THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Editors: T. Fanning, D. Lipscomb
Vol. VIII
Nashville, July 24, 1866
Number 30
CHURCH OF CHRIST AND WORLD-POWERS, NO. 12
To the Ruling Authorities of the State of Tennessee:
Whereas, A large number of the members of the Church of Jesus Christ feel a deep sense of the responsibility they are under to recognize the Bible in its teachings, as the only infallible guide and authoritative rule of action, and as being of superior authority to, and more binding upon the subjects of the Kingdom of Jesus Christ than any human rules or regulations, they would respectfully represent, first, that they recognize the necessity for the existence of civil government, so long as a considerable portion of the human family fails to submit to the Government of God.
Second, that while God demands of his servants that they should submit cheerfully and heartily to the government under which they may live, in all cases, except when compliance with the requirements of civil government involves the violation of God’s law, they are deeply impressed with the truth that when there is a conflict between the requirements of civil government and the law of God, the duty of the Christian is, upon peril of his eternal well-being, to obey God first, let the consequences be to him what they may.
Third, they are satisfied that the measure of their duty to civil government, as defined in the Bible, is to submit, not by personal participation in the affairs of government, to uphold or destroy, pull down or upbuild, but simply, as a duty they owe to God, to submit; and in that submission, modified only as above, to discharge the offices of good citizens in all the relations of life.
Fourth, they are firmly impressed with the truth that no man who regards the authority of God, or of His holy Apostles, as set forth in example and precept, for the instruction and guidance of his followers in the future ages of the world, can engage in, or in any way aid, foment or…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Countenance the strifes, animosities and bloody conflicts in which civil governments are frequently engaged, and in which they involve their subjects.
Fifth, The spirit of the Church of Christ and the spirit of civil government are different. The one is a spirit of force, as all history attests, that no civil government ever did exist except by force, violence, and the destruction of life. So there must maintain that existence by force.
We suppose the future, with but slight variations, will repeat the history of the past. But Christianity permits not its subjects to use force or violence, even in defense of its own existence; its guiding spirit is one of love, peace on earth and good will toward man.
Sixth, This difference in the spirit of the two institutions, the Government of God and the government of man, together with the diversity of the means essential to the prosperity and success, respectively, necessarily, at times, involves a conflict in their respective requirements.
We, therefore, in behalf of the churches of which we are members, respectfully petition of you that the requirements which, as we believe, conflict with our duties to God, may be remitted to those members of our churches who have been, and are now, striving to maintain a position of Christian separation from the world, its conflicts and strifes, as set forth in the preceding articles.
Seventh, We firmly believe that the oaths of allegiance, and the oaths in support and defense the governments of the world, now imposed as necessary to the transaction of the common affairs of life, are contrary to the spirit and teachings of the Savior and his inspired apostles, and involve, if strictly complied with, a violation of some of the plainest precepts of the Christian religion.
We therefore feel that in taking these oaths and obligations, and in performing those requirements that have an appearance of countenancing bloodshed and violence, we are violating the obligations we have taken to our Heavenly Master.
We implore the well-being of the church, dishonor God, and invoke ourselves eternal ruin. We, therefore, respectfully ask a release from the performance of these requirements, and others of a similar character, assuring you again, that we recognize it as a solemn duty we owe to God, to submit to the government under which we may live, in all its requirements.
Provided when that government requires of us something contrary to the letter and spirit of the Christian religion, as revealed in the Bible.
To His Excellency John A. Johnson, Governor of the State of Tennessee:
We, the undersigned, having been appointed a committee by an assembly of the churches of Jesus Christ, met at Leiper’s Fork, Williamson county, Tenn., to present to your Excellency their grievances, and in their and our behalf to petition of you a release from certain requirements made at their hands, would most respectfully represent that the mass of the members of the Churches of Jesus Christ, in the counties of Davidson, Williamson, Maury and Hickman, and many scattered through other…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
467
Counties of Middle Tennessee, believe that all military services, or connection with military service, is utterly incompatible with the spirit and requirements of the Christian religion. Believing this, they cannot comply with the requisition recently made of them in common with other residents of the State, for enrolling themselves for military service without a violation of their solemn conscientious convictions of duty to their Lord and Master, and a violation of their vows of fealty to Him. We, therefore, in behalf of these churches and members of churches, respectfully petition you, in the exercise of your authority, a relief from those requirements, that are repugnant to their religious faith, upon terms that you may consider just and right. We desire to express our earnest prayer for faith and political deliverance from Christian tyranny, and we earnestly request your counsel, that our country may speedily and lasting peace.
