ? The Quarterly
Confereences cannot conscientiously pass
their characters, when the annual examina
tion is made into their life, labors and use
fulness. It refuses to pass them. What
than ? The law provides that at the next
ensuing Quarterly Conference they may be
proceeded against, and if they do not give
satisfaction that they will amend or volunta
rily retire, the Quarterly Conference has
power to depose them from the ministry,
and their credentials must be surrendered.
The following is the specific regulation on
this subject, analagous to the proceeding
in the case of an unacceptable traveling
preacher:
“Ques. What is to be done when a local
elder or deacon is complained of as being so
unacceptable or inefficient as to be no longer
useful in his work, and the Quarterly Con
ference refuses to pass his character on that
ground?
“Ans. The Quarterly Conference next
succeeding shall proceed to investigate the
case, and if it appear that the complaint is
well founded, and he do not give the Con
ference satisfaction that he will amend or
voluntarily retire, the Conference may de
pose him from the ministry. He shall be at
liberty to defend himself before the Con
ference in person, or by his representative.
The President of the Quarterly Conference
shall have regular minutes of the investiga
flnfo taken, which, on being read and ap
pirved, shall be signed by himself and a
majority of the members of the Conference.
Nevertheless, in all the above-mentioned
cases of trial and conviction, an appeal to
the ensuing Annual Conference shall be al
lowed, if the condemned person signify his
intention to appeal at the time of his con
demnation,” etc.
Wholesome provision. And none will
welcome it more heartily than the class of
local preachers who, as members of the
General Conference, helped to enact it. For
the good fame and in tegrity of their or
der, they wish a law by which such drones
may be got rid of.
This law is not hasty in its action. The
Quarterly Conference does not take snap
judgment. From one session to another the
delinquent has warning, and may prepare his
apology or defense. He is, while his char
acter does not pass, under temporary arrest
of exercising his office; but not deprived of
his office, as yet. Nominal local preachers,
such as this reaches, have been a heavy
load for working local preachers to carry.
Nor was this law hastily conceived. In
1850 it was substantially presented to the
General Conference by Dr. B. M. Drake, of
Mississippi; and after being referred to
Committee was left over, with muoh else,
among the unfinished business. In 1854, it
again came up for consideration; and per
haps, at the next session. The following is
the paper presented in 1850:
"Ques. What shall be done when a local
elder or deacon is reported, or believed, to
have lost his grace or usefulness, and the
Quarterly Meeting Conference shall refuse
to pass his official character on that ground?
"Ans. The Quarterly Meeting Conference
shall proceed to investigate the complaint;
and if the complaint shall be sustained by
evidence, the elder or deacon shall be di
vested of his ministerial character. The
preacher in charge shall have exact minutes
of the investigation kept by the Secretary
of the Conference. The local elder or dea
con shall have the right of appeal to the
Annual Conference.”
The Church has been calling for some
such provision. The records of Annual
Conferences, in appeal cases, show this.
Quarterly Conferences, unwilling to take
measures to deprive certain ordained local
preachers of their church-membership, have
again and again moved to deprive them of
their credentials, under the conviction that
they had forfeited them—did not use them
—ought not to have them, and had no moral
u jfeo them. And their proceedings were
nWfVntly irregular, in attempting to ac
complish their aim. A mere licentiate may
be quietly set aside, by refusing to renew
his license, if the Quarterly Conference has
found that a mistake was made in making a
preacher of him. But this law is for those
who, by a greater mistake, were ordaihed;
or who, siuce their ordination, have lost that
character for zeal, labor and usefulness,
which once secured the suffrages of their
brethren. ***
P. S. —Our Northern Methodist breth
ren have a law in their book, on this sub
ject, introduced since 1844. Like us, they
have found it necessary to protect tho local
ministry and the Church from a class who
manage to steer clear of a criminal prosecu
tion on the one hand, and of acceptable
service on the other. We do not know when
their law was introduced, but it is found in
the present Discipline. It is not so guard
ed as ours, and may be abused. It admits
of snap judgment. It says of every local
elder, deacon or preacher—“if found unac
ceptable in his ministerial office, after duo
trial, the Quarterly Conference, if they judge
it proper, may deprive him of his ministerial
office.”
