THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
T. FANNING AND W. LIPSCOMB, Editors
VOL. VI.
NASHVILLE, SEPTEMBER, 1860.
NO. 9
THE SUPPORT OF MINISTERS OF RELIGION
From some cause, unknown to us, several of our ablest writers have recently felt it to be their duty to give considerable attention to the support of the ministers of religion. The fact of writing and calling so particular attention to the subject seems to say, that there are brethren opposed to the “ox that treadeth out the corn,” eating even the straw, or that the churches have failed to do their duty.
We are acquainted with no editor, or preacher who is not urging the necessity of sustaining the “laborers in the vineyard; and if there are differences amongst us, they must have reference to the manner of accomplishing the object and not the necessity of the work to be done. Our special attention has been called to some of the essays on the subject, with the view of satisfying us that certain unfavorable features of the discussion are aimed at us.
We hope this is a mistake; and we would feel much mortified to be drawn into a controversy with our brethren on a matter so plain in its character, and in reference to which, it is important for all the soldiers of the Cross to be united. Earnestly desiring union with all Christians; we feel that it is due to the cause we plead, to make a few very plain statements in reference to ministerial support.
Our readers will please keep in mind, that there are several orders of ministers in the church.
- Deacons are the servants or ministers of the church, to distribute to the wants of the needy. Their character is clearly defined by Paul in the 3rd chapter of first Timothy, and as in the law of Moses “They who ministered in holy things lived of the things of the…
258
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
“temple, and they who waited at the altar were partakers with the altar,” in the Gospel, “They who serve tables, are entitled to support from the table.” We see no room for controversy.
21. The Elders, Seniors, Overseers, Bishops or Pastors
are the experienced members of the congregations, who feed the lambs with spiritual food, and watch for the souls of the brethren, as they that must give account. There seems to be a want of agreement in some parts, as to the mode in which Christians become pastors, and we take the occasion to suggest very respectfully to our brethren, the result of our examination of the scriptures regarding this class of ministers.
Elders or seniors, cannot become such by any election and ordination by the congregation or others. In plain words, these are not official designations, and we exceedingly regret to see that some of our writers for whom we entertain the highest regard still cling tenaciously to the traditions of Babylonian captivities, and refuse to see the light.
The first converts of a city, like “The house of Stephanas of Achaia,” the members of which, “addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints” and to whom the brethren were to “submit” because they “helped and labored” are the natural directors of the service. Hence Paul and Barnabas, consecrated Elders or Seniors in every church, with the view that they would give their entire time and energies to the work. These elders, “The Holy Spirit made the Overseers” or Bishops of the church at Ephesus. (Acts 20, 28.) These Overseers, Bishops or pastors, were so designated from their labor they performed, and office, in that age was not a sinecure, given by consecration or other rite but the term was used as equivalent to work.
Thus have the Romish and English translators perverted the very substance of truth by false rendering. Hence the modern style of “official readers” and “inauguration” into office, as if some preached “officially” but not all, and servers, elders and overlookers were made by “inauguration.” We pray our brethren to re-examine this subject; and we respectfully request them to remember that Paul said “We grow up into him in all things.”
But as our purpose at present is not so much argument as to give our conclusions, we invite attention to the support of the overseers. We are satisfied that Paul had no other characters in his vision, when he said: “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers; for there is no power but of God; the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever, therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? Do that…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
259
which is good and thou shalt have praise of the same. For he is the minister of God to thee for good. Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake. For, for this cause pay ye tribute also, for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing. Ro. xiii. 1-6.
But it were most unreasonable to suppose that the Lord had required his servants to give their time and energies to the improvement of the flock, without sharing in the fleece.
3rd. Preachers of the Gospel
Preachers of the Gospel, or ministers of the word, are such as have given evidence of their ability to announce the glad tidings to a lost world, have been recommended to the work by their respective congregations, and “the end of whose conversation is Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, today and forever.”
Regarding their support, there is but little room for disputation. The Philippians “communicated with Paul concerning giving and receiving” and “sent once and again to his necessities.” Phil. iv. 15-16. The brethren are familiar with the passage, “Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel.” 1 Cor. ix. 14. Whilst no one living more firmly believes than ourselves that this scripture fully authorizes Christians to support their ministers, we can call to mind no passage more grossly perverted. In all the essays we have read in favor of raising and paying salaries to preachers, this passage is the first and last quoted, and yet it teaches the reverse of what is generally maintained.
Let us examine it. When and where did the Lord ordain that they who preach the Gospel should live of it?
Read Mat. x. 7-12. “Jesus commanded them saying, go preach, freely you have received freely give. Provide neither gold nor silver, nor brass in your purses. Nor scrip for your journey, neither two coats, nor shoes, nor yet staves, for the workman is worthy of his meat.”
Luke records it, “Go your ways; behold I send you forth as lambs among wolves. Carry neither purse nor scrip, no shoes; and into whatsoever house you enter, remain, eating and drinking such things as shall give; for the laborer is worthy of his hire.” Luke x. 7-8.
It will be noted that the scripture which the Apostle quoted to show that they who preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel instead of authorizing preachers to secure good salaries—silver, gold, brass, costly garments and sumptuous boarding—directed them to provide nothing of the kind but to eat such things as were set before them.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
260
Asking no questions and to take what was “given,” as from the Lord. Less than this, we could not, in justice to truth say; and we fear not when we know we speak as the Oracles of God. The spirit teaching in reference to the preacher of the Gospel is, that he shall go forth by the authority of the church without pledges, in faith that the Lord will provide for him, and it is the bounden duty of the church sending him, those to whom he ministers spiritual things, and others who learn his wants, to supply him in all needed good. This must not be left to chance.
The seniors of the church in sending an evangelist should learn his wants and the wants of his family, and be sure they are supplied. In as much as servants were chosen by different churches anciently, and Paul was supplied by a church of which he was never a member, or minister, we find undoubted authority for churches acting in the support of ministers.
We wish to say to our brethren in regard to the system that has long prevailed amongst us, of raising salaries by subscriptions, that we consider it, in every point of view, defective, and quite subversive of divine authority. It makes the minister feel as a beggar, and often as one degraded beyond comparison. We regard it, to say the least of it, an anti-Christian and starving system.
We beg permission to remind the brethren, that the disciples are to be carefully taught by the seniors to lay by in the treasury on the Lord’s day, as they have been prospered, and out of the abundance thus raised, the overseers are to distribute as each has need. The deacons to be sure, are to execute the orders of the bishops; but the men who visit the disciples, and watch the flock, are the only persons competent to determine what should be done in the various cases presented. Whenever the churches thus, by their bishops, take the responsibility, we expect a full supply to all the ministers, but we can hope for good results upon no other plan. “It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps.”
We respectfully request our brethren who oppose our teaching, to deal with us frankly. Tell us, what we lack, and we promise to thankfully accept all the light that can be given. We are not willing to close our remarks, without suggesting what to us, are the two most serious obstructions in the way of harmonious action amongst the brethren, touching ministerial support.
In the first place, men of means, and too independent in spirit, often abuse the cause of Christ by failing to let their wants be known, or refusing the sacrifice always due to God, in defraying their expenses. Preachers who have this…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
261
Worlds goods should distribute of their abundance for the promotion of the Lord’s cause, but they should receive from the churches in proportion to their labor, sacrifices. If they fail to do so, they injure both themselves and the brethren.
Secondly, many preachers have been so pressed for the actual necessaries of life, have felt so deep poverty, have seen so little of Christian liberality, that they are unwilling to go forth, relying on the Lord or his people. From their pressing wants and lack of confidence in their brethren, they feel dependent, and are generally disposed to adopt a human device to secure their allowance. Any system of the kind degrades both preacher and people, and those laboring under a bargain and sale plan, cannot possibly teach the churches their duty. When we come to understand the scriptural manner of raising and distributing funds particularly to officials, we shall expect to hear no more complaint in regard to our poverty and guilty failure to support preachers and their co-helpers.
