THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
T. FANNING AND W. LIPSCOMB, Editors
VOL. IV.
NASHVILLE, FEBRUARY, 1858.
NO. 2.
IS THERE NO OTHER WAY?
BY T. W. RRENTS.
Dear Brother;—Your kind favor of the 1st ult. was duly received. I avail myself the first leisure moment to answer it.
Your difficulty seems to be as follows, viz: “If we are right, others are wrong. If God has only one plan of salvation and we have that, I (you) want to know what will become of all others. If baptism is for the remission of sins, it is that positively, and he that is not baptized has no remission, and as sin cannot enter into Heaven, what becomes of him? Does not faith appear to be the main condition of salvation and baptism a minor precept?”
Before entering upon an examination of the real merits of your difficulty, let us transpose your language and view it from another standpoint, viz: If others are right, we are wrong. If God has only one plan of salvation and the denominations have this plan, what will become of us?
Now, my dear brother, as sympathy is the substratum of your difficulty, and as charity begins at home, you will please, out of the abundance of your sympathy, provide a way for your own delivery. With the same propriety the antediluvians might have reasoned with Noah. If none were saved but those who entered into the ark, what will the end of them be that will not enter into Christ? When the Lord sent fiery serpents among the people and they bit them and much people of Israel died, and the Lord said unto Moses, make thee…
#
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
“things and bring all things to your remembrance.” (John xiv, 16.)
Yet you are certainly mistaken here, for I know that faith is the main condition of salvation, and this baptism of which you speak all saving people is but a “minor precept.” But perhaps you are ready to say that as Noah was seen righteous before God before saved by water, (Gen ix, 1,) we must therefore be pardoned before we are baptized. Grant it.
What will the theory of salvation by faith alone do for this difficulty? It so happens that Noah was about as good before God revealed to him his intention to destroy the people by the deluge and instructed him in the place of effecting his salvation in the ark by water, as he was at any subsequent time. Then as he was good before he had the revelation, of course he was good before he believed it, or had faith in it. So if, because he was good before saved by water, we must be pardoned before baptized, then by the same rule, as he was equally good before he had faith in the plan of his salvation, so we must be pardoned before we receive God’s word and exercise faith in it.
Are you prepared for this? Then you must abandon this objection, for it certainly weighs as heavily against faith, as against baptism. This objection would place our salvation at the wrong end of the process. If we are to be pardoned where he was good, then we must be pardoned before we know anything about the plan of our salvation, whereas he was, though good at the time God gave him the revelation, not saved until landed in the ark, by water, upon Mount Ararat?
But as Peter says our salvation by baptism is the antitype of Noah’s salvation in the ark by water, let us compare the type with the antitype and see if they agree. God gave Noah the revelation, Noah believed it. Was he saved by it? Surely not. He obeyed God in preparing and entering into the ark, and was by water landed upon Ararat. Was he then saved? Who will doubt it?
Now let us look at the antitype. God has given us a revelation of the plan of salvation in the gospel. We believe it. Are we saved now? You say yes! Then the type will not fit, for it says no, Noah was not saved at that point. But we obey. We repent and are baptized for the remission of sins, and are thus landed upon “Mount Zion the City of the living God.” (Heb. xii, 22.) Now are we saved? The type says, yes. What say you? But it is “not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the answer (seeking. T. F.) of a good conscience toward God.” (1 Peter iii, 21.) True indeed! But how do those who make baptism a mere visible external washing, expect to be benefited by this expression. If it is, as I have heard it argued by men pro-
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Forging to have made great discoveries in theology, a mere fleshly washing, then it would seem that it might be for “the putting away of the filth of the flesh.” But Peter thought it not mere fleshly washing—it had to do with the conscience, a means of coming in contact with the blood of Christ which, Paul says, purges the “conscience from dead works to serve the living God.” (Heb. ix, 14.)
But you may ask, is baptism a means of God’s appointment for coming in contact with the blood of Christ? Let us see. When and where was his blood shed? Surely in His death. What saith the scriptures? “But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already they brake not his legs, but one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side and forthwith came there out BLOOD and water.” (John xix, 33, 34.)
Then as his blood was shed in his death, and as it was shed for many for (in order to) the remission of sins,” (Mat. xxvi, 28,) we have only to see how we get into his death to learn how, when, and where we come in contact with the blood that washes away sin. Hear Paul, “Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death.” (Rom. vi, 3.)
Query. Do we ever read in the Bible that persons are to believe into the death of Christ? If not, and they are not, according to Paul’s plan as quoted above, “baptized into” it, how do they get into it? If they do not get into it at all, how are they saved by virtue of it?
Before leaving this point we beg leave to notice another objection that is sometimes raised with reference to baptism as “the answer (seeking) of a good conscience.” As it is the answer of a good conscience, the conscience must be good, before it is prepared to give baptism as the answer of a good conscience. All the show of argument there is in this, is in the assumption that a good conscience must of necessity be a purified conscience. If this is not so, the defect in the argument is at once apparent.
Paul said after he had been engaged in “persecuting the church of God and wasting it,” (Gal. i, 13,) “persecuting Christians even unto death, binding and delivering into prisons both men and women,” (Acts xxii, 4,) that he had “lived in all good conscience before God.” (Acts xxiii, 1.) Was he pardoned all the while? Let him answer. “I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbelief.” (1 Tim. i, 13.)
Then with him a good conscience did not necessarily imply that he who had it was a pardoned man. While on figurative baptisms I beg leave to call your attention to another.
“Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
37
how that our fathers were under the cloud and all passed through the sea, and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea. (1 Cor. x, 1, 2.) “Now these things were our examples.” (verse 6.)
Thus we learn that the delivery of the children of Israel from Egyptian bondage was in some sense typical of our delivery from the guilt and dominion of sin. We will briefly examine both type and antitype.
Moses was the deliverer or person through whom God delivered Israel. Jesus is to the Christian the antitype. Moses was by a special interposition of divine providence saved from the destructive edict of Pharaoh who charged all his people saying, “Every son that is born ye shall cast into the river.” (Ex. i, 22.) Jesus was saved by the direction of the Lord from the edict of Herod who “sent forth and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof from two years old and under.” (Matt. ii, 16.)
Moses was enabled to perform miracles in attestation of the divine character of his mission in order to the production of faith. (See Ex. iv, 1, 11.) John says, “Many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples which are not written in this book; but these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his name.” (John x, 30, 31.)
The people believed Moses; were they then saved? They were then in the state of their enemies. But they started and after traveling one day (at least) they encamped by the sea. Were they then saved? They thought not, for when Pharaoh drew nigh, the children of Israel lifted up their eyes, and behold, the Egyptians marched after them; and they were sore afraid: and the children of Israel cried out unto the Lord. (Ex. xiv, 10.)
Then they did not feel very safe. Nor did Moses think their salvation effected at that time, for he said, “Fear ye not, stand still and see the salvation of the Lord, which he will show to you today.” (Ex. xiv, 13.) The sea was divided, they went forward, the cloud overshadowed them, and being thus “baptized into Moses in (by) the cloud and in (by) the sea,” landed upon the opposite bank. The Egyptians, espying to do likewise,
the waters returned and covered the chariots, and the horsemen, and all the host of Pharaoh that came into the sea after them; there remained not so much as one of them, but the children of Israel walked upon dry land in the midst of the sea and the waters were a wall unto them on their right hand and on their left. (Ex. xiv, 28, 29.)