Tlie Fault of Fault-Finding.
It was a remark of Rochefoucauld that
“there is something in the misfortunes of
even our best friends that does not alto
gether displease us.” This judgment may
seem at first view at once harsh and unfound
ed. Bat when we come to weigh the matter
carefully, it will be found to contain a spice
of truth at least, and perhaps to show the
utterer of the apothegm to have been really
what people have long held him, a man of
shrewdness and sharp insight into character.
The remark will seem less harsh, when we
consider a disposition that prevails widely
among men, to censure nnd depreciate those
around them. No man indeed is faultless,
and it requires no microscopic inspection to
discover defects and blemishes in the most
npright characters. But the proneness of
people to point out defects, to dwell upon
and perhaps magnify them, while they
underrate, if they do not wholly ignore, what
is really excellent and praise-worthy, is too
common to have escaped the least acute ob
servation.
Even the man of most exemplary life and
character, and of highest social position—
the man who has won large means by the
practice of the most rigid virtues, and dis
burses them with the most liberal hand for
the happiness of his fellow-men and the
good of society, is not beyond the reach of
defamatory tongues. Individuals and cote
ries dissect him with bold hands and keen
knives. His wealth was obtained by fraud
or craft, liis charities are ostentatious, his
family display is inconsistent with humility,
there is no virtue in giving where giving is
so easy, his gifts are mean and trivial when
compared with his ample resources, he is
purse-proud and arrogant, covetons and sel
fish —in short, a flaw is discovered here and
an obliquity there, so that his very virtues
are made to appear as if they were defects
and disfigurations. The man’s real fault,
we suspect, lies, after all, in his having been
more prosperous than his neighbors, a fault
which many are slow to forgive, and is made
often the occasion for many a wanton de
traction.
If such a man as this cannot escape dis
paraging remark, what must the case be with
the ordinary men and women that one meets
in every society. Not to press this question,
however, we would point the moral of our
article by designating a class of censorious
people who are far too numerous for the
peace and well being of society. They are
people of the church —that is, members of
it —and are avowedly among its supporters
and warmest friends. But a habit of carp
ing, and fault-finding, and detracting from
the merits of others, has grown upon them
insensibly, until its indulgence seems to be
almost a necessary condition of life. They
are no respecter of persons. In the pastor,
as well as the humblest member of the flock,
they find more to censure than commend.
Though the former may preach well, labor
earnestly, and devote himself wholly to his
high calling, these sharp eyed censors are
sure to detect, and perhaps proclaim, many
deficiencies and failings. He is too doctrinal,
and not practical enough, or else too prac
tical, with not enough of doctrine to make
his discourse edifying and efficacious. He is
too pointed in his denunciations of the
world and its pleasures, and quite too lenient
with the Church, or else the sins of the
Church are too roughly handled, while those
of the world are suffered to go scot free. He
is too much in his study to the neglect of
those who wait on his ministry, or else he is
so much on the tramp among his people and
others, that his study is of necessity shunned,
so that when the people meet on the Sab
bath to be solidly fed, they are sent away
with only husks or chaff.
A similar line of depreciating remark is
pursued in respect to those who are fellow
members of the “household of faith.”—
Something in the character or conversation,
of their neighbors is perpetually awry or
out of tune, and is made the subject of un
charitable and even harsh criticism. Even
when the solemn service of the sanctuary
has closed, and they are repairing to their
homes, the class we are speaking of can dis
cuss the imperfections of preacher and hear
er, without appearing to have the least con
sciousness of any short-comings of their
own. To feel deeply the latter, indeed,
would make them mute as the former. “If
thou Lord, shouldst mark iniquity, O Lord,
who could stand?”
To know our own sins thoroughly is cer
tain to render us gentle in our judgment of
others, and severe only toward ourselves.
They who are forever seeking aud censuring
faults in others and acknowledging none in
themselves, show that they have not mas
tered, as yet, the rudiments of the true
Christian education. While among the
brightest tests a man can give of genuine
discipleship, is the practice from the love of
it, of such apostolical injunctions as these:
“Not to think of himself more highly than
he ought to think.” “In honor preferring
one another.” “Speak evil of no man.”—
Literior.
