THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
T. Fanning and W. Lipscomb, Editors
VOL. IV
NASHVILLE, JULY, 1858
NO. 7
PRESIDENT CAMPBELL’S NOTICE OF THE SENIOR EDITOR OF THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE, IN THE JUNE NUMBER OF THE MILLENNIAL HARBINGER, FOR 1858.
President Fanning – Having read President Fanning’s “Reply” in the May No. of the Gospel Advocate, I desire to say a few concluding words in reference to the whole subject in controversy. In the first place, I must express my regret at the spirit and temper as well as the evident purpose of Pres’t F.’s article. He persists in endeavoring to make the impression on the public mind that Dr. Richardson and certain other brethren whom he names are teaching, as he says, “unmixed and unblushing infidelity.” This charge he affects to sustain by a few brief extracts from their writings.
These extracts do not at all sustain Pres’t F.’s assertion, and we wish to say that we consider it an outrage upon both editorial and Christian courtesy and upon the rules of church order and discipline that a persistent effort should be thus made, without any adequate reason, to injure the character and influence of pious and excellent brethren who utterly repudiate the sentiments attributed to them by Pres’t F.
As to Bro. Richardson, I am perfectly familiar with his sentiments on all the questions involved, and I can assure Pres’t F. that he does him the grossest injustice, not only in certain uncourteous references which he makes, but in attributing to him any views incompatible with the great principles which we have always believed and taught.
Pres’t F. has allowed himself to become super-excited, and his feelings and perceptions are manifestly in so morbid a condition that things appear to him quite otherwise than what they really are. Others who can judge of the “meaning of words” as well as Pres’t Fanning do not find in Bro. Richardson’s essays the slightest grounds for Pres’t F.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
F’s charge, and invectives, nor will the intelligent brethren justify or sanction his reckless assertions. We would suggest that if he would dismiss the whole subject from his paper, it would become a much more efficient “Advocate” of that Gospel which is designed to promote peace and love and Christian union, and as we have no idea of entering upon any discussion upon the matters involved, we shall, for our part, take no farther notice of them, but shall leave the “Advocate” to pursue its disquisitions upon what is “a prior” and what “a posteriori” ad libitum.
A. C.
REPLY TO PRESIDENT CAMPBELL
Ten years ago, we should have been much surprised at the character and terminus of this most useless attack of Bro. Campbell upon us; but now there is nothing in the matter to excite the least astonishment. The discussion has always been painful to us, yet we hesitate not as to its momentous importance, and while all the brethren, no doubt, sincerely regret its existence, the results have been, and will be, favorable to truth. Not only does the cause of Christ demand a reply from us, but while we entertain the least self-respect, there is not the slightest apology for submitting to such treatment.
No man more sincerely deplores family difficulties than ourself; and it grieves us to the heart, to think that there is a misunderstanding with Bro. Campbell. We feel assured that no man of the age has accomplished so much for the human family. The influence is not confined to the people called Christians. There is not a Protestant sect of the land that has not improved from the teaching of President Campbell and coadjutors. Still, he is but a man, and recently, he has done what in former years would have been utterly impossible, and what no man can do, without jeopardizing his character for candor and fairness. He has assailed us, not because he objects to our teaching, but to defend others whom he has aided in publishing their bitterest personal insults of us, and he has failed to do us the justice to let us be heard in his columns.
We have published everything written by himself and associates against us, and while we have no great confidence in our ability to defend any cause, we rejoice to believe that in the present controversy—the power of a giant is not required—the truth defends us.
Why does Bro. C. refuse to review our reply to his attacks on us? We did not expect him to publish it, and is it possible, he hesitated on the ground that he was unwilling to trust his readers to know even the character of the controversy? Is he unwilling for the people to see what is said of the speculations he is defending? In our present remarks, we desire nothing more than to set forth in a few brief notes.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
195
Our objection to Bro. Campbell’s farewell essay to us. While his notice is not prolix, there are, we believe, as many objectionable things affirmed, or suggested in it, as we ever found in the same space. We expect to speak in kindness, but with a little more freedom than formerly. Forbearance in this instance fails to be a virtue.
- The course of Bro. Campbell at this late juncture in declining “any discussion upon the matters involved,” in declaring that he will “take no further notice of them, but shall leave the ‘Advocate’ to pursue its disquisitions upon what is a priori and what is a posteriori ad libitum,” is so singular, contradictory, sneering and offensive, that we are constrained to protest against all such dignity. The facts in the case justify no such procedure, and we will not. In the first place, Pres’t Campbell most unnecessarily made the attack upon us without the least provocation. He charged upon us the sin of “seeking to make a false impression,” that we entertained some malicious intentions against “Bethany College and the Millennial Harbinger,” and he declared that he had no “associates that ever taught the doctrine of light from the inner consciousness.” We replied respectfully, and showed as clearly as words could enable us, that Bro. Campbell’s associates did appeal as a test of truth to “the spiritual inner man,” “the higher nature,” and “inner consciousness.” Bro. Campbell had entered into the discussion, had made the issues—we met them fairly and courteously, but instead of admitting, as he was bound in justice to do, our conclusions, he declines “any discussions,” abandons us to our fate, and sneers consummately at something he calls the “a priori and posteriori.” In the labor of almost half a century this is the first instance we recollect, of Bro. Campbell’s closing his columns against the respectful arguments of anyone, and of leaving the field in so unjustifiable a manner. We think it strange in the circumstances that Bro. Campbell should have challenged Duncan R. Campbell or Robert J. Breckenridge to single combat. He had much better silence false teachers nearer home, in our humble judgment. The charge at us regarding the “a priori and posteriori” is in keeping with the vein of bitterness that runs through all his notices of us.
- When Bro. Campbell expressed his “regret at the spirit and temper” of our article, he would have been much more satisfactory to the brethren had he submitted the evidences of our bad temper. But such “hedging” charges in the circumstances, avail not with the discriminating.
- When he refers to “the evident purpose” of our article, he leaves…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
His readers to infer that evil design prompted us. Indirect charges are difficult to meet, and we consider them more than disingenuous. He accuses us in a previous article of “seeking to make a false impression,” but explained it by contending that “seeking to make a false impression” might be done in ignorance; and therefore, he intended nothing personally offensive. This is singular logic.
Doctrine Denouncement
When we denounced the doctrine of “spirit either of our own or that of God, acting within us, being the cause of the effect which we call knowledge,” as maintained by Mr. Rossell, and Dr. Richardson’s charge upon us of the crime of “depending upon revelation, that is upon words, divine communications addressed to the bodily senses, for spiritual light, as unblushing infidelity,” we had nothing else before our mind but this teaching. Those men occasionally wrote things of a different character, but now Bro. Campbell says we “affect to sustain our charge by a few brief extracts.” We “affect” nothing. If they penned these things in ignorance, they ought not to speak on religious subjects, and if they had deliberately made up their minds to teach such views—the philosophy of Andrew Jackson Davis, and spiritual infidels generally—we affirm not too much.
When Bro. Campbell stated that he was “perfectly familiar with Bro. Richardson’s sentiments on all the questions involved,” and he assured us that we “do him the grossest injustice,” he certainly forgot his essay last year on “Natural Religion” to counteract without asserting it, Dr. R.’s teaching on the subject. And surely, he did not recollect the impression on our mind that Dr. R.’s connection with the Harbinger had been severed on account of his teaching. What does this mean? Bro. C.’s course proves that he regards Dr. R.’s teaching as false, but not infidel. We know not how to discriminate between a false theology and infidelity.
Accusations and References
When Bro. Campbell accuses us of “the grossest injustice,” and “uncourteous references,” he certainly did not consider the import of the words he employed. Had we used the words “grossest” and “uncourteous” with reference to him, he would have lost all respect for us. We will be pardoned, we trust, for intimating that from the beginning of the controversy, we have not indulged in strife that becomes not a gentleman and a Christian. We boast not—it was nothing more than our duty.