Were they then saved? Moses says: “Thus the Lord saved Israel that day out of the hand of the Egyptians.” (verse 30.) What day? The day they first…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
had faith! No, but the day when they were “baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea,” and “saw the Egyptians dead upon the sea shore.” Ibid. Their enemies were drowned, their fears were gone, and they sung a song of deliverance saying, “I will sing unto the Lord, for he hath triumphed gloriously; the horse and his rider hath he thrown into the sea.” Ex. xv, 1. Would not this song have been rather out of place in Egypt, where they first believed in the message delivered them by Moses?
Now for the antitype. Jesus having risen from the dead gave a commission to his disciples saying, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature; he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved,” Mark xvi, 16. “But tarry ye at Jerusalem until ye be endued with power from on high.” Luke xxiv, 49. “The day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place,” Acts ii, 1, Jerusalem the place appointed, and they received the promised comforter and power. Peter preached to the people on the occasion under the immediate direction of the Holy Spirit that was to guide him into all truth. Surely he knew whom to speak, where to speak and what to say. The people believed what he said and were cut to the heart.
They had the proper faith; were they saved? You say yes! But the type says no. They said no; for they cried out, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” Acts ii, 37. Really they were as badly frightened as were the Israelites, when contemplating, as they thought, their immediate destruction at the sea by Pharaoh. Peter commanded the penitents to repent that their sins might be blotted out. Acts iii, 19. If repentance is in order that sins may be blotted out, and they find this yet to do, it is absolutely certain that the sins of the Pentecostians were not blotted out at the time they believed.
But Peter answered their earnest inquiry by saying, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins.” Acts ii, 38. “Then they that gladly received his word were baptized,” v. 41. He says they were then saved.
But we are told that “the Lord said I have surely seen the affliction of my people who are in Egypt.” Ex. 3:7. Thus the Lord recognized them as his people before they were baptized unto Moses, therefore we must be the Lord’s people before we are baptized. Will salvation by faith alone relieve us from this difficulty? When did the Lord acknowledge the Israelites as his people? It was at the time he appeared to Moses in the burning bush, and for the first time made known to him his intention to deliver them. Had they faith in the plan of…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
39
Their delivery then? Nay verily! They had not so much as heard of it. And Moses was then and there enabled to perform miracles in order that they might believe. Ex. 4: 1 to 17. Then if the objection is worth anything against baptism, it is worth just as much against faith, for we have seen that they were as much the people of God before they had faith as they were before they were baptized; yea, more. They were as much the national people of God before Moses was born as they were afterwards. If the objection proves anything, it proves that we must have been the people of God before Jesus, the antitype of Moses, was born.
Are you prepared to take this position? We will notice the next argument contained in your letter. You say, “the Jailor was told to believe and he should be saved, and he was baptized afterward, which implies that his faith was the saving element.”
Before entering upon the merits of your supposition, allow me to ask you to harmonize this view of Paul’s language with the language of Peter when he says, “baptism doth also now save us.” 1 Pet. 2: 21. You will allow that the Jailor’s faith was a (not the) condition of salvation, and let Peter say his baptism also saved him, then we can see a perfect argument; otherwise, it appears to me their teaching will be difficult to harmonize. I propose to show beyond a shadow of doubt, that Paul did impose repentance and baptism upon the Jailor in order to salvation, as did Peter on the Pentecostians.
“And they said believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved and thy house; and they spake unto him the word of the Lord and to all that were in his house.” Acts 16: 31, 32. Now what was the word of the Lord spoken? Was it the same there, that it was at Jerusalem? I suppose it was, if the word of the Lord was spoken at Jerusalem. What saith the Prophet? “And many people shall go and say, come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord to the house of the God of Jacob, and he will teach us of his ways and we will walk in his paths, for out of Zion shall go forth the law and the word of the law from Jerusalem.” Isaiah 2: 3. What was to go forth from Jerusalem? Answer, The word of the Lord. What was spoken to the Jailor? Answer, The word of the Lord.
Then we have only to see how the word of the Lord went forth from Jerusalem to know what was imposed on the Jailor. We hear the Savior saying in the commission, “That repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations beginning at Jerusalem.” Luke 24: 47. The Prophet tells us the word of the Lord was to go forth from Jerusalem, and the Savior explains the meaning of this, by saying it was…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Written, that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations beginning at Jerusalem. How did the word of the Lord go forth from Jerusalem? and how was repentance and remission of sins preached (among all nations) beginning there?
After Peter preached Christ to them and they believed and were cut to the heart, he told them to “repent and be baptized every one of them in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Acts 2:38). This was what went forth as the word of the Lord from Jerusalem, and as this constituted the word of the Lord at Jerusalem, it took the same thing to constitute it at the Philippian jail.
As this was the way repentance and remission began to be preached in the name of Jesus at Jerusalem, and was to be preached among all nations, and as the jailor and all his were a part of all nations, it is certainly what was preached as the word of the Lord to them. Not only so, but we find the same result at both places.
At Jerusalem, “they that gladly received his word were baptized and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls,” (Acts 2:41). At the jail, “he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes and were baptized he and all his straightway.” (Acts 16:33). Thus we see that not only the same thing was preached at both places, but they understood and obeyed it in the same way at both places.
Query. If baptism was not included in the word of the Lord spoken to the jailor, how does it happen that he so promptly attended to it the same hour of the night? Why did Peter command the Pentecostians to “repent and be baptized,” without saying anything about faith? Simply because they already had faith as was abundantly clear by their being cut to the heart and crying “men and brethren what shall we do.”
Why did Ananias say to Saul, “why tarriest thou, arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord,” (Acts 22:16), and say nothing about faith or repentance? Because it was evident that they both existed in his case at the time Ananias spake to him.
But we must attend to your next suggestion, which we have in the following words: “We all through the New Testament read of diseased men and women, who were healed by Christ and the Apostles owing to their faith, and it is said they rejoiced and gave God the praise, and they were not baptized. But it may be said that Christ had not then established his kingdom. Grant it. These same persons composed his church when he did establish it, and material he must have before building his holy temple.
So if they were engrafted before his ascension…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Before starting upon an examination of the foregoing, allow me to inquire whether or not you expect to be healed when sick in this way; that is by a direct faith from some supernatural power, without means or means, “an sponsor of your faith?” If you say, but when sick, you ask for physicians as other men, I will take it as evidence unmistakable that you think “this mode cannot answer now.” If you will have the comparison, let us see what it will prove for you. Men and women sought for the establishment of his kingdom, were by Christ and the Apostles healed of disease miraculously on account of their faith, but you will admit that is not the case now. They having faith in the physician, perfected that faith by administering themselves to the means of their appointment in order to their being healed and they were cured. Men and women were pardoned by Christ and the Apostles anterior to the establishment of the kingdom as revealed. We will make these miracles precedent for remission of sins under the gospel as you desire. See Jesus at the grave of Lazarus restoring him to life; on account of any faith in him? No, for if there was faith in any one it was in his sister, Martha, and Mary (see John 14). Apply this to remission of sins under the gospel and we will find that the sinner need exercise no faith himself but just get his sister to have faith and that will do for him.
Again, see him beside the deceased maiden, hear him saying to the parent “believe only and she shall be made whole!” Luke 50 and she is restored to life. Apply this to remission of sin under the gospel, and the result is that if the sinner is about to rebel against God, let the parents “believe only” and the sins of the son or daughter are at the centurion’s servant at Capernaum.