From tlie Presbyterian and Index.
Fashionable A mmoments—No. 111.
AN ESSAY READ BEFORE THE PRESBYTERY OF
TUSKALOOSA, AND PUBLISHED 11Y ORDER OF
PRESBYTERY.
Participation in fashionable amusements
exerts a baleful influence upon the Chris
tian’s spiritual interests. In the expressive
language of the apostle, they “war against
the soul. ” They are in direct antagonism to
fervid piety and growth in grace. They
must, from that very nature, interfere with
the Christian’s devotions and communion
with God. In proof of their injurious ef
fects upon the heart of the Christian, and
their manifest opposition to spiritual fervor
and culture, it is enough to ask, Under what
circumstances do we find Christian profes
sors most ready to engage in them ? Is it
when God’s Spirit is poured out, and their
hearts are all aglow with love and filled with
peace and joy in the Holy Ghost ? Is it
when they are most faitlifnl and zealous in
their Christian duties, most frequently in
their closets, and have sweetest fellowship
with the Father and with his Son, Jesus
Christ? No; just the reverse is true. It is
a fact too well known to be denied, that this
evil most abounds when professors of reli
gion are cold and lifeless, when the closet
aud prayer-meetings are neglected, when all
the interests dear to God and the Christian
languish, and the things that romain are
ready to die. And while the prevalence of
this evil evinces a low state of piety, parti
cipation in it serves to render the recreant
Christian yet more insensible, careless, and
worldly. Who that knows anything of the
tendency of these things, either from expe
rience or observation, could doubt the re
sult of a visit to the theatre or ball-room, or
any similar resort, by one who had been
brought under conviction of sin and led to
seek the way of salvation ? He would ns
certainly quench the Spirit of God as that
he visited these forbidden haunts. Fash
ionable amusements 1 Alas, they have slain
their tens of thousands of precious souls !
How many have they kept away from Christ!
How many have they drawn away from him j
How" much evil have they brought upon pro
fessors of religion ! How muoh damage and
grief have they inflicted upon the Church of
God !
Tho distinguished Dr. Adam Clarke gives
his experience as to one form of these amuse
ments. He says : I learned to dance. I
grew passionately fond of it. liu no case
kept improper company; nevertheless,
dancing was to me a perveiTmg influence, an
mimixed evil. It drowned tlie voice of a
well instructed conscience, and was the first
cause of impelling me to seek my happi
ness in this life. And 1 can testify that I
have known it to produce in others the same
evils that it produced in me. I consider it
therefore as a branch of that worldly edu
cation which leads from heaven to earth,
from things spiritual to things sensual, and
from God to Satan. Let them plead for it
who will, I know it to be evil, and that only.”
Aud is not this the common experience of all
God’s true children who have ventured to en
gage in any form of these fashionable amuse
ments ? Does not tho voice of conscience
invariably cry out against the inconsistency
and desecration, when the Christian first
gives way to the indulgence ? And is he
not painfully conscious of great distraction
and deadness in his devotional duties, as tho
consequence of it ?
As illustrative of the disastrous effects of
this same form of evil upon members of the
Church, we quote an incident related by a
godly minister of the Episcopal Church,
who still lives, we trust, to battle against
worldliness and ritualism: “More than
thirty-five years ago, I made a profession of
religion in connection with a young man of
the same age, who seemed to be hopefully
pious. We read, conversed, and prayed to
gether in private, and knelt together at the
altar. He was apparently sincere and much
affected. He ran well for a season; but in
less than a year, although still regular in his
attendance on the public means of grace, he
became cold and worldly. We roomed to
gether; and on seeing him busy at his dress
ing table, I asked him where he was going.
He said he was going to a dancing party. I
remonstrated. He replied in the usual style
about the innocencv of such amusements
and tho evil of so much over-strictness about
such small matters. He went to the dance;
and from that time lie rapidly failed in his
external consistency,—so that his last state
was worse than his first. His first step in
the dance appeared to be a primary symp
tom, as well as an accelerating cause, of his
apostacy.” This case clearly illustrates our
position, that indulgence in these popular
amusements at once indicates a low state of
piety in those profeasors of religion who en
gage in them, and tends to degrade them to
a still more lamentable spiritual condition.