Committee
For a more complete exhibit of our faith and course in reference to this matter, we respectfully refer you to the two accompanying petitions marked A and B, one directed to the Federal, the other to the state authorities.
The following petitions have appeared in number 10, but were crowded out. They simply exhibit the views and positions occupied by some of the churches of Christ in the succeeding years of trial to their faith and integrity, that we must, for a time, have ceased. The first petition was presented soon after the occupation of the state of Tennessee by the Federal troops, the other upon the occasion of the call for enrolling citizens for military duty.
A number of Christians could not do this without violating their sense of duty to God, hence presented this as a reason for refusing to enlist. The reason was accepted as satisfactory by the authorities acting in such matters. The petitions referred to as marked “A” and “B,” were the two first presented to the powers claiming the right to control us, most of which were filed with the Governor, now President Johnson.
Next week, in that of something from ourselves, we will commence the publication of a series of articles upon this subject, prepared two years ago, North of the Ohio river. We expect for it a careful consideration, as exhibiting the concerns of faith produced in different individuals in different countries and situations by the war.
Brother Dan
Brother Dan, in a private note says, I closed a meeting yesterday, July 13th, in Martin, Illinois, with twenty-eight additions by baptism. The cause is unusual in this region.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
BAPTISTS AND REMISSION OF SINS
We gave in number twenty-eight of the Gospel Advocate, a number of extracts from Baptist historians, showing conclusively that for fifteen hundred years the people who practiced the immersion of penitent believers, as Scriptural baptism, the people from and through whom the Baptists of the present day claim descent, all taught that baptism was the ordinance or appointment in which God promised forgiveness of sin to the penitent believer. The Baptists of the present day claim direct descent from these people and succession of offices, yet refuse to associate with the people who, at this day, believe and teach the same thing. They make the teaching of these things that their forefathers, all the way back to the Apostles taught, the most serious objection in the way of their fundamental association.
We, in the following extracts from Neander’s History of the Church of Christ for the first three centuries, show conclusively that the faith of the united and uncorrupted church, as it came from God, believed and taught precisely the same thing in reference to baptism and remission of sins that is taught by the Disciples of Christ at the present day. We also give an extract from a Baptist reply to Methodism about one hundred years ago, in which he sets forth in opposition to Methodists, the faith of those practicing believers burial with the Lord.
We find from this that even as late as one hundred years ago, the faith of Baptists on this subject was identical with that of the disciples of the present day. The truth is, the Baptists, after protesting against the idea, were carried away by the successful current of Methodism, and adopted from Methodists the idea of direct spiritual operation, independent of the word, in conversion, and with it the idea of forgiveness without the overt act of submission together with the machinery and excitements of the mourner’s bench. They opposed the admission of these ideas and practices, denounced Methodists on account of them, yet gave way to the popular excitement, and incorporated these Methodistic ideas and practices into the ancient usages of the Church of Christ. The introduction of these unbaptistic and unchristian ideas and practices occasioned the present division between Baptists and Disciples. We ask the candid consideration of them by both, and challenge any Baptist in the land to successfully controvert these statements.
“Thus Baptism was to be the sign of a right entrance into communion with the Redeemer and with the church, the first appropriation of those advantages which Christ has bestowed on man, namely, the forgiveness of sins and the inward union of life which proceeds from it, as well as of the participation in a sanctifying divine spirit of life.” — Neander, Page 173.
The view then taken of baptism was this: “It was supposed that the person to be baptized was departing out of the kingdom of evil, of darkness, and of Satan, whom he had hitherto served, as a heathen, when de-
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
voted to his beliefs, and that he was now entering into the Kingdom of God.” [Ibid, page 193.]
“In the second century was the notion of a deliverance from the power of the evil spirit, in a religious point of view, of a departure from out of the kingdom of wickedness, and of a participation, through the new birth, in a divine life, which should be victorious over the evil principle. This notion, we acknowledge, suits the original and essentially Christian idea of the earliest times; but then, the whole act of baptism was to be a sensible representation of this idea, and therefore, there was no necessity to bring forward anything individual and detached, to denote and effect that which was denoted and represented as effective for the believer by the whole act of baptism.” [Ibid, page 196.]
