nil 11
a irx "w t y iTN a rrn
071
W 71 1 1 1 fl V I 1 1
Xj II
1 H il MM
1 1
PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY A COMMITTEE OF MINISTERS FOE THE METHODIST EPI COPAL CHURCH, SOUTH. RUFUS T. HEFLUT, Editor.
VOL. IV NO. 47.
R ALEIgITTThURSD AyT NOVEMBER 24, 1 859.
a year, in advance.
J- 1111
O II 1 (t I N A L
For the N. C. Christian Advocate.
, 3iai'l5'" aazinc" and John
The delay in furnishing you with this
i-tii-le has been unavoidable. I pass on
t,i notice the essayist's remarks on the doc
r;iue of the "witness of the Spirit." He
;IV. "kindred to the doctrine of perfec
tion was his notion of the Spirit's witness
t a ii-nuine conversion." After giving a
vorv brief abstract of Wesley's "notion,"
he continues, "we wi 1 not ventuie further
in co this mystic theology than to observe
that the notion of a witness of sonship ma
tin its impression on the mental con
sciousness alone, antecedent to, and un
mixed with, spiritual affections is a refine
rr.ent nowhere intimated in the Scrip
tures." Now a sufficient reply to this will
be aac'r statement of the doctrine as held
and taught by Mr. "Wesley. Satirists and
formalists have ridiculed the doctrine from
the time of Wesley until the present,
but it is nevertheless precious to thousands
who derive their richest enjoyments iu the
present life therefrom, and who build up
on its truth their surest hope of a blissful
future beyond the grave.
The Spirit beareth witness with our
spirit that we are the children of God."
What does this passage teach '? We an
swer, it teaches, first, that the Holy Spir
it boars witness to the pardon and adoption
of the christian ; and secondly, that our
sy.ir t testifies to our adoption by assuring
-as that we have the direct witness of the
Spirit of God to that fact. Now, the wit
ness of the Spirit of God is not only distinct
from the witness of our own spirit, but is
direct. Thus, in the first impulses of per
suasion tha- he is "born again,'' the chris
tian will have the "witness of th? Spirit.'
This m st be so. Jse our justification or
acceptance with God cannot be known by
ns. Justification is an act of the Divine
mind, bv which we are acquitted from the
sen ence of sruilt, and admitted into Divine j
favor. If this be so, and. even the Harper
writer would scarcely deny it, then none
but God can know that t'.is set nas ooon
certainly performed, unless he furnishes
evidence of the fact m some way, and
that way is through the Spirit. 'In the
hour of conversion, before we have time
for goo I works, or the fruits of the Spirit,
or even for engaging iu a course of reason
ing by which we infer our adoption, by
comparing our experience with the Scrip
ture marks of regeneration, the Holy Spirit
directlj assures us that God loves us and
freely accepts us in Christ .Jesus." Then
it is, after this evidence has beer, given us
of our pardon, that "we love him because
he first loved us. Witho t this evidence
or witness we could not have known that
God loved us, without which we could
not have loved him. To explain the man
nr in which the Spirit so operates as to
produce this evidence or direct witness is
heyond the power or knowledge of man ;
but as to the fact, there can be no doubt
whatever.as it is a matter cf express revela
tion. " Ha Yin received the testimony of
the Spirit, it will not be long before we I
will regain the joint evidenc ot our own
spirit." Perhaps wo will be induced cr j
tempted to doubt the fact of the direct ev- )
idenee of lite Spirit ; then it will be that
o:,r oirn spirit i. e., "our consciousness
of possessing those characteristics describ
ed in the Scriptures, as constituting the
christian" witl confirm us in believing
that we have the testimony of the Spirit
of God. And as long as we "fear God
and keep his commandments," just so long
will these two witnesses continue their uni
ted testimony that we arc his children.
We quote further from the essayist :
"The new creation is its best evidence.
It testifies of itself, and its testimony is
confirmed by the Scriptures, that distin
guish the genuine from the false, leaving
no ground for doubtful conjecture or en
thusiastic fancies." Then he gives a quo
tation to fortify his position : We know
that we have passed from death unto life,
because we love the brethren." " fVe
knotcfecause we Zoie." This is pronoun
ced by him to be "as rational as Scriptu
ral." Grant it. But the book tells us
that, "11 clove him bemuse he first loved
us." And this too, is "as rational as
Serif tural." For without we know that
God loves us, wc cannot love him ; nor can
we ever ' love the brtthrtn' until we are
conscious that we love iiim "who first
loved us." And of course we can never
bring forth the genuine fruits of conver
sion '.e. "the fruits of the Spirit," such
as love, joy, peace, long-su.Teriug.&c, un
til we know that we are converted. If
this be not so, wc would thank the astute
writer in Harper to expose the sophistry or
to exhibit the true Scriptural teaching j
The following which 1 quote from Balaton
is clear and I think conclusive :
"The testimony of our own spirit we do
not profess oy intuition, but it is derived
through a process of reasoning. Thus, the
Hble describes certain moral qualities of
the soul, ami moral lialiits of life, as be
longing peculiarly to the children of God.