And hence all who have their spiritual
good at heart should shun them as they
would a moral pestilence. There should be
no hesitation with them between the self
denial, or ridicule, or petty persecution, to
which abstinence might subject them, and
the fearful peril to which participation might
expose them.
But were the professor of religion not
convinced that indulgence in fashionable
amusements had this damaging effect upon
his spiritual interests, yet we argue that he
should abstain from them on the ground of
expediency —i. e., because they are esteemed
wrong by a very large proportion of God’s
true children; and by indulging in them, he
would wound their consciences, and might,
perchance, by the influence of his example,
lead others, less strong than himself, into
damaging, if not fatal harm.
The spirit of the Apostle Paul is the spirit
which every follower of the Lord Jesus
Christ should cultivate and exhibit. It was
the controlling spirit of his divine Master—
the spirit of self-sacrifice for the good of others.
He thus states the principle which should
govern us in all our conduct: “All things
are lawful for me, but all things are not ex
pedient. All things are lawful for me, but
all things edify not (». e., benefit and build
up others in the Christian life). Let no
man seek his own, but every man another’s
wealth (i. e., spiritual welfare). Whatsoever
is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no
questions for conscience’ sake. . . . But
if any man say unto you, This is offered in
sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that
showed it, and for conscience’ sake—con
science, I say, not thine own, but of the
other. . . . Whether therefore ye eat or
drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the
glory of God. Give none offence, neither to
the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the
Church of God : even as I pleaso all men in
all things, not seeking mine own profit, but
the profit of many, that they may be saved.”
Golden words, these ! A noble, Christ-like
spirit, this! Would God it animated every
Christian heart I It would save tho con
sciences of his people and the honor of his
name from many a grievous wound inflicted
upon them in the house of his professed
friends.
And by indulging in these fashionable
amusements, not only does the professor of
religion wound the consciences of many of
his brethren and cause them great sorrow of
heart, but he may lead others into the same
participation, to their eternal undoing. The
same apostle adverts to the duty of God’s
people to abstain from whatever might work
this result, on this wise ; “But meat com
mendeth us not to God ; for neither if we
eat are we the better, neither if we eat not
are we the worse. But take heod lest by
any means this liberty of yours become a
stumbling block to them that are weak. For if
any man see thee, which hast knowledge, sit
at meat in the idol’s temple, shall not the
conscience of him which is weak be embold
ened to eat those things which are offered to
idols; and through thy knowledge shall the
weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?
But when ye’so sin against the brethren,
and wound their weak conscience, ye sin
against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make
my brother to offend, (t. e., if my example
lead my brother into sin,) I will eat no flesh
while the world standetli, lest I make my
brother to offend.”
On this, ground, no man with the spirit of
the apostle and of his Master would engage
in any of the fashionable amusements now
so rife in the land, and freely participated
in, alas! by so many professors of religion ;
and that, too, with a full knowledge of the
sentiments of the Church on the subject,
and the damaging effect of their example, in
emboldening the younger and weaker to
viclato their consciences by participating in
the same.
(to BE CONTINUED.) •
Stingy Christians.
Is ther<j such a thing as a stingy Chris
tian? Can we not just as properly talk of
swearing Christians, thieving Christians?
Is there not just as much logic and Scripture
in one as in the other? Indeed, is not the
stingy Christian just a little meaner than
tliese others? Let us see. Ask that pro
fessor who got mad and swore, about his
sin. What does he say? O I know I did
wrong. I was greatly provoked, and I let
my temper get too high, and almost before
I knew it, 1 swore. lam very sorry for it.
I’ll try to be more watchful hereafter. Or
question that professor that got drunk the
other day. “Yes, I know I did very wrong,
and I’m ashamed of it. I ought not to have
touched the glass. It roused up my old ap
petite, I drank too much. I’ve asked God
to forgive me. I hope the Church will bear
with me once more. I’m resolved never to
bo guilty again.” Honor to tho man for his
honesty. We sympathize with him and will
pray for him. But here comes the stingy
professor. Now we’ll got a riddling for our
forbearance with the brother that swore, and
the one that yielded to temptation and got
drunk. He has hoard about thoso cases.