If we make an application of the miracles to remission of sins under the gospel, we find that it is not when the sinner has faith that it makes him whole, but who receives it by obedience to the gospel requirements. But I think you will now agree with me that these miracles have nothing to do with remission of sins under the gospel, only they are recorded as evidence of the divine character of the Saviour and his holy religion. But if you still insist that they have, then we find that sinners are pardoned, 1st, on account of faith in their sisters; 2d, on account of faith in their parents; 3d, on account of faith in their masters; 4th, without faith in any.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 1
And 5th, on account of faith made perfect by obedience, etc. etc. Paul tells us, “fathers, a testament is there must also of necessity be the death of the testator; for a testament is of force after men are dead; otherwise it is of no strength at all, while the testator liveth.” Heb. 9:16, 17. While men live, they give gifts to whomever they will, but when they die, leaving a will, and it is properly recorded and the appointed executors are properly commissioned, we look for no more special bequest by him in person contrary to the provisions of his will. So Jesus, while on earth did not leave his people by simply speaking the word of command. But he died, leaving a will. It was regularly recorded in the courts of Heaven, and on the day of Pentecost did he appoint Apostles who were installed executors of this will, after which its provisions are to be rigidly adhered to. And we are to look for no more special bequest by him in person contrary to the provisions of his will.
So we adhere to this principle, that when he had miraculously appeared to, and convinced Saul, that he was truly the Christ, and Saul in office, declined to usurp the authority delegated to them by telling Saul himself, but directed him to a place where he might find an officer of his administration from whom to obtain the desired information.
Therefore I beg leave to pay my parting respects to it, by calling your attention to at least four assumptions contained in it, wholly void of proof in the Bible, viz:
- “That these persons were healed by Christ and the Apostles by virtue of their faith.” We have seen that some of them had no faith but were healed, if on account of faith at all, on the principle of faith in others.
- “They were baptized.” How you learned this, I know not; John the Baptist and the disciples of Jesus had been baptizing the people there, and whether they had baptized any of these we are not informed.
- “The same persons became members of the church when he did establish it.” We are nowhere informed whether the persons miraculously healed of disease ever became members of his church or after the day of the Savior, or whether they were engraven as his church had no existence before his ascension.
Where do we read in the Bible that any of those miraculously healed persons became pillars in his church, either before or after his ascension?
Having thus noticed at some length the more prominent subjects contained in your epistle, and made such arguments as incidentally…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
43
grew out of the points raised by you, we will submit the matter to your candid judgment for a decision.
Respectfully, Yours in the Gospel,
T. W. BRENTS.
SHORT CHAPTERS ON GREAT SUBJECTS
With the earnest hope of exciting at least some of our brethren to greater zeal in the cause of Christ, we commence in the present No. a series of short essays on plain, practical questions, in which we trust our readers will feel interested. It is proper to remark, that most essays on religious subjects are too prosy, too theoretical and most generally, destitute of all vitality. We do not flatter ourselves that we can offer a sovereign remedy for all the evils of religious society—this we will not attempt; but we desire to contribute our mite in directing attention to subjects which we regard best calculated to give the disciples of Christ the greatest amount of religious activity and influence.
CHAPTER I
THE LORD’S DAY MEETINGS
It is a question of no small moment for Christians to determine, if there is a day in the seven, in which it is their bounden duty to assemble themselves together by the authority of the Lord. We remember well the Apostles’ exhortation to, “Let no one judge us in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new-moon, or of the Sabbath.” (Col. i, 16) “Which were a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”
We are under a new order of things, the kingdom of Christ is spiritual, and the Jewish holy-days, new-moons and rest days, have no place in the gracious institution of God’s Son. It is very idle, indeed, for denominations professing to respect the Sacred Oracles to talk of the Sabbath day for Christians, Sabbath schools, and customs unknown in a spiritual religion; but all philosophy—the wisdom of man—carnalizes religion.
Romanists know, and teach, that the only authority for the observance of the Sabbath day, is the supposed right of the mother of human policies, to change the Sabbath of the Jews, to a day of observance for the disciples of Christ; and pliant Protestants, without questioning the authority, tamely submit to the human dogma of Jewish Sabbath observances.
When we turn to the Lord, however, everything is…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
There was a day on which the disciples met to worship. On the first day of the week, Jesus our Lord rose from the dead—”Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled, for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and said unto them, Peace be unto you.” (John xx. 19.) In the same connection it is said, “And after eight days again, his disciples were within, then came Jesus, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.” (John xx. 26.)
Paul reached Troas on Monday morning, tarried with the disciples seven days, no doubt for the purpose of spending a Lord’s day in their society, “And upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul preached to them, (ready to depart on the morrow) and continued his speech till midnight.” (Acts xx. 7.)
To the disciples at Corinth Paul wrote, “Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.” (1 Cor. xvi. 1.)
Last of all, John says, “I was in the spirit on the Lord’s day, and heard behind me a great voice as of a trumpet.” (Rev. i. 10.)
From these scriptures several important conclusions are apparent, but for the present we state but two.
- From the example of the disciples meeting on the first day of the week, it is obvious the Author of the Christian institution designed, ordained, and appropriated the first day of the week—”the Lord’s day”—as the day for performing, at least, an important part of the service of the house of God.
- We are satisfied from the examples that the disciples all felt under the most sacred obligation to assemble themselves on the Lord’s day—not to hear preaching, but to attend to the ordinances of the Christian institution.
Whilst we admit there is not in the New Testament what is generally regarded a positive command to sanctify the first day of the week, or for the meeting of the disciples on that day, the statements of inspiration make the authority perhaps quite as binding as any command in the scriptures.
In the first place, it is admitted that the churches in the first century were governed by the direct teaching of the Holy Spirit. What they…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
45
did was in obedience to the will of Heaven, and nothing in the service was human.
Secondly, there are fifty-two Lord’s days in the year, and if we see the first disciples, moved by the Spirit of God, met on several successive first days of the week, and we have the exhortation, “Not to forsake the assembling of ourselves as the manner of some was,” but to lay by in the treasury on the first day of the week, as the Lord has prospered us, we cannot doubt the authority for the consecration of every Lord’s day to his service. If it is proper to observe the Lord’s day—any Lord’s day—it is equally important to sanctify every one; and if it is right to meet to perform the service peculiar to the day—as the Lord’s supper—it is certainly wrong to neglect it on any first day of the week.
Hence we conclude there is no correct congregational service of the Almighty without the consecration of the Lord’s day—every Lord’s day—by the assembling of the disciples to perform the Lord’s day service. This cannot be performed by a substitute, a “let upon hire,” though we might employ the most eloquent speaker of the land. It is a service—a spiritual exercise—as indispensable to spiritual life as physical labor and partaking of bread are to bodily health and being.
T. F.
REPORT OF THE MEETING AT FRANKLIN COLLEGE
In compliance with a request of brethren assembled at Ebenezer meeting house, on the third Lord’s day in October, 1857, brethren and sisters from different congregations met with the Disciples at Franklin College, on the 26th of Dec. 1857, for the purpose of consultation and cooperation.
By agreement, brother J. K. Speer assumed the position of Chairman, and Scribes were appointed. In addition to the members of the congregation, the brethren were present from Hartsville, Ebenezer, Rock Spring, Union, Sumner Co., and Nashville.
The brethren first took into consideration the subject of “the churches of Jesus Christ,” and after careful investigation, submit for consideration the following:
- A Church of Christ, as the language implies, is a collection of obedient believers, lively stones, built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ. The members constituted anciently “a chosen generation,” “a royal priesthood,” “a holy nation,” “a peculiar people,” to show forth…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
This praises of him who had called them out of darkness into the marvelous light of the gospel. The members were “full of all goodness,” “filled with all knowledge,” able to admonish one another. They were not to “neglect the assembling of themselves together;” were to “exhort one another,” and to “provoke one another to love and good works.” Thus was the church primitively compared to a city set on a hill, which could not be hid. It was the temple of God, and “pillar and support of the truth.”