- Baptism was originally administered by immersion, and many of the allusions of Saint Paul allude to this form of its administration; the immersion is a symbol of death, of being buried with Christ, the coming forth from the water is a symbol of resurrection with Christ, and both taken together represent the actual birth, the death of the old man, and resurrection to a new life.” [Ibid, page 197.]
Page 201
At this, as far as baptism is concerned, the predominant idea with most, or all of them was this: the idea of spiritual and sensuous communion with the whole Christ, for the salvation of the whole spiritual and sensuous nature of man. As out of the dry wheat, says Irenaeus, neither one mass of tough, nor one mass of bread could be made without moisture, so neither could we all become one Christ without the water which is from Heaven. And as the dry earth brings forth no fruit if it receives unmoistened, so neither could we, who are at that dry wood, bring forth the root of life without the rain, which freshly descends upon us from Heaven.
Teaching
“If the soul comes to Him, and is born again by regeneration from the water and the power from above, there shall perfect, after the manner of the old covenant, be removed, her former light.” Again he says, “Faith receives the purgation of sins in baptism, where bright faith is present, that faith is the way of salvation.”
Page 213
Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, says: “Since the forgiveness of sins has once been bestowed in baptism, so also by the performance of good, which is like the renovation of baptism, man obtains for himself the Divine forgiveness anew.”
Here the testimony is clear and incontrovertible that, in the first three centuries after the establishment of Christianity, the idea was universal in the church that, “Forgiveness of sins was bestowed in the baptism of the believing penitent.”
Read also, the following, and tell us conditionally, you Baptists, who refuse fraternal association with disciples, who have followed strange…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 170
Introduction
We propose not only to show that we, as a people, hold to the Scriptural teaching and the faithful practice of the ancient and true Church of God on the subject of forgiveness of sins, but in every point of difference between Baptists and Baptists, that we hold to ancient and long established faith of the church, while they have departed from it. We will do this kindly, and we trust, in a Christian and fraternal spirit. Should any of our Baptist brethren think we do them injustice in these matters, we will cheerfully accord them space for a response made in a proper spirit. But first, let us consider the following:
Extracts from a serious reply to the Rev. John Wesley, by Gilbert Boyne, a Baptist.
“Upon the whole, I may safely, and without error, conclude that, if a man pretends to what he will, it is certain he can never be led by the Spirit of God who is not led by the Word of God; for the Word and Spirit are one, and agree in one; they speak the same thing. Whosoever, therefore, opposes and contradicts the Scriptures, opposes and contradicts the Spirit—the Spirit doth not say one thing and mean another; he cannot be guilty of self-contradiction; therefore, whosoever are led by the Scriptures, are led by the Spirit; for the Scriptures are the Divine breath of the Spirit of God. And whatsoever secret whispers any one may pretend to have as an oracle, if those whispers contain anything in them which is contrary to the plain, spoken words of the Scriptures, they are not the whispers of God’s Spirit, but of the devil.
Every man, therefore, ought to be very careful how he entertains a whispering spirit.”
The Necessity of Repentance and Baptism
“It is necessary to penitent believers to entitle them to the promise of forgiveness of sins, which is freely given to all such, through the redemption which they have in Christ, through his precious blood, according to the riches of God’s grace.” (Eph. 1:7). Accordingly, St. Peter says to his fellow-countrymen at Jerusalem, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins.” (Acts ii: 38).
It ought to be observed that remission of sins is not promised to repentance only, but to repentance and baptism. The Apostle seems to make baptism as necessary as repentance to entitle them to the promise—not to either of them singly and separately, but to both conjunctly. Therefore, it appears plain that baptism is to be an inseparable companion with repentance, as faith is to be with them both, in order to receive the promise.
If any man will be so valiant as to cast out baptism into the above text, and declare remission of sins to repentance only, I may, by the same authority he can produce, cast out repentance, and declare remission of sins to baptism only. But I will only cite the case of Paul, which seems plainly to confirm the necessity of baptism to entitle penitent believers to the promise of forgiveness of sins. (Acts)
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
471
XXII: 16
Amias undoubtedly understood the necessity of baptism to answer its designed end, or he would not have expressed himself in such terms. Now suppose the three thousand mentioned in Acts 2: 41, and Paul in the above text, had objected against and refused to have been baptized, would they, think you, have been received as members of the Church of Christ? Would the Apostles and the rest of the brethren, the church, have admitted them into fellowship with them? Or would they, without such admission and baptism, have received remission of their sins? If not, then what I have said of the necessity of baptism under this head is just and right. Therefore, if it was so in the Apostles’ time, it must be the same, the very same in our time; and I appeal to you, sir, and every serious knowing Christian, for a decision on this point.