It’s the tlnrd or fourth time they have been
guilty of those sins. He declares that those
members ought to bo expelled at once.
Their professions of sorrow don’t amount to
anything, ho says. The Church is awfully
disgraced. He lias a special inspiration oil
half-hearted Christians and Church pnrg
ings. Now is your time. Try to measure
him by his own rule. He lias had but one
liberal impulse in a year, and that was when
he expected to die. Tell him about his
God-defrauding, heaven-insulting, heart
contracting, und soul-damning fault. The
man that was druuk owned his fault. You
saw his tears of sorrow. Does this stingy
brother own his? Not he. He feels awfully
insulted because you think him stingy. He
thinks he knows his own circumstances bet
ter than anybody else. He gives all he can
get. Yet everybody knows that his neigh
bors give five, ten, twenty times more accor
ding to their means for benevolent causes
than he. For years he has been a steward
over God's goods, and God has never do-/
rnanded his own without being grumbled at,
and jewed down to the lowest possible fig
ure, until everybody except this stingy man
was ashamed of it. Yet strange enough he
is great on honesty. Indeed he is so honest
ho must rob God' to pay his debts and pro
vide for his family. Ho has 1 Tim. v. 8
always at the end of his tongue. But he
don’t know much about the 2d chapter of
Malaclii. He is also a great lover of old
fashioned, Holy Ghost religion. And he
often breaks out into long Jeremiads over
the want of good old times, when preachers
worked for a living, and people were not
troubled by everlasting begging for preach
ers’ salaries and missionary money. Now,
alas! his prospect for big shouts are so often
annihilated by an.untimely collection an
nouncement. It’s the calls for money that
make havoc with his rejoicings. —Evangelical
Messenger.
“Outside Workers.”
“Is Mr. Hayes a Christian?” I asked a
friend.
“No; lie is an outside worker, like my
self.”
“Outside worker? What do you mean by
that?”
“Oh, Hayes and I have classes in the Sun
day-school, because some of the Christians
want to go home and get a warm dinner,
and they can do no better than take us for
teachers. Then we sing in the choir, and
sometimes, to help along, sing in the prayer
meeting. Wo give somutliing towards the
minister’s salary, etc., etc. I don’t know
how they could get along,” continued my
friend, half jokingly, “if it were not for a
few outside workers.”
“Outside of what?”
“Why, outside of the church.”
Why not come inside?”
“Oh, I’m not a Christian. I can’t do
that. I think I can do as much where I
am.”
“Do! that is not the first thing. It is be
what is right. Why not be a Christian; then
you can do from love?”
“Oil, I don’t know. I cannot yet. I
mean to some time. ”
“When?”
“You shake your head. Ah, my friend j
do not stay outside too long. Borne foolish
virgins tried that, and they never got inside
of the door. It was shut, and they had to
stay outside forever.
“Beware, lest you be left outside of
heaven. ” — Advance.
lloxv Saints may Help the Devil.
There was a young minister onco preach
ing very earnestly in a certain chapel, nnd
he had to walk somo four or five miles to
his home, along a country road, after service.
A young man, who had been deeply impress
ed under the sermon, requested the privi
lege of walking with the minister, with nn
earnest hope that he might get an opportu
nity of telling his feelings to him and ob
taining some word of guidance or comfort.
Instead of that tho young minister, all the
way along, told the most singular tales to
those who were with him, causing loud roars
of laughter. He stopped at a certain house,
and this young man with liim, and tho whole
evening was spent in frivolity and foolish
talking. Some years after, when the min
ister had grown old, he was sent for to the
bed-side of a dying man. He hastened
thither with a heart desirous to do good.
He was requested to sit down at tho bed
side, and the dying man, looking at him and
regarding him most closely, said to him :
“Do you remember preaching in such and
such a village, and on such an occasion?”