We can scarcely imagine what Bro. C. means by our “uncourteous references.” We have stated nothing. We have had greater reasons to object to Bro. C.’s associate, Dr. R., particularly, on personal grounds than from the tendency of his teaching.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
the first place, we told Bro. C. in a conversation, thousands of our best brethren firmly believe that, when Dr. R. asserted that Bro. Campbell was a teacher of the “natural theology,” by which “the being and perfections of God” can be learned from the “works of nature,” he intended to make a false impression, and therefore, is not a man of truth. Again, thousands of the best men in the nation regard Dr. R.’s course in leaving the matter in discussion to speak of some one “training horses for the turf,” and “keeping company with sporting and betting gentlemen;” as malicious in the extreme, and as infamously slanderous; and his refusal to correct the impression, is evidence of possessing qualities which place him beyond the recognition of truth-loving, honorable and Christian men.
Does Bro. Campbell consider our allusions as to the moral obligations of Prof. R. and Mr. Russell’s conduct in abandoning the Gospel to pray for mourners, in receiving $25 from partisans for his “manly” conduct in opposing the spiritual views of Pres’t Campbell, as “uncourteous references?” Be them, then, uncourteous. God will approve.
We know not the authority for Bro. C.’s statements, that we have “allowed ourself to be super-excited” till our “feelings and perceptions are manifestly in so warped a condition that things appear to us quite otherwise than they really are.” Our simple reply is, that no one in this controversy has privately or publicly pointed out anything indicative of bad temper; and, it strikes us, that Bro. C. has ventured to make the charge, without sufficiently weighing its import.
But last of all, and worst of all, Bro. Campbell exhorts to “peace and Christian union.” The exhortation almost confounds us. How can he hope for such results? We deplore difficulties amongst the brethren, detest factions, but we are assured that no religious union, based upon humbug policy can be permanent. We would rejoice to be at peace with all men, but no peace can be anticipated in the midst of contradictions. No difficulty of our life is more mortifying to us than the misunderstanding with Bro. Campbell, and there is no man on earth, whose friendship we so much desire—we intend no flattery—but the price demanded is what we cannot pay. The accusation that we “persist in laboring to make a false impression” without the least shadow of evidence, the charge of “grossest injustice,” “uncourteous references,” “reckless assertions,” and the intimation that our highest ambition in writing, is to injure Bethany College and the Harbinger, in order to build up Franklin College and extend the circula.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
The hope of Christian sympathy beyond our sight without a radical modification, both as to the matter and manner of Bro. Campbell’s writing. We could but despise the character of one who would seek, or accept the friendship of any man, upon dishonorable terms. When we denounced certain teachings as infidel, we did it on authority which no man familiar with its meaning or tendency of the system could deny; when we saw the moral qualities of Dr. R., we desired no longer his fellowship, and whilst we pray to God most fervently to enable us to be at peace, if possible, with all men, and regard our union as Christians as above all that is earthly, we desire it not, if we cannot have it on the basis of truth and righteousness.
If Bro. Campbell is determined to conduct a war of extermination against all who oppose the new theology of Dr. R., Mr. Russell and others, we cannot hope for peace or Christian union. We already have a college in Illinois, under the Presidency of a man who boldly and defiantly teaches divine knowledge from within; and in Kentucky, another is soon to go into operation under the Vice Presidency of Dr. R., whose doctrine, unless he has renounced it, is identical, and under the Presidency of Prof. Milligan, who but a short time since, wrote that we “as a church can do but little.”
We gravely ask Bro. Campbell and the brethren, how we can anticipate peace and union, unless the speculative and infidel system recently set forth by these men and others, is publicly renounced?
Before closing, we beg permission to suggest with the profoundest respect, that even Bro. C. himself, through the influence, no doubt of those he is defending, has said things in the May Harbinger regarding the “animal soul,” “the spirit,” “the true,” “the false,” “the morally good,” “the morally bad,” “beauty,” “Moral sense,” “inner consciousness,” “creations of our spiritual nature,” “He has directed the punishment of our sins, and therefore, we cannot be punished for them,” which we regard as unfortunate; and if ever criticized, will betray the insidiousness of a system that has endangered the church in all ages from the Apostles.
A hint to the wise, we regard, as quite sufficient. We are resolved by the help of God to indulge in no bad temper, to fellowship all that will permit us on “the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets,” to compromise no truth, to defend not bad men if we know it, to stand our ground firmly where we have the word of life to defend, to deal fairly with all men, to renounce error, if found under its influence; and above all, the good Lord supporting us, we will press towards the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
199
Jesus, and from our soul love all, as our brethren, who believe in the Lord through the words of the Apostles, and live humbly before God.
T. F.
For the Gospel Advocate
THE PASTORATE—A REVIEW
Bro. Fanning:—In the June number of the Advocate, there is an editorial, over your initials, upon the subject of the Pastorate, which, by your permission, I will briefly review through the same channel. While in your article, there are many sentiments to approve and commend, there are some that are objectionable; yea, and even mischievous, I think.
I will mention some of the objectionable clauses in your piece, and then offer my own views touching the same points. I, however, fully agree with you as regards the subject, that “There is something of deep moment connected with it.” We cannot, in my estimation, exaggerate its importance.
You made the following quotation from a British periodical, published by our brethren: “The seniors of each congregation are commanded to take the oversight without even an election for that purpose.” To this, you strongly intimate that the spirit and Peter both agree. I deny your assertion and challenge the proof. I do not know what spirit teaches such a doctrine; I am certain it is not the Holy Spirit. I am, too, equally certain that neither Peter, nor any other Apostle, teaches any such thing.
It will not avail you anything to refer to 1 Peter v. 2; there the Apostle is simply exhorting the Elders “to take the oversight of the flock, not by constraint, but willingly; but does not, at all, intimate that they should take the office without an election—unless you can make it appear that election and constraint are synonymous terms.
In arguing against elections, you are forced to take one of two alternatives—either that the Elders are to be a self-constituted class, or that they are to be wholly the work of the Evangelist. To both of these positions I object, as neither scriptural nor philosophical. In the first case, the most ambitious men would rush into the office, and often wholly unqualified to discharge its responsible duties; this result you could not prevent; for if you give the congregation discretionary power in the matter, it would be equivalent to an election. If you take the second alternative, that the Evangelist is to do the whole thing, you are contending for unscriptural authority.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
The part of the Evangelist is to ordain Elders—not to select them. For them to claim more would be an assumption, dangerous to the proper balance of powers that should always be observed in the church. After the Elders are fully invested, the Evangelist then has some additional, well-defined powers over them.
The following seems to me to be the true mode of making Elders: The congregation selects by popular vote, and the Evangelist only invests them with the robes of office. Should there be any Elders in the body, they cooperate with the Evangelist in the ordination. This view of the subject is strikingly set forth in the analogous case of the selecting of seven deacons in the Jerusalem church. Why should not both these classes be selected by the same mode, since they are both wholly congregational in their work?
Neither will it answer your purpose to argue against ordination as preliminary to the proper discharge of the duties of office, or that there is no such thing as office in the Christian Church; and that all labor in the congregations may be performed “Without an election, ordination, installation into office, or any other condition.” If you can allow a Scriptural warrant for such assumption, I will yield the whole matter.
You very considerately remark, “That you really doubt if the brethren, many of them at least, will receive it.” (This doctrine of yours.) I think that there is not much doubt about that matter. I predict that it will receive no congenial place among many of the brotherhood of this “Reformation.” We do not want it—we have no use for it.