T. F.
WHEN WAS MESSIAH’S KINGDOM SET UP
We regard this question as one of vital interest, and for this reason if we err in regard to the time when the Christian institution was established, we are unavoidably in darkness and misapprehension of what constitutes Christianity. Consequently, we are ignorant of what constitutes the law of the spirit of life—ignorant of what constitutes the last will and testament of our Savior, and unprepared to recognize and appreciate that word which the prophets, by way of pre-eminence, called the word of the Lord, and which they foretold should go forth from Jerusalem.
Our present object is to examine the query, Was the new covenant given under the ministry of John, or under the ministration of the Holy Spirit? Or in other words, were the ordinances of the Christian institution or the new covenant given under the Levitical priesthood or the priesthood of Christ? Those who endeavor to fix the regeneration, or the establishment of the new institution under the ministry of John and before the fulfillment of the law, refer us to the following passage: “The law and the prophets were until John, since that time the kingdom of God is preached and all men press into it.” This passage by no means conveys the idea that the law and the prophets were fulfilled under John’s ministry, and unless it does it affords not the least.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Shadow of Proof
The church of Christ was then established. Jesus said, after he had been baptized of John, “that he came not to destroy the law nor the prophets, but to fulfill them.” This was the object of his mission—to fulfill the law—to finish and to bring to a legal consummation the law of sacrificial offering, by making an offering of his own body upon the cross.
Paul’s Language
Hear Paul’s language in Col. ii. 14:
“Blotting out the hand-writing of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.”
Hence we see that the hand-writing of ordinances—the Mosaic law was in full force and effect, still binding on the house of Israel until blotted out, and taken out of the way by the death of Christ. The fact that the Messiah and his disciples lived in strict obedience to the Mosaic law—conforming to the Jewish religion in all its legal requirements, is at once conclusive evidence that the law was not fulfilled previous to the crucifixion of Christ.
And if the law was not fulfilled, and the old covenant taken out of the way; the new covenant or new institution was not given. When our Saviour said to the Jews, “If the Son make you free, you shall be free indeed,” he spoke of the final release from under the law of which he had come to procure for all the Jewish family by the fulfillment of the law in his death, resurrection and ascension.
Necessity of Redemption
Which release had of necessity to be effected before the adoption of sons could be conferred. For it is written, that he, Christ, was made under the law to redeem them that were under the law, that they might receive the adoption of sons. In Gal. iii. 13, Paul says, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the Jew, being made a curse for us, as it is written, cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree.”
Now we have it here before us, that the Jews had to be redeemed from under the law before they could receive the adoption of sons, or what is the same thing, the honor, favor and blessings of Christianity or the new institution, and that they were redeemed by the death of Christ upon the cross.
Conclusion
Hence the conclusion is irresistible, that the death, resurrection and ascension of Christ preceded the redemption of the Jews from under the law, and their redemption from under the law preceded the development of the new institution; consequently the adoption of sons was not confirmed until after these things were completed.
Christ said to Peter, “upon this rock I will build my church,” meaning the confession that he was the Christ, the Son of the living God. If the church had been established under the ministry of John, why did Christ say “I will build my church?” The language plainly indicates that the church was not built.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
at the time the Saviour made this promise. John’s disciples were not required to confess faith in Christ, for it was not then made manifest that he was the Christ. But it was enjoined on them in baptism to believe on him when he should be made manifest. John’s disciples had only the promise of the remission of sins after that Christ should be risen from the dead and ascended on high, and that only upon the condition that they should receive, believingly, the facts concerning him.
John’s mission was to prepare a people for the Lord—to prepare a people to receive the new covenant. John’s disciples, and even the twelve who joined with Christ in his peregrinations here on earth, were not in a state of actual salvation. They had not at that time received the remission of sins. Do you, reader, ask for the proof of this? Read in Hebrews v. 9, and you will find it written, that Christ was made perfect through suffering, that he might become the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him. The sufferings here spoken of, are those he endured in his death, therefore he was not the author of salvation previous to his crucifixion on the cross. If, then, we suppose the disciples to have been in a state of salvation prior to this period, who shall we imagine was the author of their salvation? There was not at that time a Christian institution—a church of Messiah. In lieu, x. 4, Paul says it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins, and yet we read that without the shedding of blood there is no remission. Hence the truth appears to be this, that the blood of Christ had to be shed before remission of sins could be granted. Not only was it needful that his blood should be shed, but it was necessary also that he should be constituted a priest forever, after the order of Melchisedec, and with his offering enter into the holy place—the true tabernacle—before the remission of sins could be granted—before the new covenant could be made or the new institution given. Paul says, “such a high priest became us,” was, according to the purpose of God, indispensably needful to the bringing in a new order of things. It was needful that the priesthood should be changed from that of an earthly to a heavenly priesthood—that one should be constituted priest, not after the law of a carnal commandment, but after the power of an endless life, in order to the introduction of the gospel plan of salvation. Paul tells us in Hebrews vii. 12, “That the priesthood being changed, there was made of necessity a change also of the law.” This change of the law was but the abrogation of the old covenant or Jewish ordinances.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Son is represented as addressing the Father, saying, “sacrifice and offering thou would’st not, but a body hast thou prepared me.” Now Paul says that the sacrifice and offering, and burnt offerings and offering for sin in which the Father had no pleasure, were those offered by the Law. Christ then being prepared with a body, in which to make an acceptable offering, was thereby to set aside all the sacrifices and offerings of the Mosaic law, and hence, Paul says in the 8th verse, “He taketh away the first that he may establish the second.”
Meaning evidently that the law was fulfilled, the old covenant annulled, the Jewish priesthood abolished, and their sacrificial offerings no longer demanded, before the new covenant was brought in. Remember now Paul says he took away the first that he might establish the second, and that he took away the first by doing the will of the Father, which was making an offering of his own body upon the cross.
Now, we can no longer be at a loss to know when the ordinances of Christianity were given. In Heb. ix., we learn that the Jewish religion, or as it is there called, the old covenant, had its divine service, its first and second tabernacles, etc., and that by the peculiar arrangement of these tabernacles and of the services of the priests—the high priest entering the second only once a year, etc. By this arrangement Paul says the Holy Ghost signified that the way into the holiest was not made manifest, while as yet the first tabernacle was standing.
Now by this we understand that the earthly priesthood had to be brought to legal termination with all its various services—the law of Moses honorably consummated before the priesthood of Christ could take place. And the priesthood of Christ had of necessity to precede the covenant of grace. Or, in other words, the law had to be legally rendered no longer binding on the Jewish people before the ordinances of Christ’s institution could be made binding upon them.
If we will now remember that a testament is of no force—has no strength until the death of the testator, the whole matter will be plain to our minds. We will at once understand that the gospel of Christ’s kingdom derived its being—received its life, its power and authority in the death, resurrection and ascension of the Son of God. In Heb. vii. 11, Paul gives us to understand that the Jews received the law under the Levitical priesthood. But as perfection or the remission of sins could not be obtained by it, it was therefore needful that another priest should arise after the order of Melchisedec and not be called after the order of Aaron.
Now what we wish to notice is this, that the imperfection and fault…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
265
The weakness of the old covenant could not be remedied by the introduction of the new covenant until another priest should arise after the order of Melchisedec. The priesthood had to be changed between the annulling of the old covenant and the bringing in of the new. For, says Paul, there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before, for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did.
In Jeremiah xxxi., and beginning with the 31st verse, the promise of a new covenant is made in the following language:
“Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah. And this is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord. I will put my laws in their hearts, and in their minds will I write them, and their sins and iniquities I will remember no more.”