“I do,” said the minister. “I was one of
your hearers,” said the man, “andwasdeep
ly impressed by the sermon.” “Thank God
for that!” said the minister. “Stop!” said
the man, “don’t thank God until you have
heard the whole story; you will have reason
to alter your tone before I have done.” The
minister changed countenance, but he little
guessed what would be the full extent of
that man’s testimony. Said he: “Sir, do
you remember after you had finished that
earnest sermon, that I, with some others,
walked home with you? I was sincerely
desirous of being led in the right path that
night, but I heard yon speak in such a strain
of levity, and with so much coarseness, too,
that I went outside the house, while you
were sitting down to yonr evening meal; I
stamped my foot upon the ground; I said
that you were a liar ; that Christianity was a
falsehood ; that if you could pretend to be
so earnest in tho pulpit, and then come
down and talk like that, the whole thing
must be a sham; and I have been an infidel,"
said he, “a confirmed infidel, from that day to
this. But lam not an infidel at this mo
ment ; I know better. lam dying and
about to be damned, and at the bar of God
I will lay my damnation to your charge.
My blood is upon your head.” And with a
E. H. MYERS, D. D., EDITOR
WHOLE NUMBER 1815.
dreadful shriek, and ono demoniacal glanco
at tho trembling minister, he shut his eyes
and died.
O, ye who profess to love Christ, be ye
minister or layman, hath not Satan legions
enough of devils to drown men’s souls iu
perdition without employing you? Let us
be more careful of our conversation. Let
not our words destroy men’s souls. It is a
fearful thing to go to the bar of God with
tho blood of souls upon our skirts. “Let
our conversation be always with grace. ”
Christian at Work.
Holy Water and its Uses.
BY REV. W. H BID WELL.
Just within the entrance of all Papal
churches in Rome, and in all Papal
churches in all lands, are fonts of holy
water, so called. Members of the Church
of Borne, as they enter, dip a finger and
sprinkle their faces with it, making the sign
of the Cross, in the form of blessing them
selves. Holy Water is made by throwing a
salt into water, with certain forms of prayer,
by which it is believed to be made holy.
Various opinions are held in regard to tho
uses of holy water. Some regard it ns an
ancient custom which they do not protend
to explain. Others regard it as a type or an
emblem symbolizing holiness as becoming
the Christian. Others regard it as possess
ing some mysterious or miraculous charac
ter as a safeguard against all evil spirits. In
its various uses, in one case, holy water is
sprinkled on a man; in another, on a candle;
in another upon the nuns of a nunnery; in
another, upon the horses of a regiment of
dragoons. We should like to put Pio Nino's
Infallibility to the test on this mysterious
subject. But especially we should like to
see a full and clear explanation and commen
tary on a most extraordinary document
which is affixed over the vessels of holy
water in tho Church of S. Carlo Barromeo
in the Corso, at Rome. It reads as follows:
“Holy water possesses much usefulness
when Christians sprinkle themselves with it
with due reverence and devotion. The Holy
Church proposes it as a remedy and assistant
in many circumstances both spiritual and
corporeal, but especially in these following:
“ITS SPIRITUAL USEFULNESS.
“1. It drives away devils from places and
from persons.
“2. It affords great assistance against fears
and diabolical illusions.
“3. It cancels venal sins.
“4. It imparts strength to resist tempta
tions and occasions to sin.
“5. It drives away wicked thoughts.
“6. It preserves safely from the passing
snares of the devil; both internally and ex
ternally.
“7. It obtains the favor and presence of
the Holy Ghost, by which the soul is con
soled, rejoiced, and excited to devotion and
disposed to prayer.
“8. It prepares the human mind for a
better attendance on the divine mysteries,
nnd receiving piously and worthily the most
holy sacrament.
“ITS COKFOKEAn USEFULNESS.
“1. It is a remedy against barrenness in
women and in beasts.
“2. It is a preservation from sickness. i
“3. It heals the infirmities, both of the
mind and of the body.
“4. It purifies infected air and drives away
plague and contagion.”
Such is this remarkable document, author
ized by the Papal authorities of Rome, and
placed as prominently in the church as the
Ten Commandments in an American or Eng
lish church.