Membership Preparation
- Persons were prepared for membership by believing with the heart unto righteousness, repenting and being “baptized into Christ.”
- The members constituted the churches of Jesus Christ whenever they gave themselves to God and to each other to keep the ordinances of the New Testament. The ordinances were not only kept by the members but the worship was performed by them alone; and they were to respect each other from the labor performed by each. (I Cor. xv, 15; Heb. xiii, 8.)
- When it became necessary the experienced members were consecrated to the labor of Bishops; and this consecration was intended to set them apart as to time, talent, and energy to the work of the Lord.
- The only evidence of the existence of the congregation is the fact that the members assemble together to keep the ordinances.
Worship of the Congregation
The subject of the worship of the congregation was next taken up, and the following statements are respectfully submitted to the brethren:
- The Disciples of Christ should meet on the first day of every week. (John xx, 19-29; Acts ii, 7; Heb. x, 23-25.)
- The following exercises constitute the appropriate worship of the congregation:
- Praises by singing. (Eph. v, 19; Col. iii, 16.)
- Prayers, thanksgiving, etc. (1 Tim. ii, 1; Eph. vi, 18.)
- Teaching by reading, etc. (2 Tim. ii, 2; Luke x, 26.)
- Exhortations. (Rom. xii, 8.)
- Breaking bread. (Acts ii, 46; xx, 7.)
- Fellowship, or raising funds. (Acts ii, 42; 1 Cor. xvi, 2.)
EVANGELISTS – HOW MADE – THEIR LABOR AND SUPPORT
On this subject the following propositions were discussed:
- The Evangelist is educated in, and by the church, and when found faithful and able to teach others, is called and consecrated to the work by the fasting and prayer of the seniors, with the imposition of their hands.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
2. The Labor of the Evangelist
The labor of the Evangelist consists in:
- Preaching the gospel to sinners;
- Baptizing the believers into Christ;
- “Watering” the young plants;
- Enabling the members to keep house for the Lord;
- Setting in order the things wanting in the congregations;
- Charging the Overseers that they teach no new doctrine, nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies;
- Ordaining Elders in the congregations;
- Assisting in training young men for the ministry;
- Taking upon them “the care of all the churches.”
3. Responsibilities of the Evangelist
The Evangelist is responsible particularly to the congregation that recommends him to the labor and is to receive a support according to his labor and wants, from the congregation that sends him and those for whom he labors; also from such as may have it in their power to assist.
PASTORS, OR OVERSEERS
- When the Elders, or Bishops of the primitive churches gave evidence of qualifications suitable for teaching, governing, and directing the congregation, the Evangelists ordained such Elders as Bishops, Pastors, or Overseers.
- The work of the Pastor is confined to the congregation of which he is a member, and consists in the instruction and edification of the church, and the regulation and direction of its affairs.
- All other Pastors, whether Grecian, Roman, Protestant, or Christian, are unknown to the Bible, and belong to the apostasy from Primitive Christianity.
Supporting Scriptures
In support of these propositions, the inquirer is referred to the following Scriptures:
- Acts xx, 28
- 1 Tim. iii chap.
- Titus i chap.
- 1 Pet. v chap.
Meeting Summary
The brethren examined every matter in much harmony and agreed to hold another meeting perhaps with one of the congregations in Sumner early in the Spring. All who attended were fully satisfied that the brethren, to understand and to feel proper sympathy for each other, must meet in frequent consultations.
It is hoped the next deliberation meeting will be attended by many brethren.
F. N. CARMACK
S. Y. CALDWELL
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
FAIR DEALING AMONGST CHRISTIANS
Below we give our readers a short communication from a worthy Kentucky correspondent who first applied to Brother B. Franklin to publish it, but who was disappointed in consequence of not submitting the name. For this refusal on Brother Franklin’s part, we blame him not. It is his right to make a rule to exclude anonymous letters, and indeed we see great propriety in doing so. We know the writer, however, and think it not unbecoming in us to give the letter. Our greatest regret is that we figure rather too conspicuously in the communication, but the statements are those of an intelligent and earnest writer.
T. F.
BRO. FRANKLIN, – Dear Sir:
I hope you will not think it impertinent in me to differ with you in reference to some of the opinions expressed in the editorial in the last “Age,” headed “President Fanning’s Course.”
First, in all humility I would remind you, that the “wisdom which cometh from above is first pure, then peaceable,” etc. If those brethren do abandon their theory or philosophy, which you admit to be dangerous, we may thank Brother Fanning first, then Bro. Campbell for calling the attention of the brethren to its evil tendency. “Honor to whom honor is due” always.
A year since I could have agreed with you that Dr. Richardson was at least a good man, and an able writer, but, alas! “how has the fine gold become dim.” Was it in the “spirit of reconciliation, harmony and unity” he replied to argument by low personalities? And is it in the same spirit he has hitherto failed to make good those slanderous charges; to give up the author or to retract them? God forbid we should have many such “good and great men” held up to the admiration of the brotherhood, and “wo to those who call evil good and good evil.”
Brother Campbell has ably vindicated himself from the imputation of endorsing those speculations of Dr. Richardson and his followers, and I trust he will remember he is responsible to God and to the brotherhood, not only for the theology but also for the morality of the harbinger, and that he will yet feel constrained to wipe off that stain from its pages. This he must do, or lose the position he has hitherto held for candor and fair dealing.
I trust, also, that Bethany College is sound, and that in its healthy action such an excrescence as Dr. Richardson will be thrown off. God forbid that men of his stamp should have the moulding of those ardent…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
49
spirits destined to scatter the seeds of this glorious reformation through the length and breadth of our country. To do this effectually they should form not only a correct theory, but a “sound judgment,” that “charity which thinketh no evil,” and lives in the daily practice of the “golden rule,” in all of which Dr. R. has shown himself signally deficient.
For Dr. Richardson individually I have none but the kindest feelings, but my love for the cause which he has cruelly wounded and betrayed, constrains me to express my gratitude to Brother Fanning for having so ably and fearlessly unmasked him. Brother Fanning is strong in the prayers and sympathies not of “a party” but of thousands of true hearted lovers of Christ.
But enough. I could not see such a man as Dr. Richardson held up as a model to the rising generation, and not enter my protest. Having done so, I fall back into my usual position, that of a
QUIET OBSERVER
In a letter to us, the writer intimates a disposition not to insist on the publication of the protest, till the endorsement of Elder Henry Anderson appeared in the “American Christian Review.” The correspondent says: “While I profess no remarkable scholarship, I claim to have a little common sense, though not enough to understand Dr. R.’s theories even when assisted by Bro. Anderson’s explanations.”
I had thought of giving some of my objections. It is unnecessary however, and I will only say this, that nearly twenty years experience in the Christian warfare has convinced me that the word of God is “the sword of the Spirit,” in the hands of those who understand and believe it. In other words, to those who “in good and honest hearts” receive it. Such persons will, “as new-born babes earnestly desire the sincere milk of the word that they may grow thereby.” They will by “Its exceeding great and precious promises, be made partakers of the divine nature,” and will pray, “Open thou mine eyes that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law.”