Now this promise of the covenant contains the promise that the Holy Spirit shall be given, and also that remission of sins shall be granted. If we can now find when the Comforter came, or when the Holy Spirit was poured out, and when remission of sins was announced, we have the time and place when and where the new covenant was given.
When the Lord said, in the promise of the new covenant, that he would put his laws in their hearts and write them in their minds, he evidently meant the same thing which he spoke by the mouth of the prophet Joel. When he said, “I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,” etc. When the Lord said, in the promise of the new covenant, that he would remember their sins and iniquities no more, he spoke of the remission of sins which our Saviour said should, according to the scriptures, be preached in his name among all nations beginning at Jerusalem.
Here now are two prominent features contained in the promise of the new covenant, viz, the Holy Spirit is promised, and remission of sins is promised. Wherever now we find these two features of the promise fulfilled, we find the new covenant made.
The question then is, was the spirit poured out upon the people under the ministry of John, had the Comforter then come? Let the language of our Saviour decide the question.
Then on the eve of his departure from earth, he said, “If I go not away, the Comforter will not come; but if I go away, I will send the Comforter unto you.” It is plain then, that this feature of the new covenant was not developed until after the ascension of the Saviour.
But can we ascertain precisely the time when it was developed? We think we can. But Peter standing up with the eleven,
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Lifted up his voice and said unto them, this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel saying, and, it shall come to pass in the last days (saith God) that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh, etc. Here then is the fulfillment of one item contained in the promise. Here is one feature of the new institution developed in the City of Jerusalem, when the day of Pentecost was fully come.
Let us now look out for the other feature, viz., remission of sins. Paul says where remission of sins is, there is no more offering for sin. As much as to say, that, so long as there was an offering depending, or an offering still called for, there was no remission of sins. But so soon as remission was obtained, an offering was no longer demanded.
In the days of John, and even until the crucifixion of Christ, there was an offering for sin depending—an offering still demanded. Therefore according to Paul there was at that time no remission of sins. Now, if in connection with this, we will remember that the Savior commissioned his Apostles to preach remission of sins in his name, beginning at Jerusalem, but enjoined it upon them to tarry there until they were endured with power from on high, meaning, until the promises of the Father should be sent upon them—the Holy Spirit given, and we have at once the two following and essential features included in the promise of the new covenant, both developed at the same time and place.
When the day of Pentecost was fully come, the Comforter was sent—the Holy Spirit was poured out—the promise was fulfilled, the law was put in their minds and written in their hearts, and the remission of sins proclaimed. But if remission of sins was never conferred until Christ was constituted priest and presented his offering in the true temple, the question arises, when did Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and all the ancient worthies obtain the remission of sins?
We answer at the same time that Peter, James, and John received remission, and that after the true and last sacrifice was completed. For further proof that the door of Salvation was not opened, neither in the days of John, nor of Christ’s personal abode on earth, we will turn to Matt. xviii. 1, and find that on a certain occasion the disciples came to Jesus saying, who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.
Now we are bound to believe that if Messiah had his kingdom established at that time, the disciples were in it. If anyone on earth were converted and in a state of salvation at that period, surely the disciples were. But hear the Savior’s answer, that will decide the query. And Jesus called a little child unto him and set him in the midst of them. And said, verily I say unto you, except you be con…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Page 267
“Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.” From this it is evident they were not converted; consequently they were not in the kingdom. For, since the establishment of the church, to be converted is to enter the church and to enter the church is to enter into a state of salvation. We sometimes hear it preached, that there are two departments in the Christian institution, but as the scriptures are silent with regard to the distinction of visible and invisible departments of the kingdom of Christ, we conclude it is only a chimera of the mind. When we put on Christ, we are then in his kingdom, we are then in Christ, and if we are in Christ, the apostle says we are new creatures; it is then in the act of putting on Christ that we are born again—that we pass from death unto life, or are translated out of the kingdom of darkness into the kingdom of Messiah.
J. M. SELPH
Henderson, Tenn., August 20, 1859.
VISIT TO WEST TENNESSEE
We have rarely spent a few weeks more pleasantly than we did in visiting and becoming acquainted with our brethren and sisters in the western portion of our good State. The first point at which we stopped was Jackson, where we have a few good brethren living in the midst of great prejudice. Here we met Bro. Jas. Holmes, who has labored probably more than any other man in pleading the cause of the Gospel in the District. He preaches regularly in Jackson but the prospect of accomplishing good is gloomy. Still the brethren are not without hope. In the neighborhood of Mason’s Grove there is a large congregation of brethren, but we fear they are not coming up fully to their Gospel privileges in assembling themselves together to do the service of the Lord’s day. At Trenton, in Gibson county, there is a small congregation of disciples who fail not to meet on the first day to study the word of God and often attend to the breaking of bread and prayers. The brethren are making an earnest effort to build a house in Trenton and expect to make a vigorous effort for a stronger hold in the community. They now as at Jackson, occupy one of Caesar’s temples—the Court house. At Union City, in Obion county, there is a number of brethren.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Bro. E. R. Osborne preaches occasionally for the brethren. The brethren here do not meet very regularly, but give up their house to the sects a good portion of the time. As an act of courtesy this may be all well enough, but for any people to rob itself of the enjoyment of Christian worship on such ground is wholly wrong.
Whenever our notions of courtesy or expediency come in conflict with the plain requirements of the Gospel, there can be no question which should give way. The last day of the week is for the assembly of the people of God, and its ordinances—worship, prayer, praise, and thanksgiving—are for the growth and strength of the disciples of Christ. All these are God’s appointed means for our spiritual health and vigor, and when we neglect them we speedily become weak and indifferent. We hope to hear better things of our brethren.
The next point visited was Cageville, in Haywood county. Here our brethren are strong in numbers, but as at many other points do not come quite up to the full requirement of the scriptures. The idea that a congregation of more than two hundred members, men and women of intelligence, cannot meet together to read the word of God, sing, pray, admonish, and exhort one another to love and to good works, and attend to the service of the Lord’s body, seems to me (to use no stronger word) strange indeed. Suppose the old “tent-maker” should wend his way to such a place on the first day of the week, would he find the disciples “come together to break bread?” as they were anciently at Troas?
Bros. Holmes and Cook were holding a meeting at this point. We tarried with them several days, but before there were any manifestations of great interest. We have since heard that the meeting resulted in sixty-five additions. We hope the brethren were aroused to the full performance of their duty.
We next spent a day in Memphis. The brethren here are doing well, meeting regularly to instruct and encourage one another. They have had some severe trials, but are in a healthy condition and the leaven of their influence will be felt in this growing city. They have a good house in progress which will be ready for use, they hope, by the beginning of next year. They then expect to do good work in evangelizing the city.
At Colliersville, there is a small congregation that has not been very punctual in meeting, but the brethren expect to do better. We know they have the ability and trust that it will be fully called forth. We stopped at no other point but met with brethren from various congregations.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
269
Gations, and learned that the good cause is gaining rapidly at many points. The only difficulty seems to be a lack of readiness on the part of the brethren in meeting fully all the responsibilities of members of the body of Christ. The brethren seem timid and backward and fearful in attending to the worship. This thing is all wrong. The worship should be regarded by us not as a task, a labor, a burden but as high and glorious spiritual privilege.
We may not be able to pray eloquently but we can pray earnestly and from a sincere heart, and God will hear us. We may not be able to deliver a powerful discourse, but we are able both men and women if we study the word of God as we ought, to say to our friends and neighbors, there is a sure, safe, and plain plan of salvation and we can learn and accept its conditions and be blessed in so doing.