It is fair and fitting to aak if the Papacy
think or imagine it can impose such egre
gious follies on Protestant belief or intellect,
oh, when they have expelled the Bible from
our public sohools, inaugurate the doctrine
of holy water in its stead.— N. Y. Observer.
The Grotesque in Religious Le
gends.
To take an Irish illustration—in a legend
related by the Month, our Lord, walking
with St. Peter, asks for admittance into a
peasant’s hut for the night, where they were
most hospitably received. When leaving
the next morning, St. Peter, with that for
wardness of initiative, of which the gospels
give so many instances, urges the Master to
reward the peasant’s hospitality. “I think
not. It is better as it is,” was the reply.
“ ‘lt’s a shame for you,’ says St. Peter”—
the story is supposed to be told by an Irish
peasant—“you must do something for him.”
An admirable dramatic touch, showing how
well the character of St. Peter is understood,
aud how thoroughly it has been realized by
tho common people. Whereupon our Lord
gives way, and tells his entertainer to look
in a certain place, where he will find a piece
of money. The next year our Lord and St.
Peter return by the same spot, and find a
grand castle in the place of the hut. They
ask a night’s lodging, telling that they are
the same travelers who received it year ago;
but the powdered footman comes back with
a peremptory refusal, saying the place is no
hotel; and slams the door in their faces.
Whereupon, after a brief silence, says our
Lord to St. Peter, “ ‘I told you so.’ ” Both
the unconscious and the conscious elements
of humor in this story are very conspicuous.
The dictatorial urgency of St. Peter’s im
pulsiveness and the childlike triumph of the
retort with which the Divine Master impres
ses his superior wisdom on that blundering
apostle, are curious enough instances of the
colloquial familiarity with which religions
ideas are treated in popular legends of this
class. Grimm’s Tales contain plenty of
much more startling instances. For in
stance, there is a story of a tailor let into
heaven by the easy, good nature of St, Pe
ter, who, while the Lord and all his angels
are gone out walking, climbs on to the gol
den throne whence he can see all that hap
pens upon the earth, and discovers a wash
erwoman in the very act of stealing a veil
entrusted to her to wash; whereupon, in liis
righteousness and indignation, he flung tho
golden footstool at the wretched thief. On
the Lord’s return, he misses tho golden foot
stool, and interrogates St. Peter as to whom
he had admitted ;“wlien the tailor is accused
and compelled to copfess what he has done
—receiving the curiously quaint and yet
solemn reply: “O thou rogue! Were Ito
judge as thou judgest, what would have be
come of tliee long before this ? Long be
fore this I should have no seats, benches,
chairs, nay, not even any toasting-forks left
here; but should have thrown every one of
them down at sinners. Here shall no one
punish, but I alone, the Lord.”— London
Spectator.
Romish Intolerance. —M. Guibord, a man
of good character and standing, and a mem
ber of the Roman Catholic Church, dying,
was denied Christian burial in the Catholic
cemetery at Montreal, because he had been
a member of the Institut Canadien, which
had in its library certain books disapproved
by the Catholic bishop. The widow brought
suit in the Canadian courts to compel the
authorities of the cemetery to allow Chris
tian burial to her husband. The court has
decided in her favor; but an appeal will bo
taken.
An Ancient People. —The earliest inhab
itants of Babylonia, known in history, are
called Akkadi. This people not only under
stood the art of writing, but had nuineious
works written on tablets of baked clay, in
letters or characters composed of arrow
headed or wedge shaped marks, commonly
called cruciform characters. These works
were collected into libraries and kept in
various temples and palaces. The Assyrians
copied these works, and accompanied them
by interlinear translations to explain the
Akkadi language.
Lust is a captivity of the reason, and
enraging of the passions. It hinders buai
nessand distracts counsel. It sins against
the body, and weakens the soul.— Bishop
lay lor.
It is an excellent thing when men’s reli
gion makes them generous, free-hearted,
and open-handed, scorning to do a thing
that is paltry and sneaking.— Henry.
Worldly pleasures are no more ablo to
satisfy the soul than the light of a candle to
give day to the world.
One of the most important rules of the
science oi manners isaui almost absolute si
lence in regard to yovL'self.