Bro. F. seems greatly concerned that there is danger of the brethren favoring Theological Schools, and really sees, in their estimation, “that farmers, carpenters, blacksmiths, lawyers, traders, etc. are not good enough to perform the services of God, and consequently, a reverend class must be raised up to take this burden from the people for pay.” If I understand you in the foregoing extract, it is that you are utterly opposed to any special or professional education of preachers, and in favor of illiterate persons, (such as are comprised in most of the classes that you have enumerated,) performing the “services of God” without pay. Such teaching is fully a generation behind the intelligence and liberality of the age, and will not take, I am assured, with many of the disciples—it would better suit a people that are encased in a very “hard shell.”
You say that you regard “the practice of one man, and he often a beardless lad, assuming the pastorate of a State, district, or even a single congregation, as downright popery.”
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
201
The practice of placing one man over a congregation, and even a district too, (and hearclless lads at that,) was instituted by the Apostle Paul, in the cases of Timothy and Titus—the one he placed over a single congregation at Ephesus, and the other over a district comprising all the congregations on the island of Crete. These youthful Evangelists did not assume their positions, but were placed in them, and such should be the order of affairs now, whether in reference to “business men,” or to gray-headed seniors. Paul (as if directing against such objects as yourself) tells Timothy to “let no man despise thy youth.”
You will contend that these examples are Evangelists. True; and so were they temporarily Pastors, ex officio in their respective fields of labor. Indeed, they possessed jurisdiction over both the Elders and laity of those localities, as the following Scriptures prove:
- “Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor.”
- “Against an Elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses.”
- “Charge some that they teach no other doctrine.”
And such expressions as the following: “Preach the word,” “Reprove,” “Rebuke,” “Exhort,” etc.
The last position of yours that I shall notice is that the seniors (Elders) of the congregations are the Lord’s only pastors. I have shown, I think, in the cases already alleged, that such is not fact. I readily grant that, from the nature of their calling, they are the only permanent pastors; and, other things being equal, the more suitable ones.
Where they are sufficiently qualified for their work, no others are needed, except Evangelists occasionally, to aid them in holding protracted meetings, and to exercise that supervision that is required by the King, in order to have the laws of the Kingdom faithfully executed.
But should congregations, not having suitable Elderships (and such is the condition of a large majority), undertake to get along with “farmers, carpenters, blacksmiths, lawyers, traders, etc.,” they will soon find whether or not they are “good enough to perform the service of God.” Such, if they do not call in extraneous aid, will soon realize a perception of their condition by bringing death and dissolution upon themselves.
You will doubtlessly contend that only competent Elders be placed in office, which would, in effect, deprive a huge majority of our congregations from having any at all. But few of them have men capable of making good Pastors. Such is our experience as a denomination.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
The true plan, in my opinion, for congregations that have not efficient Elders, is for two or more of them to unite their resources, and procure an Evangelist to visit them monthly, or semi-monthly, as circumstances will allow, until they can do better, for I do contend that a half loaf, or even a quarter loaf, is better than no bread at all.
My advice to all the congregations is to have Elders, if they possess the qualifications in any degree, and if they will not answer a good purpose as preachers, they may be made valuable as leaders, provided always, that a suitable Evangelist is over them, to instruct them in their duty, and to direct their work, as was the case, in such instances, in Apostolic times.
I am, very respectfully yours,
ALEXANDRIA, TENN., July, 1858.
O. D. WILLIAMS.
REPLY TO BRO. O. D. WILLIAMS
We award to Bro. Williams the honor of being the only open opposer of our teaching in the Southwest. He fully endorses the system, without defining it, of Dr. R., and others cooperating with him, and for his frankness we respect and applaud him. His is a much more manly course than that of others, who, in cautiously surveying the ground, quietly confidentially suggest that we have not sufficiently examined matters under discussion, and the men we have pronounced infidel, teach just the opposite of what we have said of them.
When we called attention to Dr. R.’s speculations, we predicted that he would abandon the ground which he and his associates occupied, and deny all their plainly avowed premises. The results have confirmed our conjectures.
As Bro. W., however, considers himself in the opposition, we will take the more pains to notice his conclusions. While Bro. W. seems not disposed to be unfriendly to us, personally his style is scarcely respectful. He speaks of our sentiments as being “malicious.” It occurs to us that such a charge demands proof, or the more prudent may regard it as a determination to find fault.
Bro. W sternly denies that “The Seniors of each congregation are competent to take the right, without even an election for that purpose,” etc., telling us that “neither Peter nor any other Apostle teaches any such a thing.” He, moreover, affirms that when Peter exhorts “The Elders,” (Seniors) “to feed the flock, taking the oversight,” etc., he does not intimate that they should take the office without an election.
In reading this particular statement, one might suppose that Bro. Williams was fully competent to give the proof as to the necessity of an election to…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 203
The office of Elder, but not a word do we find. When, however, we tell Bro. Williams, there is not a syllable in the Bible about “making Elders,” or “Evangelists investing them with the robes of office,” or even the “Elders’ office,” we hope he will not consider our remarks “mis· chrerous.” If there is such scripture, doubtless he or others can point it out. If there is neither such an office, nor “robes” of office, all he and others have said upon the matter must be extremely idle. The word elder denotes older, and is attained alone by one man living longer than another. Experience, time, and labor, then, and not Evangelists “make” them.
When made thus, they are exhorted to “take heed to themselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Spirit (not Evangelists) has made them overseers, to feed the Church of God.” (Acts xx. 23). The Spirit of God thus pointing out men to feed the sheep, is quite different from “selecting them by popular vote,” as Bro. Williams teaches.
He says, if we can show where men, not elected by others, and not installed into office, did the work, he will yield the whole matter. We state that ordination did not make preachers, but men were consecrated to the labor of Evangelists, in consequence of having given practicable evidence of possessing the necessary qualifications to do the work.
Paul and Barnabas were preachers before their ordination at Antioch. If the consecration did not install them into office, what was its purpose? It was Heaven’s order to “recommend them for the labor amongst the Gentiles,” which they had given so abundant ability to perform amongst the Jews. The Corinthians were commanded to “submit themselves to such” as the house of Stephanus afforded, in consequence, not of having been elected by “the popular voice;” and robed with “official authority” by the ordination of Evangelists, but because they “ministered to the Apostles” (1 Cor. xvi. 15).
This popish idea of bowing to official authority seems to influence the conclusions of many besides Bro. W., and yet there is not a word of authority in the Scriptures for it. Paul exhorts the brethren to “remember them who have the rule over them, who have spoken unto them the word of God, whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation; Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, and forever,” (Heb. xiii. 7 and 8). Again he says, “We beseech you, brethren, to know them who labor among you. And to esteem them very highly in love for their work’s sake,” (1 Thes. v. 12, 15). This is not official reverence, but esteem for the faithful labor of God’s servants.
This official authority is the rock which has wrecked more…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
churches and men than any other in our acquaintance, in this Reformation.
3.
Because we teach that “farmers, carpenters, blacksmiths, lawyers, traders,” etc., are fully authorized, as Christians, with no office higher than is guaranteed to them as members merely of Christ’s kingdom, to keep the ordinances of the Lord’s house, and dare not “let their services to lie,” Bro. Williams infers that we favor the “illiterate,” and that “such teaching is fully a generation behind the intelligence of the age.” We must say to Bro. W. that the doctrine which takes the worship from the disciples and places it in a so-called literary class, takes the bread of life from the children of God, and consigns them to the man worship in which in all countries Rome and her daughters have long reveled.
We would rejoice to see all Christians thoroughly educated, and the more learned good men are, the greater are their advantages in the vineyard of the Lord; but “God has chosen the weak things of the world to confound the mighty.” Our strength is in the truth, and not in literature, however highly one may regard it.
4.
When Bro. W. represents Timothy and Titus, whether he is serious or not, as “beardless lads placed, one over the congregation at Ephesus, and the other over a district,” he speaks without authority. Timothy, who was exhorted to “let no man despise his youth,” had been an Evangelist at least thirteen years, and was some forty years old when Paul “besought him to abide at Ephesus,” not as Pastor, but, as was his peculiar province, as an Evangelist, to “charge some that they teach no other doctrine,” to “preach the word, do the work of an Evangelist,” etc., etc.