We are able to say to our brethren and sisters, “Be of good courage.” “Fear not the Lord is our helper.” “Be faithful.” “Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life.” Crowns of unfading joy are laid up for us above if we prove true and faithful to our high and ennobling profession.
Christianity is worth but little to us as a barren and unmeaning profession, but when it becomes a glorious and living reality, filling our hearts with energy and zeal in doing all that has been required, it becomes indeed a noble, a heavenly, a Godlike possession, blessing, purifying and ennobling in all its influences.
We can make it so, my brethren and sisters, if we will only make the effort. If we will fearlessly and unflinchingly determine to do our whole duty in the cause of our Master. Let us hear no more of Christians who cannot read the word of God in the congregation, who cannot in earnestness and humility address our Father with thanksgiving and supplication, who cannot admonish and exhort and encourage brethren and sisters in this glorious work of Life in which we are engaged.
But enough. We have met no kinder people on earth than our brethren in West Tennessee. We felt indeed that we were in the midst of brethren and sisters, and often felt in mingling with them that with all our faults and imperfections and failures, there are no better people on this good earth than those who profess to be disciples of Christ. Yet we are not what we should be.
With the advantages which we enjoy in the proud position we hold, free from the trammels of human tradition and philosophy, we ought to be a better people. We have no need to compare ourselves with those around us. The pure standard of truth presents the character that is alone worthy of our highest admiration and noblest struggles. Shall we not make an effort to become wiser, purer, better and happier in the enjoyment of these blessings.
W. L.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
WHAT HAS CHRISTIANITY DONE FOR US?
We ask this question not with reference to what of the enlightenment, civilization, social and mental culture of the world is due to the elevating and dignifying influence of the religion of Christ. This is indeed a grand scheme, to consider how humanity has been raised from degradation, ignorance and vice, and what part the Gospel of Christ and the lives of his followers have had in this great work. Our question, however, has a different application—a personal, individual one. It is a question for personal, individual examination, calling for the most rigid scrutiny of our own hearts and lives. It is the great question of spiritual life or death. If we can answer it in the fear of God to our own satisfaction, we have strong assurance of hope, but if we are unable to do so, shame and fearfulness and a dreadful dread must clothe our hearts, and cover us with deep despair.
Properly considered, the Christian religion, the pure teachings of the Saviour and his Apostles, is intended for the entire control and direction of our whole life. Its first and strongest claim is upon the heart of man—the seat and fountain of all the emotions, desires, purposes and motives that control the life of man, and here it is satisfied with nothing short of entire “simple” possession. It admits of no division in its claim but demands all. Having this, its influence is to purify it—cleanse it from every defilement, every pollution, every taint of baseness and sin, and render it a fit habitat of the Spirit of God—a pure and undefiled temple in which our Father and his Son have promised to take up their abode.
It is indeed a sad, awfully sad mistake to think that we can be good people, correct and acceptable in the sight of Heaven, without hearts purified by the Gospel of Christ. How false is the idea that we can act without reproach in the eyes of men, and lead a life that will bear the scrutiny of the All-Seeing Eye, while our hearts are impure, full of treachery, hypocrisy and deceit. How strongly is the lesson impressed upon us to lay aside “all malice and all guile and hypocrisies and envies,” and how forcible does the Apostle Paul in 1st Cor. teach that all service and sacrifice is utterly worthless except under the control of the great principle of Christian love.
“Love one another with a pure heart fervently,” says Peter, so likewise the beloved John says, “he that hateth his brother is a murderer.” What stronger language do we need? The teachings of our blessed Saviour are full and clear, that all show and pretense of obedience are utterly vain without hearts full of the earnest spirit of submission to the requirements of Heaven. It is in fact the great mark…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
271
of distinction between it and all other systems of religion, that it requires a pure heart as well as a blameless life.
The great characteristic of the Christian life then is, that it is controlled by the Spirit of God, and of his Son. Paul to Rom. 8, 14, says, “as many as are led by the Spirit of God they are the sons of God.” Again to the Corinthians, he says, “If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of his.” “I live, yet not I but Christ liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God who loved me and gave himself for me,” (Gal. 2, 20.) “Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin.” (1 John 3, 9.) Scriptures almost without number might be presented showing this great truth that the life of the Christian is controlled, directed and influenced in all things by the Spirit of God. Without such control there is no Christian life—no service that is acceptable to God or honoring to his cause. Under this direction our lives become manifestations of all the fruits of the Spirit, “Love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness and temperance,” full and complete realization of the perfect man in Christ, “full of all goodness, filled with all knowledge, able also to admonish one another.”
Can we then err or go astray in answering the question, What has Christianity done for me? First of all, have we received it with that full confidence that has given us strong assurance of its power to do all for us in elevating and redeeming our lives? Have we yielded up our hearts in willing, cheerful and complete submission to its influences? And have we permitted it to wipe therefrom every trace and taint of what is rebellious, disobedient and malicious? Have we permitted its purifying influence to command and direct every passion and emotion of our hearts and bring still in complete subjection to the good Spirit of God?
So that every act speaks forth the holy unstained condition of our hearts. Truly if we can say, yes to these questions, Christianity has done much for us. Its power has indeed been great? Look at our condition, without hearts filled, all our affections and appetites low, groveling and earthly. With no aspiration for what is unchanging, unfading, incorruptible, immortal, but all bowed down to the fleeting earth-born pleasures of this fleeting existence.
Who can bear the contrast? What Christian heart can realize its exalted honor without exclaiming in gladness and thankfulness, “Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us that we should be called the sons of God.” Godliness, peace, joy and holiness, are not my brothers.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
sisters empty, unmeaning names. All the heavenly injunctions, to be pure, to love all brethren, to have compassion, to be forbearing, long-suffering, gentle, good, obedient, are not vain flourishes of the Rhetorician, but they are words of divine authority, upon which hang the fearful issues of life and death. By hearing and obeying them we lead lives of usefulness, devotion, righteousness and honor to the cause of Christ here, and leads to an inheritance of glory and renown, priceless, eternal and immortal.
Has the Christian religion so purified our hearts, ennobled and exalted all of our aspirations, and has it so mastered and taken control of our conduct, that we are prepared for all of its demands of sacrifice and toil and self-denial and ready to rejoice and appreciate all of its exalted honors and privileges? Have we so familiarized ourselves with the pure teachings and practices of the word of life, that they are constantly present with us, to guard us from sin, protect from temptations and direct us amidst all trials and difficulties?
Do we feel that we are not aliens and strangers among the saints of the Most High; but that wherever His people are there we have mothers and fathers, brethren and sisters—kindred of purer and stronger relationship than any bond of this flesh? Has the manifestation of the Savior’s love brought us so near to our Father, that we feel that we are indeed His children and that whatever dangers may encompass and threaten, He will not let harm befall us?
“If God be for us who can be against us?” is the word of encouragement which the Great Apostle could utter in the midst of the bitterest persecutions. If we have not the same confidence, it is because we have not drunk deep of that faithful, confident, prayerful trust that is within the reach of all the children of God. It is our own fault if we fail to enjoy the blessings of the Christian religion. The way is open and plain. Its blessings are not promised to us without effort on our part, where there is no grateful heart or thanksgiving tongue. Where there is no reading, study, meditation, communing with God, no earnest supplication, no exhortations and admonitions and encouragement one to another, we have no promise of the sure blessings of the gospel of peace, spiritual enjoyment and consolation.
God has promised to bless us in the use of the means which He has offered, and the only question with us, are we really to do our part? Are we ready to discharge our responsibilities and are we endeavoring to become daily more earnest and faithful to the high trust laid upon us? If so, Christianity is doing much for us and its blessing will be transcendentally glorious and abundant.
W. L.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
278
IS THE CHURCH OF CHRIST A DENOMINATION, A SECT?