Fourthly
Baptism is also previously necessary not only to entitle penitent believers to the promise of forgiveness of sins, but also to the promise or teaching of the Holy Ghost. … As above detailed. Nor do we certainly know of any one person besides Cornelius and his friends, that received the Holy Ghost before he was baptized. As to the wild enthusiastic notions of some about their having received the Holy Ghost, I am sure no wise and judicious Christian would pay any regard to them.
“Why may we not this day expect to receive remission of sins and every spiritual blessing in the same way, or in using the same means as they were wont to do in the days of the Apostles? Why not? Do you know of any man who lived in the Apostles’ days who received remission of sins, etc., before he believed, repented and was baptized? Or can you show me any promise that God has made that such should be in any age of the world? If not, what reason have you to think it so now? Here is a cure that you are not likely to find enthusiastic brethren; this was the language of a Baptist less than one hundred years ago.
D. L.
THE HAND OF FELLOWSHIP
A sister from Maury county writes to know if there is any authority for giving the right hand of fellowship when we receive members into the congregation of Christ. We answer, when it is considered a means of entering into the congregation, there is no authority for it. The right hand of fellowship, we believe, is spoken of but once in the New Testament, Gal. 2: 9. It was given to Paul and Barnabas when leaving Jerusalem to resume their mission among the Gentiles. It was given not as a reception into the church at Jerusalem, but on their separation from it, probably never to meet with it again. It was simply an affectionate expression of their approval of the work in which they were engaged, and a pledge of their prayers and cooperation in that work. It seems to me entirely legitimate to extend the hand of Christian fellowship, granted…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 472
Introduction
Sympathy to a brother in commencing any work or course of service to the Lord that meets our approbation, but it never should be regarded as an act that puts us into the fellowship of any church or congregation.
Question of Membership
What then puts an individual into the Church of Christ, or into connection with a congregation of Disciples? This is a question that we would do well to consider.
Baptism and Membership
Baptism puts us into the body of Christ. How it is possible for us to be in the body and not connected with any part of that body is certainly difficult to conceive. When we are baptized into Christ, we, by that act, are made members of the body of Christ where we are baptized.
Changing Connections
How does an individual change his connection from one body to another? We generally say by a letter of dismissal. We presume it will be about as difficult to find such authority for this, as for the admission, by hand, of fellowship. Letters of commendation, it seems from 2 Cor. 3:1, were given brethren traveling among strangers; but we have no evidence they were given to enable them to connect themselves with other congregations.
Guidance and Direction
To our minds, when an individual is baptized into Christ, he is under the guidance and direction of the congregation with which he obeys; or the one to which he is most conveniently situated. The acts of obedience and worship that bring a person into Christ’s body, bring him into it at the place at which these acts are performed.
Identification with the Congregation
The act of worshipping with an assembly of Christians identifies him with that body. A man, by joining a congregation in worship, says to that congregation: “I am one of you, so long as I remain in your vicinity, make your prayers for and watch-care over me, and be for me a proper subject for the admonition, exhortation, reproof, and discipline of that congregation.”
Observations on Worship
We have, once or twice in our life, seen individuals worship for months and years with a congregation, commit some act demanding reproof or dismissal, turn coolly to a congregation and tell it that it has no control over him because he has never “put in his letter,” or received the hand of fellowship. Such a course always carries to our mind the conviction of great ignorance and wickedness.
Responsibility of Worshippers
The one that worships with a congregation makes himself one of them, and is subject to all their watch-care and oversight. If he remains but one week in their community and commits some act that requires that he should be dealt with, the congregation in the vicinity is perfectly competent to care for the discipline.
Encouragement for New Converts
But it is appropriate and becoming for a congregation to give the new convert the hand of fellowship, congratulation, and encouragement in the new and holy life-work he is commencing. Not only is it proper to do so at the beginning of our Christian career, but it is on every Lord’s day, when the brethren meet together, that they would greet each other just before dismissal, with the cordial grasp of brotherly affection; the influence would be most happy.