But it is singular that after all Bro. W.’s broad and bare assertions regarding youthful and single pastors of churches and districts, and in opposition to the Seniors being the Holy Spirit’s overseers, he should abandon all, by admitting “that the Seniors, from the nature of their calling, are the only permanent Pastors, and other things being equal, they are the more suitable ones.” Hence there seems to be no ground of controversy. This reminds us of all the speculative school, from Dr. R., and Prof. M., to Bro. W. They furiously attack us, yet close the controversy by admitting all we ask. We do not thank them for their admissions.
When the opportunity offers, they may exhibit their true colors. They have proved themselves fully adequate to the task of teaching, with a good grace, systems as opposite as the poles. The Spiritualism of Andrew Jackson Davis, and of Paul the aged, are found upon the same page, if not in the identical sentence.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
205
- Bro. W. closes his “Review,” by settling down on what he calls “the true plan,” in his “opinion,” for congregations that have not efficient Elders, two or more of them, to unite their resources, and procure an Evangelist to visit them MONTLY, or semi-monthly, until they can do better, with the presumption that a half a loaf, or even a quarter of a loaf is better than no bread at all. We beg leave to differ in “opinion” with Bro. Williams. If congregations are too poor to worship God for themselves, they are not only sick and dying, but the sooner they acknowledge themselves dead and buried, and twice plucked up by the roots, and abandoned of Heaven to their own folly, the better for them and the cause of Christ. A few miserable crumbs doled out to such by a hired straggler, in monthly doses, only protracts their miserable and disgraceful existence, and the sooner they silence their empty profession, the better for the world and the cause we plead. While we feel that it is necessary to let our readers see the character of the opposition, we say in much forbearance, that we are heartily ashamed to witness so utter a destitution of love for the truth, with men who have had ample opportunity to learn the will of the Lord.
The ambition, however, of some of our ablest men, to prove themselves orthodox, of others to gain the fellowship of the heresies of the times, and of many, to submit the administration of religion to a literary class called Pastors, indicates a fearful want of confidence in the ability of the church to show forth the authority, perfections, and praises of Him who has called us out of darkness into his marvelous light. We trust Bro. W. will more sincerely examine the matter, before he undertakes again to correct our teaching.
T. F.
THE BLESSINGS OF THE GOSPEL ONLY IN OBEDIENCE
Beyond all doubt the besetting sin of the day is an aversion to labor, physical, mental, or religious. We are persuaded that most men and women have some ambition for distinction, but the trying matter is that its cost is labor, toil, and unflinching endurance. All men, probably, would like to possess a competency of the good things of this life, and there are few, indeed, who might not with proper exertion, but what multitudes do we see who hardly make out to supply their daily wants as they come upon them, and are never able to lay up anything for the trying hours of sickness and affliction. Most young persons whose intellects are in the least awakened, have some…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Desire to become learned, and aspire to some sort of intellectual culture, but small indeed is the number of those that ever reach the condition of the tamest mediocrity. Why is it? Simply because our wise creator has given no excellence except upon the condition of exertion and unwearying toil.
The possession of wealth and enjoyment of mental distinction are open to all, but they alone ever taste of their sweets who are willing to bear the labor of scaling the rugged heights on which they are placed. In Christianity, the same law holds good. God our Father has manifested his love, given to us his will, placed within our reach the means by which we may attain to happiness and peace in this life, and honor and immortality hereafter, and most persons have some desire for these blessings, but nothing has been offered except on conditions.
All will most readily confess that these ends are desirable, but those who are willing to bear the burden and heat of the day for their attainment are few indeed. If the blessings offered in the Gospel were to be had without exertion, doubtless many would be willing to reach forth their hands and take of the enjoyments. But our kind Father has ordained that there should be no blessings except at the cost of labor.
All the offerings of his grace are to us upon the condition that we are willing to endure the toils and hardships that may be required at our hands. We have often said that the moral curse of the age is that people expect to be accounted servants of heaven without service, but in indolence, negligence, and disregard of all the obligations imposed by the gospel. That the Christian profession is a mere idle form of words without meaning or influence.
Hence we have come to the point that the easiest way of keeping up the appearance of a respectable profession is the best. We might as well expect wealth in golden abundance to flow to us, and honors and chaplets of renown to encircle our brows while we are idle, careless, and negligent, as to expect the enjoyment of the blessings of the gospel without that devotion of time and energy which heaven requires.
There is much speculation about influences that operate upon man in tendering him spiritual, and the matter of spiritual enjoyment has become to the minds of many a perfect maze of confusion. The world has come to regard spiritual enjoyment as antecedent to all Christian service. The ancient and divinely promised order was and is that Christians were to receive and enjoy the spirit, upon condition of faithful obedience to the law of Christ; we now must be spiritual before we can obey the Savior. This is but a vain effort to lessen our responsibilities to heaven, and excuse ourselves in the neglect of the obligations.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
207
Galions of the Gospel
No people on this earth were ever blessed with spiritual blessings, and filled with the fruits of the spirit that were unwilling to worship God as his servants, and manifest in their lives their entire submission to his requirements. Unless the professed servants of God feel that it is their imperative duty to worship God in all his appointments, in reading and meditating upon his word, singing his praises, exhorting one another to love, and to good works, and in often, very often, bowing before God in sincere and humble confession and prayer, they cannot expect to be other than a light, irreverent, worldly, and godless people.
But when they are willing to do these things, they must become godly, spiritual, and holy in heart and life; upon no other condition have they the right to expect anything but barren leanness and poverty, and then alone will they be regarded worthy of the name of sons and daughters of the Most High.
Whenever men and women on this earth have been disposed heartily to labor for the Lord, He has not failed to bless them with the fullest abundance of all spiritual honors and privileges, and their lives have been ever filled with all the fruits of Peace, Righteousness and Love. Any show of submission except a devotion of time and means, and energies of mind and body to the service of our Lord is but useless and empty mockery of allegiance to heaven, and leaves us at all times open to the insidious attacks of the world, the flesh, and the devil, and ready always to fall away and become abandoned and reckless of all that is holy and just.
If the Christian religion is to be our peace, solace and comfort, our highest enjoyment through the storms of disaster in this life, and the sure and steadfast anchor of hope for an inheritance beyond this life, we must, my brethren and sisters, love it more sincerely, consecrate our hearts and lives to it more earnestly, and apply ourselves with greater diligence to all of its duties, privileges and requirements. Thus alone will God be honored by our submission, and we receive the fullest enjoyment, and every spiritual blessing and honor as his children.
W. L.
Blaspheming Against the Holy Spirit
Brethren: — Please give your views of Matt. xxi. 31 and 32. I am blinded upon that subject. Yours in the one hope.
W. S. C.
The passage referred to by our brother is that in which Christ is speaking of the unpardonable sin of blaspheming against the Holy Spirit.
208
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Spirit. We think there is little difficulty in understanding what constitutes that sin when we read the whole connection. The Saviour had been charged by the Pharisees with the crime of receiving his power from the Prince of Devils, Beelzebub, and this was undoubtedly the sin with them against the Holy Spirit. They saw his wonderful works, such as no man could do, but instead of being convinced by them, they hardened their hearts in wickedness, and in mad defiance of the testimony presented to their own eyes, charged the Saviour with being an emissary of the wicked one. For such a sin Christ has said there is no forgiveness either in this world or that which is to come. The sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is then, evidently, in denying the power of God through his spirit, and attributing his works to the Prince of Devils.
How many of the sinful practices and doctrines of the present day are sins against the Holy Spirit might not be very easily determined but undoubtedly such sins do exist. The constant disposition which men manifest to rob God of all the glory of man’s redemption and elevation, and to arrogate to themselves whatever has been accomplished for man’s social and religious advancement bears strong marks of this sin.