We invite attention to the following remarks of our highly esteemed and most gifted Bro. D. S. Burnet, as published in “The American Christian Review,” of Aug. 18, 1860:
“Now as to Bro. Fanning’s fear that we legalize the use of the word ‘denomination,’ in the sectarian sense, I can not see any ground for it. I would not have worded the question as it is, but at the same time the criticism is unwarranted. I should have said the denominations rather than other denominations, had I written it. Yet the church of Christ is a denomination, a sect, ‘this way,’ etc: and it may be asked how members of this sect, way, denominations, may treat other denominations, ways and sects. The reasons assigned by the movers for the questions selected, was that they were questions of interpretation, on the most practical subjects, avoiding everything theoretical and speculative.
“Let me say to Bro. Fanning, that had I spoken on the theme assigned me, I should have reproduced, substantially, the speech I delivered before the Missionary Society last October, concerning which he (Bro. F.) said, when I came down from the pulpit, ‘You ought to die after that speech, Bro. Burnet, for you will never equal it again.’ I then said what I have to say about the denominations, for my subject was ‘our plea and the way to urge it.’
“Begging pardon for the occupancy of so much room on so unimportant a subject, I subscribe myself,
D. S. BURNET.
August 20, 1860.
REPLY TO BRO. DAVID S. BURNET
Will Bro. Burnet bear with us while we offer a few respectful thoughts, in regard to his conclusions? We are sorry to differ from him touching the “Unimportance of the subject.” While we never presumed that he was the originator of the themes, “The best mode of conducting protracted meetings,” “Treatment of other denominations,” etc., we felt that his connection with such discussions would not exert a good influence. We were also aware that there is a disposition on the part of many, to lay down the weapons of their warfare against denominations; and if the parties will acknowledge their orthodoxy, to be at one with them. These to us, are matters of some importance.
Are we a denomination, a party, sect, or heresy? Is this a subject of…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
no concern to the saints?
Bro. Burnet says “The church of Christ is a denomination, a sect.” He also says that our “criticism is unwarranted.” Will the scriptures enable us to decide as to the truth respecting such matters?
In the first place, we regard it as a subject of some importance to enquire if we are “a denomination” in any correct employment of the term? The style is used in the theological circles, to designate one of the religious parties of the age, and implies not the slightest connection with Jesus Christ. A denomination, a sect of the world, is not an admissible style, and a denomination or sect of Christians is equally objectionable. The Bible designations are never employed indefinitely. There is no “Baptist,” a “Christ,” a “church” in the scriptures; but we read of the “baptizer,” the “Christ,” the “church,” the “faith,” the “name of Christ;” and we therefore consider it highly unbecoming for Christian men to talk of the kingdom of God as a denomination. We trust Bro. B. will look at the subject again.
Is the church a sect?
We hope that lengthy arguments are not necessary. Bro. Burnet says it is a sect. We say nay. Who is right? To the law and to the testimony. Bro. Burnet, we presume, will admit that “sect” and “heresy” are from the same Greek noun. He will also doubtless admit that divisions and heresies are forbidden in the Bible. Paul, indeed, commanded his son, “To reject a heretic (partisan) after the first and second admonition.” Titus iii. 10.
The greatest misfortune that befell the Corinthians consisted in their parties; some were for Paul, some for Apollos, some for Cephas, and some for Christ. Who were right? We answer, those for Christ. He asked, “Is Christ divided?” or were you baptized in the name of Paul? As much as to say, “If you were baptized in the name of a man, wear his name; but if in the name of the Lord, honor him by bearing his name.”
He says, “I hear that there be divisions among you, and I partly believe it; for there must also be heresies (sects) among you, that they who are approved may be made manifest among you.” 1 Cor. xi. 18-19. But to conclude our authority for the present, Paul places heresies or sects amongst the works of the flesh. Gal. v. 20. and Peter pronounces them damnable. 2 Peter ii. 1. What need we more?
Bro. Burnet no doubt will say that Christians were styled a sect in the Bible. Yes, three times. Let us read the passages. Paul called the chief of the Jews at Rome together, who said, “For as concerning this sect, (heresy) we know that everywhere it is…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
275
“spoken against” Acts xxviii. 22. Paul answered this charge made by the lawyer Tertullus, before Felix. Amongst other crimes the lawyer specified that “we have found this man a pestilent fellow, a mover of sedition among all the Jews throughout the world, and a ring-leader of the sect of the Nazarines.” But hear the insulted, indignant and glorious Paul speak. He said, “I do the more cheerfully answer for myself, there are yet but twelve days since I went to Jerusalem for to worship. They found me neither raising up the people neither in the synagogues nor in the city. Neither can they prove the things whereof they accuse me.” What is the worst charge Paul? “That I am a sectarian.” What say you? “But this I confess unto thee, that after the way which they call heresy, (or a sect) so worship I the God of my fathers.” Acts xxiv. 14.
We wish to say to Bro. Burnet that while we were much pleased with his address in Cincinnati, and sincerely commended it, we are not pleased with his connection with the Carthage meeting, less pleased with his declaration that our “criticism is unwarranted,” and we consider his teachings in regard to the church of Christ being a denomination—a sect, so antithetical to the letter and spirit of the Christian institution, we think that he owes it to himself and the cause, to modify his conclusions.
T. FANNING.
ANOTHER FACTION
Pickens County, Ga., Aug. 15, 1860.
Dear Bro. Fanning—We are in the midst of trouble in this section. On the 13th of July, 1859 the church of Christ at New Liberty, Pickens county, Ga., withdrew from Charles Jones, and a faction that adhered to him, there. They built a house within 70 yards of our house, and they two organized on the pamphlet that you will find enclosed, and they are trying to make the impression on the minds of the people of North Ga., that the thing is popular with the churches in East Tennessee.
At the request of our aged Bro. James Swan we send you a copy of his principles and church government.
Yours in Christ Jesus,
G. D. GILLESPIE.
REMARKS.—We have more to fear from factious than from all other
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Few men are so degraded, false, or deceitful that they cannot find zealous sympathizers and bitter partisans.
In regard to the faction in Pickens County, Ga., we know not the particulars, further than they are set forth in Bro. G.’s letter and the pamphlet referred to, and therefore, we cannot say whether the brethren did right in the premises, or whether any of them are adhering to the constitution; but we are confident that those organized on “The Principles and form of government” of the pamphlet before us, are to all intents and purposes a heresy, and not a church of Christ.
They have published eight articles of faith in their “Principles,” four of which are destitute of scriptural authority, and the other four are not in scriptural form. In the “Form of government to be universal in this body,” we find six items, no one of which is true.
- The first contemplates a board of elders elected by the church constituting “The only legal court to decide all matters of controversy.” Such a court has no sanction in the sacred oracles.
- The second makes Evangelists of bishops.
- The third makes bishops of deacons.
- The fourth sets forth a law for raising funds on the ad valorem plan.
- The fifth requires that “no minister shall be rewarded more nor less than the average value of the laboring class per day.”
- The sixth rule declares that no one whose name is “not attached to” a Covenant, which they have published, “is entitled to the charities” of their organization.
But we forbear. We pen these things in sorrow and to warn the brethren against heresy. The Apostle said, “Evil men and seducers wax worse and worse,” and we have never witnessed an apostasy from the simplicity of the truth, that the subjects of it did not become the most inveterate enemies to the reign of the Messiah.
We trust our brethren who have the truth in East Tennessee and North Georgia, will listen to no partial or one-sided view of any controversy, but that they will, in the fear of God, learn the whole truth touching every subject of difficulty, and be firm in the execution of the laws. The time has come when shrinking from responsibility will bring ruin upon the cause.