Were I asked what is the great thing lacking among the professed followers of Christ, I would say at once, it is that “living faith,” which would enable them to appropriate to themselves the glorious promises of the gospel, and “count all things but loss, for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus.” That as a people we may grow in faith is the ardent desire of
AN OBSERVER
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
EARLY MORAL TRAINING
The world it is said is a school, and all human beings are learners. We either study to be wise or vicious continually. Our minds become stronger, more active and more refined every day, or more feeble, inactive, and coarse in their conceptions. Parents send their children to institutions which they call schools, fondly thinking the day of their matriculation is the dawn of their education, when, in truth, their education is often well nigh finished at starting. If their graduation has not been proclaimed, their course of learning is settled, and they will not change it. They often cannot. Education begins in the mother’s arms, in the nurse’s cradle, in the first caresses of friends at the breakfast, dinner and supper table, in the first dressing—first restraining lessons, and in the acquisition of the habits for gaining a support, or wasting the wealth unwisely bestowed by too fond parents. Hence, by the time children are started to school, very frequently they are beyond the control of both parents and teachers. Their views of life, and habits are settled; some passion perhaps has taken control of them, and its dictates they will follow to the last bitter end. Perhaps it is the witchery of doing as they please, which they call liberty; or more likely, it is the gratification of some fleshly impulse. This may be manifested in making a god of their stomachs in a slavish devotion to a morbid appetite, to the nauseous stimulants of tobacco, or a yearning for ardent spirits. It matters not what passion is honored, the fate is generally sealed at some early date, both for life and death.
It is said a wise man is one who can control himself. There was a time in Greece when to know oneself was the highest evidence of superior wisdom. This is equivalent to self-control, bringing all our members into subordination to proper rules.
Why is it that so few who attend our high schools, never make respectable attainments in learning, in good morals, or good manners? Why is it that nine-tenths of even the graduates of colleges are worthless men? We might do well to answer the last first. Custom has ordained the graduation of nine-tenths of our college inmates without the requisite qualifications. They may not be deficient in native intellect, in languages and science, but their moral obliquities paralyze their mental energies, and the sensual quite overcomes the spiritual. The reason so many who enter colleges are utterly incompetent to succeed is, in part, in consequence of a false course adopted by parents in childhood. They have yielded to their offspring, till no advice is received and their children’s cruel tempers enslave them for life.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 51
That stout, florid-cheeked, self-willed, sulky and rude youth, who has just entered college. Notice him gazing about, determined to be displeased with everything. Although at home he has lived in very plain style, there is nothing that suits his taste at table. He dislikes coffee—always did—cannot bear tea—as to milk it is not sufficiently sweet, the bread is not warm, as for the meat it is not suited to his taste, and the vegetables, dessert, etc., etc., cannot be endured. Yet he is a voracious consumer, and as to his manner, he gives the idea that the world was made in a day. Soon he overloads his coarse stomach, and comes to the teacher, complaining of the unwholesome food—it gives him the “heartburn.”
There is a worse feature in his case—all that is oppressive to a young “gentleman;” he has a right to sleep as late as he pleases, smoke a pipe if he pleases, chew tobacco all the time, whistle when he desires, and look sulky at his tyrannical preceptors whenever they meet him. As to the books suited for such a “young gentleman” there are very few which suit his “taste.” All this “headlinch and unuseful course of study,” such as Latin, Greek, Spelling, English Grammar, and Arithmetic should be rejected. “Engineering,” “Philosophy,” and the “technicalities necessary for the profession of law, medicine and divinity,” are about all youths of high quality need! We knew one not long since who had traveled several hundred miles to enter college, so offended because the teacher respectfully suggested the propriety of studying English Grammar till he could at least parse a very simple sentence, that he left in great disgust at the want of discrimination in the Professors.
Schools to all such are prisons, and worse. Why are these things thus? The answer may be given in few words. Parents failed in training up the children in the way they should go, and all the powers of heaven and earth cannot change the stubborn temper of the self-willed. At least it is a rare case, for a youth even to be educated or become a useful man, who has not been under proper influences in childhood. It is easier for children to adopt a wise than an unwise course, if the attention is directed to the good at the right time; but a day or two too late, and all is lost forever. If parents and primary teachers would occupy the time in making impressions of submission and morality upon the tender mind, instead of attempting to make intellectual prodigies—men and women—of babes, success might attend every department of improvement in youth and manhood. Correct training in childhood would save parents from the mortification of having to deal with ungodly, profane, dissipated and abandoned.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Done children. It would save them too from the shame of the woful ignorance of their children regarding religion. We have heard recently of divers volatile youths, whose parents professed to be Christians, that were found in altars and at mourner’s benches, seeking something they called religion, and positively professing to get direct converting influences from above. With such the teaching and religion of the Bible are unknown; and such parents should sit in sackcloth and weep many bitter tears, for not instructing their children in the way of righteousness.
We may safely say, that most of the ills of youth, manhood and society generally arise from lack of parental training. All the schools of earth, and all the preaching of the world, must forever fail to reform the masses that grow from childhood, in rudeness, obeying the sovereign dictates of their fleshly natures under the false guise of yielding to dictates of noble impulses. The family and the church must take the responsibility of instructing and training the youth of our country before we can hope for a moral population or a true spiritual church. This teaching and this training are the business of life. They should engross our time, employ our pecuniary resources, engage our ardent prayers and our continual efforts. It is almost useless to preach to, or even convert a people who are not qualified by early training to glorify God.
To yield ourselves to Heaven, requires our best exertions, and if the enemy has vantage ground of bad habits from childhood, there is but little hope for us in education, religion, happiness, or in any pursuit whatever. Would to God the disciples of Jesus Christ could be aroused to duty on this subject. Would that we who preach and write for the public good, could fully appreciate our responsibility to God, and to our fellows of earth, whom we are called to bless.
T. F.
THE WORD OF GOD
Well will it be in the day of judgment for those who shall have regarded the precious Oracles as intended by their Author. Well for Christians, while peregrinating these low grounds of sorrow, to examine their hearts touching the source of their confidence in the Invisible, the Eternal and only wise God, his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, and the Good Spirit.
There are many reasons for calling attention to this momentous subject.
- German Neologists
- French transcendentalists
- Scotch and English
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 53
Metaphysicians, and American “higher-law” politicians and preachers, boldly, fearlessly and wickedly reject the word of life, for something they are pleased to denominate “light of reason,” “absolute truth,” “direct light of the unconscientiousness,” etc., etc. But we have a class of men quite as dangerous in their influences in most of the churches of the saints. We can distinguish them by their works. They preach eloquently in regard to what they call “the real,” “the true,” “essence,” “being,” etc., as if there were something in religion which we have a right to expect that comes to us, without form, without words, without church, and without the aid of our bodily senses.
It may be proper for us to remark, that although men have speculated diligently for nearly six thousand years, we yet know nothing of the essence of God—we cannot comprehend the idea of Spirit, of heaven, or even demonstrate what we shall be in the future. Still we most heartily believe that God is, and that he is a rewarder of all them that diligently seek him; that we shall see his Son our Savior, and that the Spirit is from God, dwells in our hearts, and will quicken our bodies in the resurrection morn, but these are not matters of sight, feeling or experiment, but of faith only.
“We walk by faith as strangers here.”
We ask, what is the ground of our confidence in God and in a spiritual life beyond this world? No one regards words as constituting God, or his Spirit; but by means of these, as marks and signs, Jehovah has seen proper to reveal himself to a lost race. Hence, in the language of inspiration, “Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.” Our Lord prayed that all who should believe on him through the apostles’ words might be one, that the world might believe the Father sent the Son.