Conclusion
They would know one another better, feel more interest one for another, and their zeal would grow. We are too chary of expressions and tokens.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
473
DISPENSING CHRISTIAN FELLOWSHIP
We have received contributions from one church at least, for needy preachers, accompanied by the suggestion that a part of it should be applied to the relief of a brother within reach of that congregation. Now it is eminently proper that that congregation should aid that brother, but there is no sense in sending that aid to the Gospel Advocate. The Gospel Advocate, nor either of its editors, has proposed to become disbursing agents for any church. We being in constant communication with the brethren South, simply proposed to forward the contributions of those not favorably situated for doing so themselves, to those in need.
There are brethren in Middle Tennessee in need, and the churches should supply their wants, but do not send the means for so doing to us. We have made no effort to post ourselves in reference to the brethren in Middle Tennessee, and are as little competent to judge of their necessities as any one that could be found. We have confidence the churches will attend to the wants of those in necessity in their midst. Except in a few well-known instances we have not ourselves applied what we have sent South. Our object has been to put the members, elders of the congregations in the different desolated sections South, best suited to distribute to the needy, and we have sent to them. So that it goes as true fellowship should go, as the contribution of the Churches of Christ, to the Churches of Christ in need.
Our instruction has been to remember first the wants of the preacher, so as to enable him to preach as much as possible; secondly, the impoverished widow, orphan and poor of the church, and lastly, the suffering of the world. But in all cases it must be given as the offering of Christian fellowship to the churches South for the relief of their poor widows and orphans, and those of their vicinity.
We have the fullest assurance and confidence that every dollar will be faithfully and worthily distributed, and we would earnestly urge Christians to increase activity in contributing to the relief of the poor. It is the true, holy, Godlike work of the church. This is the work for which the church was established, and if it fails to do the work for which it was established, it might as well dissolve its organization and cease to be.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
church must be educated to the true appreciation of its proper work, and the solemn obligation that rests upon it to perform that work, or it can never enjoy the blessings of God. Jesus Christ personified Himself in His poor brethren. He stands today personified in the gaunt and hollow face, sunken eye, and half-clad emaciated form of widowed mothers and of hungry, starving children in the South. If Christians fail to make their wants known, no matter whether we or they believe in societies or not, and no matter whether their sympathies were Northern or Southern, the stern truth will one day confront them. “Inasmuch as you did it not to one of the least of these, you did it not to me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal.”
D. L.
LETTER FROM OLD VIRGINIA
Locust County, Va., July 10th, 1866.
Brethren Fanning & Lipscomb: Through the kindness of some brother the Gospel Advocate has been sent me regularly. I am delighted with its Christian tone and spirit, its fearless and able advocacy of the truth, and its earnest exhortations to greater attainments in the divine life. Very many, I fear, are content with a mere nominal religion, while “the choice spirits are few.” O, for purer hearts, for holier lives, for a closer walk with God.
Your essays and the contributions of some of your correspondents are supplying a great need among our brethren. While we should not preach less boldly and frequently the Gospel of Christ, we should oftener impress upon the hearts of the Lord’s people the great importance of “observing all things whatsoever” Christ has commanded His Apostles. We read of the first converts, that “they continued steadfastly in the Apostles’ doctrine, and in fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.” Thus they formed beautiful Christian characters and developed lives, adorned with the excellences of the religion of Jesus.