We have become a great and mighty people, and our future safety and the prosperity of the cause depend upon a strict adherence to the law of the King. We should know no will but the will of the Father though the heavens fall.
T. F.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
KEEP THE SECRET
There has been much said regarding secret Societies. Some speak in terms of the highest commendation of worldly secret societies, others spoke of them as being unnecessary. Whether such societies are useful or not, one thing is sure, take away the secret from any one of these societies and you destroy the society. It is of the greatest importance that the secret of any of these institutions be kept inviolable, that the institution itself may be perpetuated, its members kept together, objects of charity relieved from the common fund, and fraternal kindness kept constantly glowing. If the secret is revealed, confusion is the consequence.
But what is our object? It is this, the Lord orders that alms be given in secret. He has a society of people on this earth; He gave the laws, rules, pass words as a secret to these people and commanded that all be kept inviolable. While this society met together and kept the secret, there was no such thing known as worldly institutions being necessary to support preachers, relieve the poor saints or anything of the kind. Who can disprove the proposition that the weekly contribution is the secret in Christ’s society or church? One thing is sure, no man can show from inspiration or history wherever God let any of his people suffer when they did precisely what he said. For the time it might so appear, but all worked out well to those who loved him.
Brethren keep the Secret, the Contribution, we can support the “man of God,” relieve the poor saints, revolutionize the whole world, and the world remain in ignorance as to who is the benevolent man or woman knowing only that the society of Heaven has done all these, and the founder of the institution gets the honor, power and glory. Do this and you will hear of no “starved preachers,” and you will have no suffering widows—no poor saints begging the world for a living. Each keep the “secret” and there will be no benevolent and stingy Christians, one will be as benevolent as the other. Keep the secret, and there will be no need of secret societies in the world—no associations, conferences, Presbyteries, Missionary Societies, Cooperations will be needed at which preachers beg money to relieve themselves and others. Keep the secret and the church will prosper, Christ will be honored, confusion stopped. Reveal the secret and you have confusion in the church.
“Let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth, that thine alms may be in secret.” Who will tell me how much I must give? or who shall I tell? Brethren, keep the secret.
J. K. SPEER
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
THE ATONEMENT
DEAR BRETHREN: I am conscious I am obnoxious to the title of the “importunate widow” yet I am not satisfied to desist. If however, I weary you with my questions, please get some other Brother to answer or I may perhaps importune again. Will you allow me, my dear Brethren, to recall your response on the questions of the sufferings of Christ, to your present attention. You say there that “The Atonement is our reconciliation to God and not a sacrifice to appease the wrath of a revengeful God,” &c.
Further down you say, “This is a heathen doctrine incorporated in Romanism, and transmitted through Protestantism to the nations of the earth. It makes God our Father a monster; and Jesus His well Beloved Son pour out His heart’s blood to make atonement to His Father; ‘reconcile God’ as the creeds have it, or put Him in a good humor with the world.”
Gos. Adv. vol. 61 No.5, p. 153.
In the June No. Bro. Goodall writes with much pathos in his article “Reconciliation,” and describes the ineffable love of God to man as displayed in the plan and work of redemption. After expatiating at some length on that subject he also expresses the same idea you had formerly expressed, but not in the exact language. He says, “Not until the Romish apostasy was its (‘this heathen’s doctrine’) corrupt and neutralizing influence felt upon the word of God. It has imperceptibly led men from a correct knowledge of God and intelligent obedience of faith to ignorance, superstition and idolatry. The Protestant sects inherited the error with its corresponding practices from the mother of sects, and though they teach that ‘God is love,’ that He is full of mercy, long suffering and willing to pardon and abundantly bless all who will come unto Him, in their practice they contradict it all and represent God as a cruel, revengeful being, who suffers His creatures to sorrow and afflict themselves,” &c.
This then is the teaching of the sects—and my view that the atonement is a sacrifice well pleasing to the Father, is quite orthodox but of doubtful scriptural authority.
Bro. Fanning was it not well pleasing to the Father? Did not our blessed Lord frequently say He came not to do His own will but the will of His Father? On that dreadful night of His untold agony did He not entreat that the cup might pass from Him? “Nevertheless,” said He, “not my will but thine be done.”
I do not believe that God our Father is a “cruel, revengeful being” as Bro. Goodall expresses it—for I learn in the sacred Oracles that God is love. But while our Saviour was expiring in agony, burst forth that soul-trent expression “My God—My God why hast thou forsaken me.” Oh the
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
279
Inexpressible torture, of that loving heart—yet he said, “Lo! I come to do thy will, O God.” If it was not the Father’s will that he should suffer, why was it inflicted on him? Peter said, both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles were gathered together against him to do whatsoever thy (the Lord God) hand and thy counsel determined before to be done—and now, what was it done for, if not for man’s ransom? By whose will was it done if not by the will of the Father? And was it not thus that “being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.”
I cannot see it any other way yet. Probably I might have spared you this intrusion had it not been for a paragraph in the article, “Christianity,” in the July number of the Advocate. It reads thus, “Jesus Christ came on earth to accomplish a work which all the prophets and the angels of God would have undertaken in vain. He came to reconcile the human family to God himself. To accomplish this glorious mission He prepared himself for that grand sacrifice which alone could extinguish the flames of divine justice burning to avenge the wickedness of man! I see no difference between ‘the heathen doctrine’ spoken of by Bro. Fanning in May, the error of ‘the Romish apostacy,’ Bro. Goodall noticed in June and this tone so boldly expressed by Bro. Fulgham in the July number—except in its superior strength of terms and pungency.
Is this sectarian teaching and orthodox? In hope of eternal life, I remain, affectionately, your sister in Christ,
Barnes Store, Miss., 1860.
D. M. PRIEST
REPLY TO SISTER PRIEST
The doctrine of the Atonement affecting God our Father, instead of a lost world; or rather the doctrine of reconciling and saving sinners, by appeasing the wrath of the Father, through the sufferings of His Son, has no sanction in the sacred records. Our sister uses strong language in setting it forth, yet it is the style of the creeds.
In speaking of the sufferings of the Saviour, she says, “That grand sacrifice which alone could extinguish the flames of divine justice, burning to avenge the wickedness of man,” etc. We once heard a very distinguished clergyman represent the Saviour as suffering on the cross in place of the sinner, an amount equivalent to the eternal burning of the whole human family in hell, to satisfy divine wrath and offended justice.
We have many more objections to the doctrine than we have space to notice in these few thoughts, but we feel that it is due to our sister and others to make some very brief statements on the matter.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
In the first place, the scriptures do not represent the sufferings of our Lord in this light.
Secondly, if the sufferings are a substitution for the suffering due for sin, according to Calvinism, the elect for whom Christ paid the debt, will be unconditionally saved; and accordingly the world is secure. It must be noted that, according to this doctrine, remission of sins is out of the question.
If a man should owe another one hundred dollars, and a friend as surety should step forward and pay the debt, there would be no truth in him who received the money saying to the debtor, “I freely forgive the debt.” If the sufferings of Christ were a substitution for the punishment due our sins, to appease the wrath of God, or satisfy the demands of justice, salvation on the conditions of the Gospel, would be impossible.
So much we have felt it is proper to say negatively, but there is a positive side of the question.
Christ suffered for us, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God. In the style of T. W. Jenkyn, D. D., “God is rich in mercy, plenteous in redemption and ready to forgive; nevertheless he is concerned for the honor of his justice. He needs no motive to feel compassion and mercy towards sinners, nevertheless a safe medium is necessary for the honorable expression of that mercy towards them. Sin is a public injury to God and the universe.
It is not in the nature of mercy nor does it become its character, to forgive such a public wrong, without an expression of its abhorrence to the crime. Such mercy would be a weak indulgence, a fond and blind passion. A father, for instance, will not be afraid of relaxing the bonds of good discipline in forgiving a child, when a mother in tears and anguish is the expression of an abhorrence of the child’s guilt.