W. L.
THE LOVE OF THE TRUTH.
We know no higher test of Christian character than a deep, earnest, reverential respect for the word of God. We may be deceived by a mistaken zeal, but sincere reverence for God’s Word is a test by which we cannot be deceived, and which cannot be counterfeit. To hear the word of the Lord with trembling and reverence shows a regard for the authority of Heaven. The Lord has said, “To this man will I look, even to him who is of a humble and contrite spirit, and trembles at my word.” The love of the word of God impelled the disciples of our Saviour, when many were turning back and walked no more with him, and he put to them the trying question, “Will you also go away?” To reply, “Lord, to whom shall we go? for thou hast the words of eternal life.”
Our blessed Lord himself has given it repeatedly as the highest test of loyalty to Him. Before Pilate he says, “Everyone that is of the truth heareth my voice.” Again, to the Jews who had believed on him he says, “If ye continue in my word then are you my disciples indeed.” The aged John to his beloved children gives most fully the characteristic by which they might know that they were the servants of God, and might assure their hearts before…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 209
Him. “We are of God,” says he, “he that is of God heareth us.” Again, “By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error, he that is of God heareth us, he that is not of God heareth us not.” Again, “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep his commandments; for this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments, and his commandments are not grievous.”
Such tests as are here given leave us no room to doubt in regard to our position before Heaven. Any other test of mere feeling or transient emotion may be false and deceptive, but when we know that there is constantly abiding in our hearts a constant love for the words of our Master, and a continual disposition to hearken to all that he commands, we have the strongest assurance that we are the children of God.
Men and women profess conversion to God under various influences, but soon it appears who have been turned to God by a sincere conviction of the truth, and who have been under the impulse of merely animal feeling. Those who are truly turned from sin and folly to the love of the truth, desire the sincere milk of the word, that they may grow thereby, while those who have been mere dupes of deception and creatures of passion, have no love for God’s word and never think of looking to it as the source of spiritual food for Christian growth and strength, but soon fall away into wickedness and hardness of heart, tenfold more difficult to reach with the truth than if they had never been the subjects of such deceptions.
Those who intelligently enlist in the service of the Great Captain, and own allegiance to the Lord, have the deepest and most abiding reverence for the word of God, and love for the testimony upon which is founded their confidence.
There is no surer mark of a corrupt life and secret baseness of heart, with any professed servant of God, than to hear him speak slightly of the word of God, or manifest indifference on any question involving its authority. I know there is much vain declamation about the authority of the word; “The Bible, and the Bible alone,” has been the meaningless, empty babble of many a tongue, while the heart and the life were in the wickedest rebellion against all of its teachings. This is all the vainest mockery. We show our love and reverence for the word of the Lord when we diligently read its teaching, fill our hearts continually with its holy lessons of spiritual life, and tremble at its authority.
Any other sort of respect for the living oracle is the emptiest affectation and show. When indeed we love the truth, we are ready to exclaim, in the fullness of our hearts, with David of old, “O,
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
“how I love thy law; it is my meditation all the day.” “Thy testimonies have I taken as a heritage forever, for they are the rejoicing of my heart.” Such is the expression of every heart filled with veneration for the words of Jehovah.
W. L.
AN APOSTATE
CHESTNUT BLUFF, Tenn., May 31st, 1858.
Dear Bro. Fanning:—Elder Thomas Owen, near Brownsville, a Baptist Minister of high Christian character, informs me, that while in Arkansas he met with a Mr. Collinsworth, who represents himself as once having been “a Campbellite Preacher,” and fully conversant with the “Campbellite” doctrine, that baptismal regeneration is one of the strongholds of “Campbellism,” etc., etc. Bro. Owen wishes to know something of the history of this Mr. Collinsworth. He says that Mr. C. told him that he was from Bedford County, Tenn., etc., etc.
Bro. Owen says that Mr. Collinsworth is using stronger exertions to prejudice the minds of the people against the doctrines of the Christian Church than any other man he has ever met with, and that while in the company of Mr. C., sheer justice required that he should defend the Christian Church from the vile persecutions heaped upon it by Mr. Collinsworth. He informed me that he has read the writings of the principal editors of the Reformation, and that he has never seen anything assimilating to what Mr. Collinsworth represents us as believing and teaching.
My answer was that I knew very little about Mr. Collinsworth, but that I would get you to give him all information. I therefore hope that you will not fail to do so as soon as you can. In fact, from what he tells me, your special respects to Mr. C., through the Gospel Advocate, are necessary.
Though Brother O. is a Preacher belonging to the Baptist Church, he is a firm believer in the doctrine of the truth.
Your brother in the faith of the Gospel,
JNO. H. MOSS.
REMARKS:
Our quondam friend, J. R. Collinsworth, indulged in idle speculations, apostatized and was excluded from the Church at Lewisburg; and is now a very mean enemy. The doctrine of Baptismal Regeneration, no disciple ever believed or taught. Bro. Campbell was unfortunate in some of his remarks in…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
211
the Extra, published in 1830, but he did not then believe, and he does not now believe that baptism is regeneration. It is the washing of the new creation, renovation, or regeneration, (Mat. xix. 28; Luke xxii. 28; Titus iii. 5) but the washing of an institution is no more the institution than the fruit of the tree is the tree.
T. F.
For the Gospel Advocate
SPIRITUAL BAPTISM
Regarding Spiritual Baptism, it may not be amiss to refer directly to the argument of the doctrine based on Col. ii. 12-16.
“Buried with him in Baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him, through the faith of the operation of God, which hath raised him from the dead.”
The Colossians are said to have been raised through faith in the operations of God.
[Faith in the operation of God in raising Jesus from the dead. T. F.]
Therefore it is supposed to refer to the operation of the spirit.
[No authority. T. F.] By which the soul is regenerated
[Regeneration has no reference to an operation on the soul. T. F.] in spiritual baptism. It should be borne in mind, that the Colossians were raised from that in which they had been buried. Is this supposed to be true of all Christians, after their conversion and regeneration by spiritual baptism? Are they taken from under those influences of the spirit? Are the advocates for this doctrine prepared for this admission? The text does not read as generally quoted—raised with him through the operation of God—as though the baptism of the spirit was the operation alluded to.
But the idea is, that persons buried in the waters of baptism, were raised from the water to walk in a new life by faith. That is, they were led to be baptized and raised to a new state of life by faith in the operation of God; who raised Jesus from the dead. The operation of God spoken of, was his act of raising up his Son from the dead, not the act of regenerating the soul by spiritual baptism; it was their faith in the resurrection of Christ, which led them to be buried and raised in Christian Baptism. This is precisely what the Apostle teaches in this text. Hence baptism is here and elsewhere connected with the resurrection of Christ.
Baptism saves us, says the Apostle Peter, by the resurrection, 1st Peter, iii. 20. Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, that like as Christ was raised up from the dead, by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life, Rom. vi. 4.
If the dead rise not, why then were you baptized for the dead? 1st Cor. xv. 29. We have
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Multiplied and explicit evidence that water baptism is the only Christian baptism, by which persons are initiated into Christ, he being the head of the body, the church. It should be borne in mind that the Apostle says, “Buried with him in baptism.” If these texts, Col. ii. 12 and Rom. vi. 4, do not mean water baptism, we ask what do they mean? If they mean spiritual baptism, then it is not this baptism in which we were buried with Christ. The Bible nowhere teaches that Christ was buried in the baptism of the spirit; but to the contrary, He taught the people, during his stay on earth, that he would send the spirit to them that believed on him. For the spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet ascended nor glorified. If Christ was not buried in the baptism of the spirit then it was not this baptism that Paul had reference to, when he said we are buried with him in baptism.