I have been reading, with very much interest and pleasure, your series of articles on the “Church of Christ and World-Powers.” I am acting on the principles for which you contend, but must confess myself as yet unsatisfied, or rather not fully convinced. It is to be hoped that the question will be thoroughly discussed by those competent to the task. One or two difficulties present themselves to my mind, but I wait until you have completed your series on the subject, before submitting these objections, lest I anticipate you. When Zwingli began in Switzerland, the Reformation of the sixteenth century, “many magistrates were gained over. The council published a decree ordering the priests and monks to preach nothing in their sermons that they had not drawn from the sacred fountains of the Old and New Testament.” It was in 1520 that the civil authority thus interfered, for the first time, in the work of the Reformation, acting as a Christian magistrate (in the opinion of some) since it is the…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
475
The primary duty of the magistrate is to defend the word of God, and to protect the dearest interests of the citizens—upholding the church of its liberty, (in the opinion of others) subjecting it to the secular power, and giving the signal of that long train of evils which the union of church and state has since encountered. We will not here decide on this great controversy, &c. D’Aubigne’s History Reformation, vol. 2, page 337. In vol. 4, page 32, the great historian continues, “As we said in another place, we will not decide on this great controversy of church and State. But there are certain ideas which can never be forgotten. God is the principle from which every being commences, and who ought to govern the whole world, societies as well as individuals, the State not less than the church. God has to do with all governments and governances with God. The great truths of which the church is the depository are given from above to excite the influence on the whole nation—on Him who is seated on the throne, as well as on the penitent in his cell, and it is not only as an individual that the prince must be partaker of this heavenly light; it is also that he may receive a Divine wisdom as governor of his people. God must be in the State. To place nations, governments, social and political life on one side, and His word and His church on the other, as if there were a great gulf between them, and that these two ought never to meet, would be at once high treason against man and against God.”
The above, I presume, you do not disagree.
I sent some encouraging items of news from Virginia. Our untiring, indefatigable and devoted evangelist, Bro. G. W. Albell, reports 15 additions to the church as the result of his labors in May and June. From Northwestern Virginia, Bro. null reports some 125 accessions. Some of our churches which were prostrated by the war, have revived. For four years some meeting houses were closed. Now large and attentive audiences indicate the return of better days, and give promise of success and triumph for the Gospel.
I shall report you, from time to time, any religious news which may prove interesting and encouraging.
Yours fraternally,
L. A. CUTTER.
MAPLETON, Stark county, Ohio, July 10th, 1861.
Bro. Eli Regal, of Michigan, closed a series of meetings at this place June 26th, and resulted in seventeen additions, one from the Methodist, one from the Baptist. Sixteen individuals—one old lady intervened, has passed her three score and ten years. We had a lovely and happy meeting. To God be all the praise.
Your sister in the Lord,
W. C. L.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
RESPONSE TO DR. BERNARD—CONTRIBUTION
It has been clearly developed to my mind that when our brethren begin to defend a human institution, they are as intolerant as the defenders of other human institutions of a religious nature. When they adopt an untenable position, they act precisely like other religious organizations which adopt untenable grounds. They become afraid to have those positions examined. The Gospel Advocate only proposed that others might discuss those subjects, if done in a Christian manner. For maintaining this old sacred principle of our brotherhood and of true Christianity, it must be ostracised. Just as the sects opposed the discussion of their positions, and ostracised every man and every paper that tolerated the investigation of these principles. The society men were just as ready to crush the Review for tolerating this investigation, were they not afraid of the attempt, as they are the Advocate. It has the mark of the brotherhood—has a prestige and business influence that they are afraid of. The Gospel Advocate they knew was weak, but just commencing life, under difficulties, in the South, after four years of desolation and destruction of property, its friends poor and disheartened. They thought it could not exist without their aid; it was not their mercy. So after the example of their political friends, while they must tolerate some things in the older, established papers that did not suit them, this one just struggling for life, must take their methods, swear by their tests, or be cut off. The intolerance, the bitterness, the persecution, the ostracism, the refusal to cooperate in this and in all other cases, came from those who were after the flesh, who supported the human expedient, versus the Divine appointment. Romanism ostracised, persecuted and disfellowshipped those who opposed her assumptions and human expedients. The Presbyterians and Baptists did the same to our fathers—the society men of today do the same thing to those who simply protest that God’s institutions are sufficient without human amendment for the end for which God instituted them.
As a sample of the style in which they are denounced, we quote from C. L. Laos, June number of the Harbinger, “Those few who have been of late persistently and noisily denouncing missionary associations, have, by the unsanctified bitterness and rudeness of their attacks, given full evidence of the causes of their opposition, a lack of knowledge of enlightened piety and a true spiritual culture. To attempt to teach such men, is as well nigh useless, as it is almost hopeless.”