God has consulted the ends of justice, in the exercise of his mercy, and has therefore set forth the death of his Son as the honorable ground on which he is just, in justifying him that believes. It accords with the divine mind that without the shedding of blood, there could be no remission of sin. Hence the necessity of Christ suffering on account of our sins.
There were two grand objects in the sufferings of the Saviour, which should always be kept in mind.
- In order that the Father might be just in justifying lost sinners, he gave his only begotten Son to die the just for the unjust.
- By the death of our blessed Saviour, a way has been opened for our redemption from sin.
Hence the Apostles preached Christ and him crucified, in order to an atonement between God and his erring creatures; or to reconcile the rebellious to a loving Father.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
281
Should the Scriptures ever be translated without the admixture of heathen fables, they will give no countenance to a doctrine which countenances these views of the sufferings of our Lord Jesus Christ. It may not be improper to suggest in conclusion, that, if mistaken touching the mission of Christ to our world, it is scarcely possible to get right in reference to the Gospel plan of Salvation. It is enough for us to believe that God loved us and gave his Son to die that we may live free from sin here, in yielding our hearts and lives to him, and attain to eternal life by persevering in well doing to the end of our journey.
T. F.
CHANGE
Brethren Craig and Sweeney have removed the office of the Bible Advocate from Jacksonville to Carrollton, IL. These good brethren are laboring earnestly for the truth and deserve the hearty encouragement of the brethren of their own state and elsewhere. They have not the least sympathy with the Russell faction.
W. L.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Much to our regret, our paper has been issued for a considerable time, too late in the month to give satisfaction to our readers. The day of publication shall be changed, and the brethren may look for the Advocate very early in the month. We are happy, however, to know that it is not only anxiously read, but we have also the highest evidence that it is accomplishing a good work. Notwithstanding we have taken but little pains to circulate it, we rejoice that it is extensively read. Our purpose is to give it a wider circulation in future. We are confident that it is our highest ambition to do good by our journal; and we entertain not a doubt as to the truth of our religious position, but we cannot work with proper effect, without the cooperation of the friends of Jesus Christ.
T. F.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
GOOD REPORTS
We have visited several of our most important towns since our last issue with the view of preaching the Gospel and encouraging the saints, and we are free to state every congregation that is doing its own work is prosperous and happy, and every other is dead or in a dying condition.
T. F.
“THE NAME OF CHRIST” versus CAMPBELLITE AND INTENTIONAL WRONGS
“Now, I want this question settled before I die, viz: Am I or the public right or not, when we call them Campbellites? Now, if we are right, we shall stand to it and call them Campbellites; but if we are wrong, we should quit it at once.”
— Cor. of Banner of Peace.
“Banner of Peace” is a singular name for a paper which speaks such things. — Ed.
These are singular sentences.
“Am I or the public right,” implies that one of them might be right, and the other wrong, in calling us Campbellites! His manner of asking the question; “Now, I want this question settled before I die”—shows that, with him, it’s not a question sub judice; and we are led to suspect his sincerity in asking it, for it is full to the brim of irony.
“When we call them Campbellites.” He meant, in calling them Campbellites. The right or wrong lies in the act itself, and not in the time of doing it, as the word “when” implies. This is the better wording. I wish the question settled—whether we are right in calling them Campbellites.
[We presume he intends to ask whether the doctrine of doing evil that good may come is right. — Ed.]
The Tennessee Baptist, quoting the above, remarks, “It is well known that this sect, which had its origin with Alexander Campbell, has the name of their ‘Master’ when applied to them as religionists; and have the effrontery to usurp the name of Christians. Had its origin with Alexander Campbell.”
[This is shameful conduct Mr. Graves. — T. F.]
He meant, probably, that Alexander Campbell originated it. But, what a monstrous conclusion.
“Without faith it is impossible to please God.” “Faith comes by hearing.” “God commands all men everywhere to repent.” “The goodness of God…”
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
leadeth thee to repentance.”
“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.”
“Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.”
“Arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord.”
Says the Baptist:
“The spirit operates upon, and converts the soul.” Says Psalms xix: “The Law of the Lord is perfect converting the soul.”
Says the Baptist, “We are freed from sin before we obey the form of baptism.” Says Paul, “Ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you, being then made free from sin ye became the servants of righteousness.” In believing these passages of scripture consists in our “peculiarity.” And did Alexander Campbell invent them? J. R. Graves must know that he speaks without authority.
“Had its origin.”
Had, here, implies possession in the past tense. Then the sect existed before it existed, and possessed its origin.
“Had its origin with.”
With whom? With Alexander Campbell.
I possess a field with Mr. Cooper. I came here with Mr. Cooper. What is true of me, is true of Mr. Cooper. Does he possess the field? So do I. Did I come? So did he.
“This sect was originated with Mr. Campbell,” or, “Had its origin with Mr. Campbell.” Now, what is true of Mr. Campbell is true of the sect. Alexander Campbell was originated by God, ergo, according to his “with,” the sect sprang from God.
“Hate the name of their master.”
Jesus Christ is our master, and we love him. But he means we hate the name of Mr. Campbell. This is also incorrect. We love, and feel proud of him as a brother, not as a leader, or master. We have no “master,” save him who died upon the cross.
“Have the effrontery to usurp the name of Christians.”
This, again, is hard grammar. Why not say the name – Christians?
“Effrontery.” He continued: “Campbellites” is, in our judgment, (your judgment Sir is weighed in the scripture balance and found wanting) the only proper name by which to designate them. Their peculiar doctrines HAD (my capitals) their rise WITH (my capitals) Campbell, and should bear, out of honor to the author, the name of “Campbellites.”
Name – Campbellites.
“Well, here are his HAD, and WITH again. Take it “all in all,” in this little piece, in the Tennessee Baptist, Dec. 3, 1859, is condensed more willful malice, and grammatical error, than I generally see in a piece of its length.
Why do we repudiate the name – Campbellites?
Because we are
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
married to Christ, and wish not to play the harlot, by assuming the name of another than our husband. Think of that old “Mother of harlots.” ‘Tis but a short time since Mr. Graves charged upon us the teaching—baptismal regeneration. He knew it to be his own when he uttered it. Do we ever baptize the dead or infants? Such is baptismal regeneration. Can not every one see, even the most stolid, that we teach not baptismal regeneration? Then how can the mind of Graves assert it, without tainting his soul? We teach that God has commanded us to be baptized, and that when we obey him, he will pardon us in that obedience.
But do you believe in faith? That is to ask me if I believe in belief. But I answer in Bible language: “Without faith it is impossible to please God.”
“But how does faith come?” Again let the Bible answer. “Faith comes by hearing.”
“Do you hold to repentance?” Let the Bible reply. “God now commands all men every where to repent.”
“But what produces this repentance?” Consult our creed. “The goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance.”
“But what follows repentance?” Excuse us for quoting again from our creed. “Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins.”
“But,” says one, “for is, in this case, a conjunction, and means, ‘because of.'” If they were baptized because of remission of sins, they repented because of remission of sins; for, ‘repent and baptized’ are connected by the conjunction “and.” “For,” as a conjunction, does not mean “because of,” but simply because.
Try a case. “Let him ask in faith nothing wavering, for he that wavereth is like a wave of the sea.” Do not all see that, “Because of he that wavereth,” would make no sense? Because is alone the sense of joy, when for is used as a conjunction. “Because he that wavereth is like a wave.”
Are we freed from sin before baptism? Let them quote an explicit declaration thereunto. “We are freed when we have obeyed that form of doctrine.”
Now for the explicit declaration: “You have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine, which was delivered you, being then made free from sin you become the servants of righteousness.”