It is sheer nonsense to talk of being buried with Christ in that baptism in which he himself was not buried. The scriptures mention but four baptisms, and of course it is one of those that Paul referred to. We have the baptism of suffering recorded in Luke xii. 50, and it is not the baptism in which we are buried with him. Nor the brethren at Colosse, for they never had been crucified with Christ nor buried with him in the earth; for they were alive at the time Paul wrote the Epistle to them, addressing them in the following language: “Buried with him in baptism.” The next is the baptism of the Holy Ghost, and that of Fire, as prophetically alluded to by the harbinger, John, in Matt. iii. 11.
We have just shown that it is not the baptism of the Holy Ghost that our Lord was buried in; for such a thing as Holy Ghost baptism was never given till some time after Jesus had ascended to Heaven, and was coronated as King of the universe; then it was sent to his disciples, as a comforter, to guide them into all truth; not to convert their souls, but to bring all things to their remembrance that our Lord had communicated to them during his stay on earth. We have no account that our Savior or his disciples were ever buried in the Baptism of Fire. We cannot suppose that the baptism of fire spoken of in Matt. iii. 11, was a symbol of good, or any benefit to be conferred upon the righteous; for the scriptures never speak of fire as a blessing, but as an evil, a curse to be inflicted upon the wicked. Surely, it was not this dreadful baptism that the Colossian Christians were buried in.
It will be remembered that the baptism mentioned in Rom. vi. 3 and 6, is that by which believers are initiated into Christ and become new creatures—”Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into his death.” It is clear then that the baptism by…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
which we are said to be buried, is that which puts us into Christ; and everything else that men, in their wild imagination, may designate baptism, is worthless; for this is what puts us into Christ. We have only to ascertain what this is; and the Apostles, in another part of his writings, fully explain himself. In 1st Cor. xii. 13, we read, “By one spirit are we all baptized into one body.” The body here mentioned is Christ’s body, the church of which he is the head. This whole passage is now clear.
The baptism which the Apostle connects with a burial is that which puts us into Christ; but it is “by one spirit” that we are “baptized into him.” In the commission given by Christ to the Apostles, he said, “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost;” Mat. xxviii. 19. In this commission, be it observed, the Saviour tells his Apostles to baptize the people into his name as well as that of the Father and Holy Ghost. In Rom. vi. 3, the subjects are baptized into Christ. In Col. iii. 27, the Apostle says, “So many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” In view of all these circumstances of the case, we think we are fully authorized to come to the conclusion that it is water baptism in which believers put on Christ, are baptized into Christ, into his death, have been buried with him, and raised to walk in newness of life. The scriptures represent Christians as having been crucified, dead, and buried with Christ and raised to walk a new life.
In this view of the subject, how impressive the exhortation of the Apostle to his brethren, who had been thus buried and raised with Christ in baptism. “If ye then be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affections on things above, not on things on the earth.” There are many reasons why our affections should not be set on the perishable things of this earth, because they are fleeting, and we shall ere long cease to enjoy them; but to the Christian that seeks for that life which is eternal, that is hid with Christ in God, when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then shall we also appear with him in glory.
And may the Lord help us to use the means of salvation, that we may gain heaven and all the blessings of the same.
Fraternally yours in Christ,
BLUFF SPRINGS, Tenn.
WM. J. HAILES
214: THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
FRANKLIN COLLEGE COMMENCEMENT
The fourteenth annual Commencement of this institution took place in the College chapel June the 16th, 1858. The day was delightful, and several hundred persons present seemed much interested in the addresses of the young gentlemen. We considered the character of the audience, equal, if not superior to that of any previous assembly in this institution.
Everything seemed to be conducted to the satisfaction of the spectators, and we regard it not at all unbecoming in us to say, the performances were much to our satisfaction. The friends of the College were evidently delighted.
The afternoon of the same day was spent in hearing essays and music from the young ladies of Mrs. Fanning’s school. We never saw an audience manifest a higher degree of satisfaction at the genuine merit of the compositions, with the beautiful and modest bearing of the young ladies, and the music was all that could be desired. Prof. Sulmer has made himself a name as a faithful and highly competent teacher, that will remain, when he shall have passed from time. We should be much pleased if our brethren, particularly, were fully apprised of what we are doing in the education of youth.
T. F.
PARTYSIM
A notable feature of every moral, social, or religious movement of the present day is the disposition to do whatever is attempted on a grand scale. We are told that the triumphs of mechanism is past removing the necessity for the toilsome labor of individual handicraft, and that everything in acts of industry tends to consolidation and combination. In the moral and religious aspects of society we see very much the same tendencies. The idea of individual efforts accomplishing any great and permanent good is not current with the would-be social and moral reformers of the day. Instead, we are accustomed to look for good only from the operation of some colossal moral machine in which the people are lost sight of, or are only looked to as the source from whence to draw supplies wherewith to keep in operation this grand machine.
That such was the state of matters in the darkest day of Romish degradation all are ready to admit, but probably we are not so ready to see that the prevailing tendencies of this day are toward the same end. There is scarcely a party of religious people in our land that is not already consolidated in a vast missionary, or some other sort of an association, overriding everything like personal individual usefulness in its members. We, as a people are not
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
so far advanced in these things as many others, but the indications of the last half score of years are that we too must soon follow in the same road and furnish ourselves with all the accompaniments of a respectable religious body.
I repeat, our disposition is, at present at least it appears, to follow in the wake and imitate the example of others. To what extent this feeling will lead and what checks it may receive we cannot at present decide.
Certain we are, however, that things which twenty-five years ago were condemned most severely as utterly unknown in the economy of Christ are now in many quarters received and commended to the acceptance of the brethren. So far, however, we have not done much on the grand scale, and efforts at consolidated machinery for accomplishing good have not been very successful.
Tis true that we have a feeble starveling at Cincinnati, called in courtesy a Missionary Society, and in several other quarters quite pretentious evangelizing and educational schemes, still compared with the efforts the results have been yet lean, and there has been but little hearty cooperation of the disciples of Christ in any of these plans.
We would gladly hope that there might be even less, still there are some indications that are not the most pleasing. There is growing up among the people, called the disciples of Christ, a strong party feeling, a feeling to sustain “our denomination” at every hazard, and the current sectarian phraseology of the day is insinuating itself into the language of our speakers and writers.
The bold, original platform, that we were not a party upon which so many a noble triumph was gained, seems to have been lost sight of; and we are now especially pleased if we have gained numbers and influence in any locality, to be regarded merely as one of the orthodox recognized religious bodies. Such was not the feeling in the day when this movement was as a vigorous, athletic giant, fearing no danger, and asking no quarter.
Then the question was not, does this or that man belong to “our denomination,” or has he been recognized and respected among us? but it was, does he love the truth above all things, and does he teach it? If he does, he is our brother by every tie that the love of God entwines. If not, we have no use for him on any ground.
This is the spirit we still need; this love of truth above the love of party; this feeling that we are more ready to expose and reform error among ourselves than with any other people. Should an error, however, be now marked, the ready cry of croakers is “you are ruining the cause,” “you are ruining the cause.” What cause do they mean? If they mean the cause of a party, let us rather be
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
thankful for every blow which it receives. But if they mean the cause of our blessed Lord, let us remember, the truth has never yet suffered from the exposure of error, but has always come out brighter and more beautiful from the conflict. While we are bound together by the simple love of the truth and the practice of its injunctions, we will be superior to all evil from such causes.
If we are determined to stand upon the truth as God has given it, then all such croaking must appear to us most despicably degrading to a Christian people. If our trust is still to be in the strong and mighty power of the Word of the Lord, we cannot fear to be ready at all times to hear the fullest exposes of any error that may have crept in among those whom we are wont to regard as brethren. Where the simple love of the truth is the bond of union, the fullest and freest discussion, instead of separating, must rather bind in closer and firmer bonds those who are worthy. But if we expect strength and influence from some vast consolidation, sustained by worldly wealth and favor, and having no basis except in some contrivance of man, every jar and mistake in any part will be felt by the whole, and the entire concern will be the constant subject of suspicion, and dread, and continual disturbances.