We suppose this is sanctified bitterness—it is at least pretentious. This is said in an effort to ridicule the position, numbers—and characters of those advocating the sufficiency of God’s appointments for the conversion of the world, for this is the only point at issue between the non-society men and the society men. Yet in this very number of the Harbinger are notices and reports from the earnest, thoughtful men of the day who are striving for the unity of God’s people. Both of which, con-
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 477
Condemn in principle, the operation of such societies, as fully and as clearly as ever did one of those who are hopeless of being taught. We extract the following from the report published of the “Christian Union Association.” Some of the positions gained by three years’ experience, seeking after Christian union, are enumerated. The first of these is as follows:
“The growing evil of emptying the church of its vitality, in the multiplication of societies, has been pointed out, and slowly men are coming to see the church to be, when united, a moral cosmos, wherein are found all the forces necessary to evangelize the world, to edify the saints, and control the State.” Again is published in this same number of the Advocate, the address of Dr. Armitage, of New York, to which reference has already been made in our pages. “I take it then, that the only way in which we Christians can be united is to agree that we will mutually obey whatever is positively enjoined in the New Testament, and insist upon nothing beyond that. Let each man appeal to the same rule, and he will need to ask for no concession from his brethren. Opinion will then give place to Christian faith, confidence, and deference to divine authority. How common it is for Christians to retain their distinct peculiarities, because they are not positively forbidden in the New Testament. This is a dangerous principle; it is one of the rocks on which Christian sects split. The things that are specially required are the things that are to be done, and all the things that are not specially forbidden. Luther fell into this trap. He argued from the principle, ‘Where has Christ commanded us to break the host?’ Where has he forbidden it? Luther concluded that it must be done. Our legitimate springs largely from this false position. If we could only ask that each other’s tastes and preferences would yield to one’s word, we would soon begin to respect each other’s views, and to grow into real unity.”
Professor Long thinks of Dr. Armitage’s words, yet it is strange that the mind should be so blind to the implications of principles as well as to the necessity of union held by the master spirit of the Baptists of the present day, and by this body or earnest Pseudo-Baptists, are as vital to the existence of missionary societies as any principle can be. The one sees that the multiplication of societies in the church is to rob the work God has delegated to the church, emptying the church of its vitality; and God lines the church the forces necessary to evangelize the world and edify the saints. The other sees that doing or requiring things to be done that are not specifically required or obtained in the Scriptures, because they are not forbidden. The fruitful source of evil is division. Now we venture that proof, Luther or any other defender of the institutions, gives a better defense for these societies than Luther gives for the deviation of the host. They are not specially, by name, forbidden in the Scriptures.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
tut·es, therefore we must sustain them. Let Prof. Loos and all other society men, in language that he thanks Dr. Armitage, “appeal to the Bible only, and he will not ask any concessions from his brethren. Opinion will give place to Christian faith, conscience, and preference, and experience will determine authority.” He approves this language in Dr. A., when applied to Baptist and other human organizations and expedients, but when his brethren apply the same principle to his societies, his experiences, the applications “unsubstantiated bitterness.”
Commentary on the Advocate
Since writing the above, we have seen a very illuminating source of the Advocate, from the pen of Elder Elly, which is but a continuation of what we have written. Elder Elly writes to the Review from Hartsville, Tenn. He says, among other things that might be criticized, that the Advocate is crying out against missionary societies, but shows us no better way. Now, why write to the Review that the Advocate is wrong, when every reader of the two journals knows that two articles against missionary doctrines have appeared in the Review where one has in the Advocate. Perhaps, as we suggested before, Elder Elly has been misled from the political. The Advocate is weak, the Review is strong, we must tolerate the Review. The Advocate, if it dare let out its expedients be criticized in its pages, we will crush. The very fact that the adoption of such expedients and societies have such an influence for evil upon the minds of men, like Geo., Elly, that causes them to disavow every principle for the defense of which they have labored, is one of the strongest arguments to me, of the evil of those societies.
We furthermore state that if it had not been for the efforts of Elder Elly and his associate society men in interesting the circulation, in Kentucky, of the only paper of our brotherhood that has the interest enough for the impoverished South to make an appeal in its behalf, we confidently believe that the wants of every evangelist south would have been supplied, and every one of them been able to be actively at work in proclaiming the gospel to sinners. But the spirit of all partisan organizations has prevailed with them, if you will not support our party expedients, your preachers may starve and your sinners go to hell, we will not cooperate with you to save them.