By the exercise of Lis own consciousness,
and a contemplation of our own lives, we
j may form an opinion concerning our own
character ; then, by the exercise of our j
reasoning faculty, we may compare our
; character with the character described in I
Scripture, as pertaining to the child of God, j
and rationally draw the conclusion that we j
sustain that relation. This is the only j
I lan by which our spirit can witness to the j
.fact. Now. to say that this is also the
sense in which we are to understand that
the Spirit of God witnesses to our adoption,
we think is an erroneous view of the sub
ject." He then offers several considerations
in proof. I quote a portion of them.
"1. This is evidently, as already stat
ed, to confound the two witnesses to
make the witness of our own spirit and that
of the Spirit of G od essentially the same
and really but one witness ; whereas, the
Scriptures plainly teach that there are two
witnesses : 'the Spirit of God,' in the
heart of the christian, crying, 'Abba, Fa
ther,' and 'his own spirit,' uniting in tes
timony to the same fact.
'The above (erroneous) view of the sub
ject appears evidently to exhibit the wit
ness of the Spirit in a sense entirely inad
equate to the purpose for which, according
to Scriptuie, it is designed. The witness
of the Spirit is designed to give us an as
surance of our adoption, so satisfactory as
to amount to real knowledg e. Now, as
the forgiveness of sin, or adoption into the
family of God, is an act ofGid, it follows
that God must be the prime witness of the
fact ; but to suppose that this witness is
onlv given in the indirect sense, as des
cribed, is in effect to discard the witness
altogether, so far as the simple question of
adoption is concerned. For, if the descrip
tion of the christian character given in
Scripture by the inspiration of the Holy
Spirit, is ail the agency of the Spirit al
lowed iu the witness in question, then it
follows that this witness does not testify at
all to the adoption of any individual. The
Scriptures only testify to the general truth
that n't who possess a certain moral char
acter are the chlidron of God - but with re
gard to the question whether this or Had
individual possesses that character or not,
they are silent. As to the simple fact of
my adoption, according to the above (er
roneous) theory, it is not learned from the
testimony of the Spirit, but must be a mat
ter of inference, derived though a. pro
test of reasoning. Hence, unless we
presuppose the infallibility of our rea
soning powers, we may have erred in
this intellectual process ; we may have
formed an improper view of our own
moral character ; we may have mis
understood the Scrtptures in reference to
the moral character peculiar to the chil
dren of God : or we may have blundered
in the comparison of ourselves with the
Scripture requirement, and in the conclu
sion, drawn from such comparison, that we
are the children of God. In all or any of
these particulars we may have erred ; and
it so, it follows that the conclusion arising
from this process of ratiocination cannot
amount to certain knowledge, but can, at
best, be but probable conjecture. There
fore, it is clear, that as it is the privilege
of the christian to lenw that lie belongs to
the family of God, it must be possdjle for
him to have an evidence of the fact superi
or to the individual testimony now in ques
tion " Hence, I conclude, that possibly
the essayist is at fault, when he says, that
"the inner experience," by which I under
stand him to mean the intellectual process
alluded to in the extract from Ralston,
" that the inner experience of a christian
life is sufficiently certain for all the pur
poses of piety, rectitude, and a tranquil
death," for as shown by Balston, a man
may err in the intellectual process, or at
best have but a probable conjecture upon
which to rely.
I did not purpose to notice the writer's
remarks upon Wesley's "notion" of "chris
tian perfection," but it is necessary, as he
appears to base his criticisms chiefly upon
the self-contradiction of "an imperfect per
fection," that is, that Wesley applied the
term " perfection" to "a less than total
sinlessucss," and that "it is like asserting
a circle with the proportions of a triangle"
etc., &c. He finds fault with the doctrine
because he does not like the nam-a by which
it is called. He thinks it well enough to
aim at perfection, and thinks every man
should try to become a perfect gentleman,
that " Wesley was both a gentleman and
a christian of the highest style, yet he made
no professions to either." If by this ho
means simply tnat Wesley did not go about
boasting of his perfection in religious life,
or of his gentlemanly bearing, I agree
heartily wiih him. But if he means to say
that Wesley did not profess to have enjoyed-"perfect
love," or "christian perfec
tion," he is simply mistaken. Dr. Bangs
has proved this point beyond all question,
I refer the reader to the quotations from
Dr. B. s article in Dr. Ilosser's work on
"Experimental Bcligion."
There arc some excellent passages in tLe
essay upon wbich I have tLus commented.
Indeed, they are so truthful and striking,
that I intend to copy a few of the most no
ticcable that you, Mr. Editor, may. if you
' choose, give them a place in the columns
of "our" excellent "Advocate."
P. J.
For the N. C. Ch. Advocate.
Cable Characters Jnbal.
J ubal was the father of all such as han
dle the harp and the organ. That man
could use the voice in making music before
! the fall, seems to be reasonable. That
j hours were spent by the innocent pair in
I Eden in singing praises to God , seems so
reasonable that we cannot doubt but that
it was so.