If we are indeed the servants of Heaven, we need no such bonds of human devising, but we love those who love the truth, and every aspiration and impulse of our hearts is in unison with theirs. The same glorious aims inspire our hearts, and the same promises and blessings cheer us on in our way, and the same trust is in His blessed cause. This is the strongest ground of Christian union—the love of the truth, and faithful obedience to all its teachings.
W. L.
UNITED WE STAND—DIVIDED WE FALL
Feeling satisfied that it is necessary for Bro. Campbell and others, to hear the views of good brethren regarding the unfortunate controversy with him, we have selected, for the public eye, the following very discreet letter from our highly esteemed Bro. Dr. M. Hackworth, of Ala.:
DICKINSVILLE, ALA., June 24th, 1838.
Brother T. Fanning—Dear Sir, I have just finished reading, with much pleasure and deep regret, the April, May, and June numbers of the Gospel Advocate. Pleasure, because I see much in them which
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
is so well calculated to instruct sinners, strengthen the brotherhood, and build up poor, languishing Zion. Regret, because I see that all is not yet right in quarters from which we should look for no evil. O, how long will it be till that glorious day will come when all the great and good men amongst us will have learned to be “wise as serpents and harmless as doves?” Are we, while treading the rugged path of life, while traveling through this vail of tears, authorized to look for entire consistency among ourselves? We do not ask for peace, or terms with sin, the common enemy of our souls, while there is one sin, or sinner in the whole world.
But we pray for peace and union in Zion. Can we hope, ever hope, to see the brethren seeing eye to eye, of the same mind, of the same judgment, and speaking the same things? (All Christians are one now.) And until we can thus hope, can we count on much being done towards the conversion of the world? Was there not much meaning in the language of the Savior when he prayed “that they may be one as we are, that the world may believe that thou hast sent me?” O, was not the holy Apostle, right when he told the Corinthians they were carnal, and walked as men, because they had discords amongst them? And is not the same Scripture applicable to us when similar misfortunes befall us? And, Bro. Fanning, does it not look very much like a misfortune, similar to that of the Corinthians, is likely to come upon our churches from the Franklin and Bethany difficulty? (We hope not.)
Already men are casting it in our teeth, that it is with a grace, not becoming us, to call on others, from the pulpit, for union while we are divided among ourselves. (Bro. Campbell and we differ not regarding the gospel.) And I confess, that for me, I do not feel myself so well prepared to repel the force of it. To be sure, I can make an offset by telling them that they, too, are divided. But still I feel that as two wrongs never made a right I have not done anything by the offset which will justify divisions and discord among us.
And, my brother, although I have never conversed with the first brother who was in the least disposed to censure you, neither have I conversed with any one brother, who does not deeply mourn over the unfortunate difficulty. Every brother with whom I have conversed on this lamented (and I meet with not a few) subject, is decidedly of the opinion that the discussion between you and Dr. R. R., was and is, one of vital importance to the cause of Christ and the church generally; and that our venerable and highly esteemed brother Campbell, should, in all conscience and reason, have given you, in the Harbinger, that
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
useful and welcome messenger, page for page with Dr. R. R., until you had exhausted your arguments, or were willing to leave what you had said with your readers respectively. This discussion being one which, in the very nature of things, was referable to the readers of the Harbinger and Advocate, and to these alone.
Brethren have told us that they were very anxious to circulate the Advocate among their non-professing friends, being better suited to their needs than any other periodical known to them now; but doubting, really, as to the propriety of doing so until this controversy is ended, they do not take action. So much do they regret the apparent alienation of feeling existing between two main defenders of our cause. If it existed between any other two individuals, we should pay but little attention to it. But as it is, I do hope you will not be surprised at the deep and anxious interest which we take in its settlement. We see not, in justice to yourself and the position in which you are placed, how you could have said less. But our hearts’ desire and prayer to God is that you may both unite in the fear of God, in bringing this matter to a favorable termination. (We pray for peace, but are ready for war. We have but little to hope from the advocates of the new theology. T. F.)
In thus addressing you, my dear brother, you may depend upon it, I am but giving you the sentiments of many brethren who feel deeply concerned. I hope that this will be a sufficient apology for this intrusion upon your patience. I ought to add that there are men of no religion, but who are with us in sentiment, who feel almost as much on this subject as any of the brotherhood. But we will, very impatiently, wait the result. (We regret it more than any one, yet God will be honored in the results. T. F.)
O, Lord, take us not out of this world, but keep us from the evil of it. As ever, your devoted brother,
MATT. HACKWORTH.
“THE BIBLE UNION”—A NEW PAPER IN CONTEMPLATION.
We have received from Bro. D.P. Henderson, of Louisville, Ky., an address by himself and Bro. Dr. T. S. Bell, in which they propose to publish in that city a weekly paper “devoted to every interest which the Bible teaches belongs to us.” These are brethren of superior ability, and we will take pleasure in giving our readers their prospectus, and in doing so.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
219
All in our means to enable them to enlarge their sphere of usefulness. From the general tenor of the circular, however, we think likely they may be slightly mistaken in some points. It occurs to us that the appeal to Kentucky, to the South and West, or to the North, evinces not a proper view for a religious editor—the world is the field. Again, it is possible, the brethren promise too much, and both they and their readers may be disappointed. But as we know not what men can do till they are tried, we offer our brethren at Louisville, all the encouragement in our power.
T. F.
PERSONAL
Whilst we as deeply regret the difference with Bro. Campbell as any one of our personal friends can do, we beg leave to say to several of our excellent brethren, who have furnished protests to his defense of Dr. R. and doctrines, that for the present, we consider it prudent to delay their publication. There is really no positive evidence that there is any important discrepancy between Bro. Campbell’s teaching and our own, and we still hope a little more time for reflection will enable us to amicably adjust all our real and imaginary difficulties. Bro. Campbell is much devoted to those who have long cooperated with him, and he is reluctant to admit their abandonment of the Bible. We presume, indeed, that even Dr. R. does not now intend so rash a step, although his writings last year placed him beyond the precincts of the Christian religion. We may possibly show in our next some new features of the same system; but, should Bro. Campbell in the meantime, lose sight of what we regard a very contracted school policy, all may come right so far as he is concerned, in a single hour. We still love him for what he has done, and though he should in the evening of life, exhibit too warm an attachment for men, unworthy of his confidence, we hope for the best. He must, however, rest assured that the brethren familiar with the controversy do not approve of his recent attack or act.
T. F.
EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES
We deem it our duty to very respectfully call attention to our educational advantages in Franklin College. We have seldom spoken or written a word on the subject, but we deem it our duty to the brethren, particularly, as well as ourselves, to speak firmly. By our own means we have a good college edifice, and other important buildings.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
For conducting an institution of learning, and a better cabinet, and better apparatus, than any institution amongst us, North or South. In point of climate, good water, convenience of approach, freedom from vicious influences, and general comfort, we are acquainted with no school possessing equal advantages. Regarding moral influence, we consider everything as favorably as could be desired.
From the fact, however, that the zeal of our friends and our faculty has not been for a few years past adequate to the wants of such schools as we have contemplated in Tennessee, and as should have, and as such will exist, our success has not been according to our wishes or what we can make it. Preaching from home mainly, and other engagements, at home and abroad, have operated unfavorably.
We have determined, “the Lord willing, and we live,” to give ourselves in the main to the instruction and care of youth, and to communicating with the brethren and the world by our pen. Our friends may rest assured that the very best school advantages will be afforded, at prices which will enable all who desire it. Our determination is not only to have able and devoted teachers always on the ground, but if possible, to give satisfaction to all who may favor us with their patronage. Our brethren and friends may rest assured that we will give every necessary attention to their children and wards.