So, so far from sending the Gospel to the poor, we hold ourselves responsible to prove that these politics have been the chief obstacle in the way of its being preached in the South. And so far as showing a better way is concerned, we and others have proposed to meet the necessities of these societies, and commit their scriptural foundation with a view to obtaining about unity and harmony of action, and to stop the dissension and strife that is going on in reference to the societies. We do not intend to take up the pages of the Advocate with discussions of these matters, but we reiterated what we promised in a private note to Elder.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
479
Elly. We are willing to meet any reputable advocate of these societies that he may desire, to investigate their claims, and propose to show a better way, a more efficient way, a way that will develop the energies, arouse the spirit, and excite the higher devotion of the church. We will show a divine and perfect plan for the conversion of the world and the edification of the saints. Will Elder Elly give us the opportunity? He complains that we do not show a better plan. Will he, as president of his association, give us the opening? And we promise, from the book, to do this, or we will join his society, if we can raise money enough to pay our way into it. Now we know that when Methodist expedients are in question, Bro. Elly is greatly in favor of discussion—investigating their Scriptural basis. Is he as willing when his own expedients are called in question? Will he open the way for the full and free investigation of this question at Lexington at the next meeting of the society? We shall see, and I believe we shall see that when our brethren adopt human organizations and human expedients to do the work of God’s Church and God’s appointments, they are just as much opposed to open and free investigation as Methodists, or Baptists, or Presbyterians. Our expedients, our institutions, our fidelity to God’s appointments must be brought to the test of God’s word as well as theirs. Ours are no more sacred in God’s sight than theirs. That we may all learn to walk by the same rule, and mind the same things, through Christ our Lord, is my earnest prayer.
D. L.
SPALDING COUNTY, Ga., July 29th, 1866.
Dear Brother Lincoln:
Permit me to say to you that Brother Fears and myself, with the aid of Brother N. W. Smith, distributed all of the provisions and clothing sent to us to the best advantage we could, among the needy brethren and sisters, for which let me tender you and the brethren of Tennessee and Kentucky my sincere thanks, in the name of the brethren and sisters who have received those gifts with so much thankfulness and joy.
Your brother in the Lord,
Hiram Travis.
There are two things for Christians to do in this world; to receive from God, and to give out to their fellows. One cannot be done without the other. Man’s province is simply to open his heart to the teachings of God, and in his life, character, and words give out those teachings, pure and unpolluted, to his fellowman. His heart must be kept so simple and pure that the teachings of God passing through it will not be marred or discolored.
D. L.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
HARTSVILLE, July 12th, 1866.
Brothers Fanning & Lipscomb:
I see in the Advocate, No. 28, of July 10th, under the Progress Toward Union, the Church of Christ at Augusta, Ga., being without a public servant or minister, has obtained the service of an old preacher from our Baptist brethren. With some little qualification you seem to approve it.
Question: Union upon what? The mourning bench system—total hereditary depravity—experience of their feelings over and superior to the Word of the Lord. Does the brother preacher at Augusta exhort the brethren, that they are saved, once in grace, always in grace, or does he say to them as one of old, and to your faith knowledge, temperance, brotherly kindness, and to work out their salvation with fear and trembling.
Truly yours,
H. AVERITT.
We take it for granted that the brethren in Augusta, Ga., understand the Scriptures. If they do, should our Baptist preacher exhort and teach the things above suggested, we think some Aquila and Priscilla would soon teach him how to teach the way of the Lord more perfectly. I think the church at Hartsville would not refuse to let a Baptist preacher preach for them. If we should hear of one preaching in their house for a time, we should by no means feel the brethren. We understand that the preacher at Augusta, discovered, years ago, a number of the points in question.
Moreover he has gone to labor with a Christian, not a Baptist church. He has, in doing this, identified himself with a people marching only the Bible. We know association, the wearing down of prejudice, and this truth has nothing to fear, if she is true to herself.
D. L.
MURFREESBORO, July 7th, 1866.
Brethren: Bro. E. G. Sewell and myself held a series of meetings during the days, at a school-house on Stewart’s creek, in this county, closing last Wednesday. We had a very interesting meeting—had the pleasure of immersing nine persons. Several others seemed much interested, but could not be induced to obey the Savior. We regretted to leave several elderly men, exposed to death without the Christian hope, who seemed to be much interested in the progress of the Gospel, and rejoiced to see their children and neighbors obeying the Savior. I hope that they may yet summon sufficient moral courage to do what I still think it their duty to do. There is a fair prospect of a meeting house being built there, and a congregation growing up in that community. The Lord bless and prosper them.
Fraternally,
W. H. GOODLOE.