We have no idea an honest mind in favorable circumstances ever attempted an examination of the word of God without fully yielding to its heavenly influence. The word of the Lord, honestly understood, removes all skepticism, and brings the soul near to the Father. It is not only the source of all faith, but we rejoice to know that it brings all believers to see eye to eye, enables them to speak the same language, destroys discord, strife, partyism, systems, speculations, theories, philosophies and every high thing that exalteth itself above the truth.
“Precious Bible, what a treasure.”
Why should we not then preach the word in much confidence to a dying world?
T. F.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
ELDER B. FRANKLIN’S REPLY TO T. FANNING
In the A. C. Review for Jan. 12, 1858, Bro. Franklin has done us the justice to publish our notice of his course, with strictures on our remarks, which we take pleasure in laying before our readers. We are pleased in the main with the spirit of Bro. Franklin, and while we see but little room for discussion, we think it in place to give a few very brief notes on his reply.
Bro. F. speaks thus:
- The first complaint of Bro. Fanning is that our interference with the controversy was out of place. We cannot see how this can be, as they are public men, the controversy public, and the cause in which our all is at stake was affected by it. Any man has a right to give his opinion of the controversy, either publicly or privately. We had a right to do this, and believe we did right in exercising the right.
- Bro. F. heard us, when conversing upon the Ferguson case, say that his teaching was “infidelity!” Indeed! But shall we assume that Bro. Richardson is preaching the same doctrine that Ferguson was? Has not Bro. R. already refused to endorse some brethren, who are bordering upon the ‘higher-law’ doctrine, and made an effort to give satisfaction? Must he, then, be put upon a level with Ferguson and called an infidel? No, sir. He is not to be treated in that way.
- Bro. F. is sorry we said the article of Bro. R.’s in the Review made no allusion to him. We did not hunt up the number containing the article at the time, but wrote from recollection, and the statement of the former editor, and if we have fallen into a blunder, we will certainly correct.
- Bro. E. is certainly above desiring to make a party, or to injure Bethany College, which we clearly intimated before; yet his course was such that many thought of both. We did not believe he intended either the creation of schism or the injury of Bethany College, and wished him to maintain his position on its own merits. We are fully with him in the issue with Bro. R., and have been preaching as we wrote him. We think just as badly of the mystic system—the whole thing—as we said in our private letter to Bro. F., but we do not think as badly of Bro. Richardson as he does. We do not think that, of necessity, either he or Bro. R. must be lost. It is certainly possible for them both to be saved.
- There are several ways in which colleges may affect us, besides teaching mystic theology. Certainly the College is not to blame for what Dr. R. teaches, however much he may be to blame for what is taught in the College. We were certainly not blaming Bethany College for what Dr. R. had written; but what we had in our mind was that our colleges seemed to involve our principal men in disputes, upon the comparative merits of their respective systems of philosophy, and are thus proving disastrous to the cause.
- Last, and worst of all, is our remark, that Bro. Campbell had taken his pen in hand and that the thing would be set right! Well,
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
we can not see any particular duplicity in our supposing that Bro. Campbell could set a question of this kind right. There is nothing in it terrifying to us.
Bro. J. thought me one of the most competent defenders of the faith, but now he fears that we are the advocates of some policy of man. We understand what the word policy means, and what the spirit of a Christian is. It was policy for Bro. Fanning not to insert our article, but not the spirit of Christianity to call his brother an infidel.
We have now had a broadside from both Bro. Fanning and Bro. Richardson, and allowed our readers the benefit of both pieces, though neither of them have published one full sentence from us. We can afford this and not fall out with them.
NOTES
- Bro. Franklin thinks that Dr. Richardson, in consequence of refusing to endorse persons bordering on “the higher-law” doctrine, proves that he did not teach the doctrine himself. We are sorry to admit, that Dr. R. not only at first endorsed these “higher-law” preachers, but said we had not the ability to understand them, and when he was exposed, to cover his retreat, he made a tilt at the innocent young men whom he had taught and encouraged in the direct light of their “underconsciousness.”
- No candid man ever thought that we can tell to form a party to injure Bethany College, or any other institution or man on earth; or for any other purpose.
- Bro. Franklin certainly does not believe, that we had any “jobbery” in not publishing his notice of us. We were candid in refusing to do so, because we did not wish to be severe on the Editor, and we had the charity to think he had written hastily. We have not refused to publish the vilest things of earth against ourselves, and we hope Bro. F. does not really think we are timid on this matter. But we need no discussion of these things.
Fraternally,
T. FANNING.
ITEMS
Bro. Jacob Creath, in the Jan. No. of the Christian Evangelist, suggests the propriety of endeavoring to influence Congress to give the poor of our nation, homes from the public domain. Congress has always favored actual settlers, and no doubt will still do so; but if Bro. C. will remember, this is a partisan political question. We respectfully suggest another good work for our lawmakers, viz. the adoption of some successful plan to make all our poor people independent and…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Happy by their own industry. If the poor were taught practical Christianity, they would learn to live by the sweat of the face, and not by begging or even receiving land without giving value received for it.
The Brethren in Kansas have appointed a co-operation meeting at Vernon School House, Leavenworth County, to commence Friday before the fourth Lord’s day in May, 1858.
Bethany College was consumed by fire in December—it is thought the work of wickedness. Bros. Campbell and Pendleton are traveling with the view of raising funds to erect another edifice.
Brother Dr. W. H. Hopson, of Palmyra, Mo., says, in a letter to the Christian Evangelist, that during a short tour “one hundred and ninety persons were added to the churches he visited.” This is good news. He adds: “We are fraternal and a unit on the ‘Spiritualism’ and other kindred subjects agitated in other States. We are satisfied with the ancient landmarks, and are jealous of any attempt to remove them.” We hope brother H. is not mistaken in his conclusions.
T. F.
We learn that there have been several additions at Memphis recently, through the labors of Bros. McCall and Holmes. Bro. Dr. W. J. Barbee is teaching and preaching in Memphis.
Bro. Dr. S. E. Shepard is traveling in Europe we believe with the view of collecting materials for a Christian University at Canton, Mo. He is writing some pleasant letters to the brethren—we may be able to give some of them in the Gospel Advocate.
MISSIONARY OPERATIONS
The church at Franklin College has sent Bro. J. J. Trott as a missionary to the Cherokee Nation. The Missionary Society at Cincinnati is about to send Bro. Barclay and family to Jerusalem, Bro. Beardslee to Jamaica, and Bro. Burnet to England. These are, no doubt, persons much attached to the work of the Lord, and we pray that the results may be good.
Bro. D. Oliphant, of Cannua, really thinks that the Church of Christ is a better missionary society than any the brethren can make; but Bro. B. Franklin seems to insinuate that this view is to avoid the responsibility of missionary labor. We are sorry to hear such things.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
57
CONSULTATION MEETING
DEAR BRETHREN:
The congregation of Disciples at this place have, by unanimous consent, set apart the Friday before the third Lord’s day in May, as the commencement of a meeting for purposes of consultation on various subjects connected with practical Christianity. The brethren generally are most cordially invited to attend; and the different congregations especially are requested to send messengers to the meeting, and to report through them their numbers, order of worship, etc. Ample preparations will be made for the accommodation of all who may favor us with their attendance.
By order of the congregation,
W. H. HALL, Sec.
Union, Sumner Co., Jan. 11, 1858.