When were they freed? “When,” and not before they had obeyed the form.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Now how regardless of truth must those be, who assert that men are freed from sin before they have obeyed that “form of doctrine!”
D. L. PALMER.
Dearmond’s Mills, Ark., July 23, 1860.
Our friends of the denominations who regard God or the honor of his cause, surely will not attempt to degrade us by calling us Campbellites. If we are not worthy of the name of our Savior, it matters little what we are called, but if we are, woe be to them who thus insult our Lord and master.
T. F.
CIRCULAR
The Annual meeting of the American Christian Missionary Society, will be held in Cincinnati, commencing on Tuesday, Oct. 23rd, at 2 o’clock. We are authorized to say that the President of the Society will deliver his address Tuesday night at 7 o’clock.
Not having received definite replies, as yet, from the brethren from whom regular addresses are expected, we do not feel at liberty to publish their names. We will only say that care will be taken to provide speakers for the night meetings; and we expect to gratify the Convention with speeches from brethren who have never yet been heard in Cincinnati on the Missionary question.
With the enlarging usefulness of the Society, there will of course be an enlarged interest in its doings; and we are well assured that the business to be transacted this year will exceed in importance that of any preceding year. The brotherly concord, delightful fellowship, and joyful interchange of views, and feelings, which have hitherto furnished so rich a feast at our anniversaries, will, we are sure, continue to attract the lovers of our Saviour, from all parts of the country to this annual Love Feast.
The call was so cheerfully responded to last year, that we feel embarrassed to renew the request that the churches everywhere will, on the first Lord’s day in October, or at such other time as may suit their convenience, have a discourse delivered on the subject of Missions, and take up a collection to be sent to the annual meeting.
Not only Life Directors, Life Members and Messengers of churches, are desired to be present; but all who have a wish to share in the solemnities and joys of such a meeting, will be made equally welcome.
286
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Half-fare tickets will be provided on as many roads as possible, of which notice will be given in the Review. Brethren coming to the meeting will please report themselves at B. S. Bosworth’s Bookstore, corner 5th and Walnut Streets, where a committee will be in waiting to provide places for them. Let us have a gathering worthy of the cause, and by united counsel, prayer, and exhortation, endeavor to help forward the triumphant marches of the Gospel.
By order of the Executive Board,
Cincinnati, Sept. 1st, 1860.
ISAAC ERRETT,
Cor. Sec.
NEWS FROM THE CHURCHES
DEAR BRETHREN:
I seat myself this evening to communicate a few lines in regard to the progress of the Truth in this part of the country. I have still been proclaiming the Gospel and have had since I last wrote you several additions; had preaching on yesterday, some fifteen miles from this place, and three additions.
Clinton, Ark., 1860.
J. J. STOBAUGH.
DEAR BRETHREN:
As you like to learn how the cause of Christ prospers, I can say that we have in our town a very faithful little flock of about 50 members. All in union and harmony, and I think the prospects are good; and the time not far distant when many more will come out and take their stand with us, and be numbered with those who contend that the Bible and the Bible alone contains everything that is required for the salvation of man. You will please send the Advocate gratis to Sister Susan Murphy and Sarah Cook, who would be pleased and grateful to you for such a great gift.
Covington, Ten., 1860.
T. R. RICHARDSON.
DEAR BRETHREN:
Through the kind mercies of Heaven, I am once more seated to write you again according to promise and give you the news from this part of Texas. We have reasons to thank heaven for the victories we have gained through the word of the Lord. Not withstanding the strong efforts to hinder the spread of God’s Holy Truth, still men will hear, believe, and obey. I can report 62 additions.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
287
For the year 1860, up to the present writing and never was there a time when I thought more good could be effected than at present in Texas. The harvest is indeed white but the laborers are few; pray the Lord of the harvest to send more laborers into his vineyard. I have been at some very interesting meetings recently, particularly in Denton County, last Lord’s day week, when noble souls made the confession and were immersed into the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Our protracted meetings are now commencing, and I hope to be able to report many additions. May the Lord prosper and bless you. Pray for me that I may stand in my lot.
Timber Home, Texas, 1860.
A. M. DEAN.
Dear Brethren:
I make haste to convey to you the cheering news that this vicinity has received the word of the Lord. Yesterday, a meeting of eight days continuance, conducted by our beloved Bro. J. Greer, of Tennessee, came to a close, attended by the happiest results. Fourteen persons made the good confession, all of whom were buried with our Lord, but two; they having been many years ago baptized by the Baptists, and professing themselves satisfied with their baptism. Several more are in Agrippa’s situation—almost persuaded “because the preacher was wise, he still taught the people knowledge, yea he gave good heed and sought and set in order, the pure testimony.” We will meet in church capacity to commence our labor of love as a Christian body. Bro. Greer organized a congregation, the first Lord’s day in August. I hope to have the good news of an orderly walk in the high and holy vocation to which we have been called to announce in my next communication. I write in order to relieve Bro. Greer of that care, he having now to hurry home to meet a Methodist preacher in discussion on the principles of Christianity. We praise the Lord for the power of the Gospel.
Barnes’ Store, Miss. Sept. 1860.
D. M. PRIEST.
Dear Brethren:
I have just been out on a preaching tour, and preached to very respectable congregations, at various points in the Counties of Winston, Walker and Blount, without any signal marks of success. I afterwards assisted in conducting a protracted meeting at Tabernacle, in Cotake Valley, Morgan County, where we had six confessions and baptisms, and one added from another congregation. The brethren were much revived, and a great deal of prejudice was…
288
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Removed from the minds of the people. I then went to the Valpermoso Springs, where I made an appointment to preach, and in a few hours had a large congregation of attentive hearers. I continued the meeting and delivered four discourses, with seemingly good effect. During my stay at the Springs I partook of the hospitalities of Mr. J. J. Giers, the proprietor, and was helped on our way by his kind lady, our zealous sister; I would just say to all the lovers of the good things of this life; such as a well-furnished table, a good variety of water, romantic scenery, and charming music, to visit Vallermoso Springs; and let me say to you or any other preaching brother, that if you visit said Springs, you will meet a few good soldiers of the cross, and many kind friends.
Yours in the faith,
G. L. BROWN
Gainesville, Ala. 1860.
OBITUARIES
DEAR BRETHREN:
Again has death clothed the family of Bro. Chambers in mourning. His daughter, Sallie, aged 28; his pride, and as it were, the “apple of his eye,” bowed her head in death, June 28th, 1860. She leaves behind a bereaved husband, and three little children. She yielded to the “mild scepter of Prince Emanuel” in 1847, and died triumphing in the hope of Christianity. Mrs. Sallie Bynum is no more, but “blessed are the dead which die in Christ.” But for this consolation, the despair of Bro. Chambers and family would be too great to bear.
Yours in the one hope,
D. L. PALMER
DEAR BRETHREN:
It has become our duty to announce through the Advocate, the death of our worthy and highly esteemed sister Abigail Brandon. She died at her residence, near Boon’s Creek Camp ground, Carroll county, Tenn. She was the wife of Bro. John Brandon, who departed this life on the 8th day of September, 1858. Her death occurred on the first of this month from an attack of apoplexy. Sister Brandon was 57 years of age when she obtained release from the cares and troubles of earth. She engaged in the Christian warfare in early life—confessed the Messiah and was buried with him in baptism, at Roan’s Creek camp ground, by Bro. De Whit. From this time to her death, she lived an exemplary life—a pattern of good works and humble piety—exhibiting her faith in the Saviour, and an unwavering reliance upon the promises of the Holy Spirit, given in the Gospel, by a life of obedience to the teachings of the Apostles of Christ.
Yours,
J. M. SELPH
Sept. 1860.