NEWS FROM TEXAS
Bro. D. F. Hall, of Grayson Co., Texas, under date of May 25th, writes:
“I am getting on here in Texas quietly. I preach steadily at four different places, and some promiscuously. Our cause is steadily onward. Our increase is gradual, but some are added at almost every meeting. Bro. M. W. Matthews and I are now holding a meeting in Sherman; our audiences are large and well attended. Five have already made the good confession, and others are expected. Dr. Matthews is still an eloquent, impressive, and efficient minister of Jesus. His heart is in the work. Could we only get him again in the field he would be eminently useful. I would like to read your paper, but I am not able to take it (We will furnish all preachers gratis who desire the work. — T. F.)
Yours, fraternally,
B. F. HALL
We hope to hear from Bro. Hall often, and a letter from Bro. M. W. Matthews we would rejoice to read. In Texas the Lord’s disciples seem to be alive in the work.
T. F.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
221
Bro. B. J. Mayer, of Drockville, Ellis Co., Texas, informs us that he is laboring in the cause of Christ, with fair success. We cheerfully send him our paper.
T. F.
SAN ANTONIO, Texas, June 12, 1858.
Dear Bro. Fanning:
It is with pleasure I avail myself of this opportunity to write to you. You have it in your power, my Brother, to communicate to the preaching brethren in Texas, and you will please give them some notice of this part of the country. We have a beautiful country and healthy one, and think that a minister of the Gospel would do well here. We are all poor and new beginners, but we have something to spare and would contribute liberally for the support of the Gospel. I will say in short, that the people are anxious to hear the truth, but there appears to be a difference in some respects between us and the sects; they have the largest audiences, but we progress slower, although they are much embittered against us still they desire to hear us, and I do believe that much good can be done here if the Gospel had preachers.
Please excuse me, Bro. Fanning, for my feeble letter, but I can say this to you that my whole desire is for the Redeemer’s cause. May the Lord bless you, and strengthen you in all your laborious labors of love.
Yours, in the hope of the life which is to come,
JOHN HENSHAW.
N. B. – The church is situated in Atascoso county, twenty-five miles South of San Antonio, on the head of Lucus Creek.
J. H.
GOOD NEWS FROM THE SOUTH.
Columbus, May 22d, 1858.
We most devoutly rejoice with the disciples at Columbus.
T. F.
Bro. Fanning:
Our little society of Christians at this place have just had such a feast, I cannot forget the pleasure of giving you, and through you the brethren, the good news of twenty-one accessions to the Lord. Bro. P. B. Lawson preached for us some eight days; was upon every occasion quite happy, and succeeded in cheering on the Christians, and convicting the wayward. A few days preceding the labors of Bro. Lawson, a Baptist Bro. by the name of Tenseuale, from Washington city, held a protracted meeting for three weeks, causing a great excitement in all the churches.
222
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
G.dltling some thirty-seven or eight to the Baptist church. He plead for the Bible, and the Bible alone. He received applicants for baptism by experience, and by profession of their faith without experience; in fact, I could but think, were it not for the power of old associations, he would be with us. I was rejoiced to see the Baptist receive the Truth from him so heartily.
Your Brother,
JOHN GILIER.
FRANKLIN COLLEGE—SESSION FOR 1858-9
The fifteenth annual session of Franklin College will open Sept. 6, 1858, and continue forty weeks.
CHARGES
- Board per week: $2.00
- Tuition per month: $5.00
- Washing per month: $1.50
- Fuel: $1.50
- Vocal music per year: $5.00
- Matriculation—paid but once: $5.00
- Graduation fee: $5.00
Catalogues sent upon application.
We promise to give the best school advantages of the country, and to satisfy all who can be pleased by devotion to the interests of the pupils committed to our care.
T. FANNING,
President.
W. LIRSCOM,
Secretary.
The Preparatory Department will be conducted by C. K. Barnes.
PRICES
- Board and rooms per week: $2.00
- Tuition per month: $2.00 to $4.00
- Washing: $1.00
- Fuel and light: $1.00
MRS. C. FANNING’S SCHOOL FOR YOUNG LADIES
This well-known institution will open its next session September 6th, 1858, and continue forty weeks. Mrs. F. will still have the assistance of the Faculty of Franklin College, and such other aid as
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
223
The school may require. The young ladies have access to the Library Cabinet and Apparatus of Franklin College, and there is no competent person at all acquainted with the school, who doubts the superior advantages afforded the pupils. There will be room for a few more pupils, at the opening of the term.
T. FANNING
TO PREACHERS DESIROUS OF IMPROVEMENT
It will afford the managers of Franklin College very great satisfaction to furnish without charge for board, tuition, etc., for the session of 1858-01 to twenty approved ministers of the Gospel, who may desire greater literary advantages in the prosecution of their heavenly calling. Having witnessed so many bad effects in attempts to educate young men for the ministry, who regard preaching as a mere popular profession to gain a support and position, it is desired that no one should apply who cannot give evidence of practical ability to promote the cause of Christ.
This is a matter to which we have long been anxious to call the attention of our brethren, and we sincerely hope in the manner proposed, to enable some of our faithful ministers to become more useful in the cause of Christ. We sincerely hope our brethren will not hesitate to address us on the subject, or visit the College at their earliest convenience.
T. FANNING, President
W. LIPSCOMB, Secretary
OBITUARIES
HOUSTON Co., Texas, May 25, 1857
Dear Bros. FANNING & LIPSCOMB:
It becomes my unpleasant task to announce the death of our highly esteemed brother, C. L. WALL, who departed this life on the 28th of November last, at the residence of Sister Murchenson, in this county, aged 43 years. He had been a zealous and devoted Christian for the last eight years of his life. His exemplary life and Christian deportment is seldom equalled. He was ever foremost in all good works, and liberal even to a fault, and loved by all.
But he is gone from this world of sorrow to a brighter home. When questioned as to his willingness to depart, he remarked that he had no fears to die. His trial was to leave his beloved wife and little children, but he feared not at all. His amiable wife and four lovely children, with his brethren and friends, are deeply depressed with irreparable loss on earth, but they…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
may indulge the consoling hope of a happy re-union where parting and trouble will be no more.
D. R. WILSON.
Dear Brethren:
I write to inform your readers of the death of a much esteemed and beloved sister in the Lord—Cynthia Carnes. Sister C. was a daughter of our well-known deceased Bro. Dr. Gowen, of Cannon County, Tenn., and consort of Bro. A. B. Carnes. She died last 23rd Feb., at her home near Woodbury. Sister C. had been for a considerable time in poor health, and was fully aware of the approach of the last enemy. Her sufferings during her illness were at times great, but she bore them with fortitude, saying, “if it is right to wish it, I desire to be relieved from my sufferings, let the will of the Lord be done.” One of her favorite passages was, “they that trust in the Lord shall be as Mount Zion, which cannot be moved,” and when friends were weeping around her she quoted the lines:
“To sleep in Jesus, blessed sleep,
From which none ever wake to weep.”
Sister C. had been a woman of prayer, daily, secret prayer, and when called to pass through the dark valley it was in prayer and faith that she entered its gloom, not fearing nor doubting. Her chief regret, she said, was that she had not done more for her Master in Heaven.
Sister C. had been for nearly thirty years in the church of God, having been immersed by Bro. Frederick E. Becton. She often talked with her children about dying and her most fervent desire was that they might be trained for the skies, and so live as to lay up treasures in Heaven. For them chiefly she seemed desirous of living longer, but such was not the will of God. But though dead she can yet speak to them by the memory of her piety, her counsels, and prayers.
Thanks be to God, His word declares that He is the God of all comfort. May that word which was the staff on which the wife and mother leaned in the journey to the tomb be the constant support of the husband and the children through all the pilgrimages of life.
In hope of eternal life, yours,
J. D. Eichbaum
McMinnville, June 24th, 1858.