SCHOLASTICISM
BROTHER FANNING:
The last three numbers of the Gospel Advocate were gladly received a short time since. I assure you, the Advocate is a welcome visitor; such a work is highly appreciated by one far from the society of a Christian brotherhood. The important truths it contains—embodied in that bold, yet dignified style that has ever characterized it—are as consoling and reviving to such a one, as the longed-for oasis, to the weary traveller. It is much regretted, that brethren occupying high places, as well as those less distinguished, are busy in the advocacy of speculative views and theories; which, if fostered upon the minds, would have as corrupting and ruinous an influence as Scholasticism had in the 10th century.
The object of the efforts that are making is evidently to impose a “Christian Philosophy.” It is well known that the efforts of one Scotus Erigena, in the latter part of the middle ages, resulted in the development of what has been termed a “Christian Philosophy.” Said “Christian Philosophy” was produced by a union of Christianity and new Platonism. The “Christian Philosophy” of the nineteenth century as taught by Prof. R. R. and coadjutors, is a union of Christianity and of man’s “higher spiritual nature:” his “self-consciousness” the divinity within. God save His people from a “Christian Philosophy” that regards His revealed will—the word of life—as an insufficient guide to his eternal mansions!
Scotus Erigena had no opposition in the promulgation of his pernicious doctrine of Scholasticism? But not so with his co-workers in these latter days. I have no disposition to flatter, and no hesitancy in saying—the opposition from you, is indeed and in truth, potent; because it has for its basis, the Bible—the only reliable source of Christian instruction.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Formation. It is confidently anticipated, that principles emanating from such a source, set forth in the peculiar style of Christian men, will check and roll back the angry and intrusive tide. The Christian forbearance manifested in your replies to the sarcastic and “ad captandum” efforts of Prof. R. R. does unquestionably meet the approbation of Bible-respecting brethren, everywhere.
Very Truly,
Carrollville, Mass. 1858.
H. R. M.
SEMI-ANNUAL EXERCISES IN FRANKLIN COLLEGE
We deem it in all respects in keeping with the objects of this Journal, to inform our readers that the Semi-Annual Examination of the students of Franklin College closed January 28th, much to the satisfaction of the members of the Faculty, as well as to the credit of the students.
Notwithstanding the secret, public and determined opposition to the institution, she can boast of fair patronage for fourteen years, with very slight efforts of friends, and never did the Faculty feel more determined to do their duty. They ask nothing but fairness, and while they earnestly desire the good wishes of all, they appeal not to the sympathies of any; but can say, after a constant labor of fifteen years, the college is out of debt, except to the amount of a single scholarship of a thousand dollars, it has a much better cabinet and apparatus than any school of the country except such as are endowed by States and denominations; and we regard it as altogether respectful to say, that our Faculty is composed of experienced and efficient teachers. For manly deportment, and freedom from vicious habits, the students occupy a high position. We also consider it our duty to say, that we do not believe there is a single school North or South, East or West, that offers greater safety to the morals of youth. Our wish is to succeed alone upon the ground of affording the proper advantages to young men ambitious to become scholars and useful citizens.
W. F.
CORRESPONDENCE
Bro. Fanning: Permit me to wish you a happy Christmas. The tolls of another year have well nigh closed. The acts and causes which prompted them of the past year are gone, and gone forever. In reviewing them, we have many to deplore, but none can change them. Yet, there are others, of which we feel thankful to God, that we have been permitted to participate in. In some four or five counties around my residence, by the united labors of Bros. Kendrick, Armstrong,
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
59
Thomas, Giles, Carrington, McCall and myself, there have been added to the Christian congregation, two hundred and thirty-three members since the 1st of last July. Hoping that your useful life and labors may long be preserved to the brotherhood and good cause, is the sincere desire of your brother in Christ.
STEPHEN STRICKLAND.
Georgetown, Texas, Christmas night.
BRO. FAULKNER AND LIVINGSTON:
I will give you a sketch of the progress of our Evangelist, H. B. Trimble, for the last year; as I have not seen any account of his labors in the Advocate; he wrote to you about it some time since, and perhaps you did not receive his communication, as such I will say to you that Brother R. B. Trimble in his last years’ labors in the cause of the Redeemer, had in all one hundred and forty-four additions to our Heavenly Father’s cause. His labors were mostly in Hickman and Maury counties; Brother Trimble is our Evangelist for the present year; and we trust and hope he will do full as well or better than last year. As ever yours in the one hope of the Gospel.
SAM’L. A. BAKER.
Duck River, January, 1858.
BRO. FAULKNER AND LIVINGSTON:
I am at this place holding a meeting which commenced last night; the cause here, as well as in many other places, is in rather a bad condition, but a universal cry for preaching. All that seems necessary to success, is the faithful preaching of the Word and a holy living on the part of the professed followers of the Lord Jesus. On my way to this place I preached in Hempstead County, and baptized one highly respectable gentleman. I will add, the brethren at this place show a commendable zeal for the cause; they are making arrangements for a house; when completed, will be worthy and will add much interest to the cause. The brethren show considerable liberality, they have employed brother David H. Sally, as their Evangelist, by whose labor we hope much will be accomplished. You shall hear from me again. Yours in the Truth and for the Truth.
J. S. ROBERTSON.
Camden, Ark., Jan. 21, 1858.
BRO. FAULKNER AND LIVINGSTON:
A considerable period has elapsed since I wrote you, from the fact that I had no important news to communicate, but I now have something that will both interest you and your numerous readers. I commenced a protracted meeting in Tarrant County, Texas, some…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
25 miles from here, on Saturday before the 3rd Lord’s day in September. I continued the effort until Wednesday night, when 15 were added to the Lord, and were built upon the foundation of Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone. Nine made a profession of their faith and seven were baptized; the other 2 perhaps was sick is the reason that they were not; five from the Methodists and four from the Baptists. The Brethren and sisters in that neighborhood formed themselves into a congregation by giving themselves to the Lord and to one another, numbering in all 60.
We had much opposition, but truth, the Lord’s truth will prevail. I preached at Birville, the former county seat of Tarrant Co., on Saturday and Sunday night to respectable audiences; we had good attention here, thence home and found all well. I think I will be able to get some subscribers for your valuable paper, at least I will try. One of those from the Baptists was convinced by reading the Gospel Advocate. Be faithful, dear brethren, and a crown of rejoicing will be yours.
Dallas, Texas, 1858.
A. H. DEAN.
Bro. FANNING AND LIPSCOMB: I am now on a tour to the southern part of the State, with a view of laboring for some weeks in that region for our Master’s cause. Since my last, we have held some interesting meetings, one embracing the first Lord’s day in October, in Madison Co., with three accessions; one the first Lord’s day in November, at Carrollton, Carroll Co., resulting in three additions that would do honor to my cause; 4th Lord’s day, same month, at Middle Fork Union, we had one accession; embracing the 5th Lord’s day in November, we held a meeting of several days on Flat Rock, near Van Buren, with five accessions, leaving a general good impression on the mind of the people at that place, which we hope will result in more good.
All that seems to be wanting to secure success, and a glorious triumph is a holy living, on the part of the professed friends of Jesus; oh that they would consider the importance of so doing, and lay aside all vain speculations, and honor God by honoring his Son, and thereby contribute to the conversion of the world. May the Lord bless you in your labors of love.
Your brother in Christ,
Walton, Ark. 1858.
J. S. ROBERTSON.
Bro. FANNING AND LIPSCOMB: Having left my old home in Ky., I wish through your paper to give my friends my whereabouts, and also to renew my subscription to the Advocate. Since I arrived here I have aided in one meeting at Desoto, on the
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Central Rail Road, commenced by brother Dewhit and my brother Isaac Mulkey, which resulted in 19 immersions. So far as I can learn we have no advocates of Modern Spiritualism, nor of man’s ability to know God intuitively, and I do hope we shall never see the Bible made to trail in the dust by such presumption and arrogance. I feel greatly lost for the want of your paper, for it has made its monthly visits to my family ever since its commencement, and the Post Master promised to forward the balance due me this year, but they have not come.
Believe me your Brother in the Lord,
John N. Mulkey
Thompson, Ill. 1858.
Brother Lipscomb: The Gospel Advocate for the present month is now before me. I am well pleased with the manner in which Bro. Fanning has conducted the discussion with Brother Richardson. Whenever we look to any other source than the Bible for information in regard to salvation or sanctification, we are most assuredly deluded, and are liable to be imposed upon.
Brother Richardson has not done you and Brother Cannack justice. He has represented you as contending for the word alone, and if I have understood you, you have never taken that position. Brother Richardson may say what he pleases about Locke’s philosophy, but how a person can receive information in any other way than through the five senses or some one of them, is an incomprehensible mystery to me.
Wade Barrett
Elic Ridge, Tenn. 1858.
Brother T. H. Trice writes from Memphis, January 11th, “Our congregation here is improving gradually. Our esteemed Bro. Trice is our teacher. We regard him as an excellent teacher. I feel great interest in the welfare of your Periodical. I should be glad for its circulation to extend from Maine to California.”
Bro. Trice has our sincere thanks for his aid to the Gospel Advocate.
W. L.
Bro. Chamber from Woodville, Miss., writes: “The brethren in this county have increased in numbers during the year, but still neglect to assemble themselves together upon the first day of the week unless a preacher is at hand.” Such reports as this are truly mortifying. What a shame it is that children of our Father cannot come together to worship Him without some human priest to offer prayer and praise for them. Under the new covenant we are all kings and priests unto God.
My brethren, let us beware lest we sell our holy birthright for a mess of pottage.
W. L.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
OBITUARIES
Dear Brethren, — I have been requested to prepare for your columns, a notice of the death of brother Levi N. Murphree. The knowledge of this sad event has already carried sorrow to many a heart and will doubtless to many more who by these lines shall for the first time become apprized of it. At the time he received the injury which probably caused his death, brother M. was absent from home engaged in the labor of a protracted meeting in Warren Co., Tenn. On Tuesday night, Oct. 6th, he complained of being unwell and spoke to his fellow laborer in the gospel, brother H. Campbell, rather despondingly of his health.
Next morning, however, he ventured to get upon his mule, intending to ride if possible to the meeting, and thence to make his way home. On the way the mule became frightened, ran and threw him against a tree. He lay for the most part unconscious and speechless till the brethren could remove him to the house of brother Wheeler. The best medical aid was procured, and all that kind Christian friends could do was done, but in vain. It is thought he never became fully rational after his fall. He lingered, however, about nine days and on the 16th fell asleep in Jesus.
While we cannot, however, dwell upon his dying words we thank God, we can dwell with delight upon his life, the labors and the bright examples of our beloved brother. He was truly an ornament to his family, to the State and to the church of God. Full of warm attachment himself to the people of the Lord he was repaid with full measure. His heart seemed a great and overflowing fountain of kindness and love. How many will remember to their dying home his impressive countenance as he stood and with eyes streaming with tears exhorted his brethren to be faithful and sinners to repent.
Who ever sought relief from him in distress that did not find a warm and quick response? His humility and diffidence were evidences of his real worth. His deep devotion and childlike reverence for his Maker were perhaps the crowning glory of his character. I can never forget the solemnity and pious reverence with which he engaged in the ordinances of the house of God. His course as a preacher was firm and unwavering. He was not tossed about by winds of doctrine. Neither denunciatory on the one hand nor compromising on the other: he enjoyed the high esteem of…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
The brotherhood wherever he preached. He was ever ready to engage in the work to which he had consecrated his life and many, very many, doubtless, now rejoice that they ever heard him, and will add lustre to the crown of immortal honor we believe he will forever wear in Heaven.
Bro. M. was born in Bedford Co., Tenn., April 25, 1814. In the year 1838, after having experienced much trouble and distress of soul, he was immersed by brother Trott. Not very long after he made his first efforts in preaching. After spending some time at school with brother Fauning, he married Sister Caroline, daughter of brother Thos. Snelling of Warren Co., and was employed by the congregation at Philadelphia, Warren Co., as an Evangelist in 1846. From that time to his death he gave himself wholly to preaching, with the exception of a year spent in College studies. During that year, however, I think he preached as much as opportunity permitted. But he has passed away. He has left a mourning wife with her four fatherless children, aged parents, brethren and sisters behind him. Many of us mourn for him as for a brother in the flesh, yet not without hope. We joyfully anticipate the day when we shall behold him and rejoice with him in the presence of God and the Lamb forever and ever.
Amen.
J. E.
DIED, in this place on Wednesday night the 2d inst., after a short illness, Mrs. Jane McClesh, daughter of the late Elder James Young, of Ala., and wife of Jos. B. McClesh, aged 41 years, 1 month and 3 days at the time of her death. She connected herself with the Christian Church in 1851 and lived a consistent and exemplary member till her death.
She was an amiable and affectionate wife, a good neighbor; beloved and esteemed by all who knew her. In her death her husband has lost a helpmate that time cannot restore; her relatives and friends will long mourn the breach that death has made in their midst. That impartial messenger came and took her in the bloom of life, cutting short her earthly prospects and anticipations, but transported her with bright hopes and unshaken confidence to the enjoyment of a happy immortality.
She was often heard to say,
“O die I’m not afraid With an Almighty guide. The valley now I’ll wade The Savior’s by my side.”
Brownsville, Sept. 12, 1857.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Brothers Fanning and Lipscomb
It becomes my duty to announce to you the death of our beloved brother, Elder William Nicks, who departed this life on the second of this month. His death was caused by a fall from his mule. He was driving his team, and on Thursday evening just at night his mules ran off with the wagon, and near his house he fell from the mule he was riding, and was dead for a few minutes, but came to, and was carried by his children into the house. He lived in great suffering from Thursday evening until Sunday night, and could talk, and was perfectly at himself until Sunday evening.
I have been acquainted with brother Nicks for upwards of thirty years; have lived a neighbor to him and a member of the same church nearly all the time; he may be said to have lived the Christian life and have endeavored to persuade others to be Christians, both by precept and example. He was a good neighbor, a loving husband, and an affectionate father. He has left a widow and a large family of children, and relatives and acquaintances to mourn his loss, and indeed and truth we do feel his loss, yet we do not sorrow as those who have no hope. His age I do not know exactly, but it is about seventy years. We deeply sympathize with the family and friends of the deceased. We live in hope that we will meet him where all our troubles will be at an end. As ever yours in the bonds of the gospel,
SAM’L. A. BAKER
Duck River, Nov. 20, 1857.
Bro. Fanning
Another good sister has fallen. Sister Sarah Johnson, wife of brother Jacob Johnson, and daughter of our much loved Elder John Mulkey, who was for forty years a faithful teacher of religion, departed this life about the first of Nov. 1857. Sister Johnson was born in Ky. May 16, 1791; became a Christian at nine years of age, and closed her eyes to earth in the triumphs of faith in Christ. During her sickness she had the attention of her daughter and son-in-law. I was to see her, and she manifested the greatest resignation. It is but due to her and her family to say, that her brothers Isaac and John Newton Mulkey are able and faithful ministers of the word.
Yours affectionately,
H. J. BLAKE