Perhaps, though the music was far in
ferior to that made in Eden, many a dark
and sad hour was relieved by some sweet
, hopeful song concerning redemption after
the fall.
But it seems that instrumental music
was unknown until the days of the inge
nious Jubal.
Ilis harp, and organ, perhaps, were
crude, and the music not very sublime, yet
it was the foundation of a science which
has done great good to the world.
Instrumental music is second only to
vocal music.
Though it has long been desecrated by
wi ':ed men, it is only the abuse of a sci
ence, useful in itself, that does mischief.
After all, it admits of a doubt whether
a man is ever mad a worse by music. That
' it is used by wicked persous for their
amusement is admitted, but it is doubted
1 whether even over rough natures, and
! hard hearts, it may not wield a restraining
influence.
It is evident that it has a good influence
j over a good person.
How many sad hearts have been checr-
ed, how many desponding sons of adver
! sity have been encouraged and made hope-
ful by the sweet sounds of instrumental
j music. How few of us when l'stcnina: to
f the charming sounds of the violin, the very
; best instrumental music, or to the more
I solemn strains of the organ, reflect that
j these are only improvements on the
' invention of the anteueluvian " fa titer of
! all such as handle the harp and organ"
j Jubal.
I May we not hope that the time will come
when every harp, and viol, and organ,
will be u-;ed only to lead on the hosts of
the Lord in the crreat work of converting
the world?
When music shall no more be heard as
sociated with sinful mirth, but from every
tent, and cottage, and mansion it shall be
heard floating on every morniDg breeze,
and every evening Zephyrs laden with the
praises of Him who hath redeemed us with
His own precious blood? When the sons
of., .en shall vie with the angels in the
Heaven born science of music? C.
For the N. C. Ch. Advocate.
Contingent Fund.
In the "Steward's Beoort ' at the Ten
nessee Conference, published in the Nash
ville Advocate of the 3d inst., it is stated
that they were unable to pay twenty-five
cents in the dollar, of their claims. This
is too bad, and the Committee was right in
asking the Conference to pass a resolution
requesting the Bishops at their subsequent
Conferences, in the official examination of
character, to enquire of each preacher
whether he has taken up his "Conference
Collection." In the N. C. Conference we
have been doing much better than our
Tennessee brethren, but not more than half
as well as we might. Why is not the
whole amount necessary to meet our claims,
raised ? I believe it is because the preach
ers do not give proper attention to the mat
ter. I do not believe there is a, circuit or
station in the conference upon which the
assessment could not be raised if proper
efforts were made. It may be too late to
give an exhortation with a view to practi
cal results, the present year, but I suggest
that it be a mattci of inquiry at Conference,
as to the manner in which tha preachers
have attended to their duty in taking, up
this collection.
X,
Fur the N. C. Christian Advocate.
Ten Cents fo the Missionary
Cause.
One of the colored members of my
charge attributes his conversion to Gad to
a contribution which he made often cents
to the missionary cause. On his way
home he reflected upon what he had done
as follows : Why did I give that money ?
To send the gospel to the heathen. Why
should I wish to send the gospel to them ?
Because it is the way of life and salvation.
But what good has the gospel done to mo ?
I'm a poor sinner, and on my way to nell,
and paying money to save the heathen !
But why don't the gospel save me ? This
led him to make up his mindtoseeek God,
and this year he was made happy in a Sa
vior's love.
Brethren, give the colored people an op-
portunity to contribute to the support of
missions. There is a blessing m it.
JOHN BAYLEY.
Murfreesboro', N. C, Nov. 10, 1859. .
SELECTIONS
From the N. Orleans Ch. Advocate.
The Methodist Church Apostol
ical. Many have been the claims of likeness
and identdy to the Apostolic Churches.
We wish to examine whe?;r ,the Metho
dist Church has any claims' to present for
this honor. Likeness may bo expected in
three particulars doctrines, ordinances,
and polity. The Methodist Church teach
es, that Christ and the Holy Spirit are
equally divine with the Father ; that the
atonement, or provision of mercy, is uni
versal; that justification is by faith alone,
and regeneration a necessary qualification
for heaven ; that, (aside from grace,) men
are totally depraved, and hence all ability
to turn to God is derived from grace ; that
men can improve this grace and be saved',
or abuse it and be lost ; and that future
rewards and punishments will bo eternal.
These doctrines are certainly apostolical.
Thus far, likeness is clearly discerned.
Let us now look for the ordinances. A
scriptural ordinance, is an ind'tuie of di
vine appointment and of perpetual obliga
tion. Of such, the New Testament teach
es but two, baptism, and the Lord's sup
per. ThGse do for us two things; 1. They
introduce us into God's household and
covenant, and 2. Bind us to duty. We
hold them to be signs, or symbols, and
not necessarily possessing or conveying
inherent grace. We try to use the ordi
nances according to their -spiritual inipoit,
without reference to mode, as mode is no
where taught as essenti il to duty, and if
it is essential to one duty it is to ail.
Hence we allow the right of private jxdj-
inrnt to candidates for the reception of the
ordinances. These views we think the
scriptures clearly sustain. The last fea
ture of likeness to be sought is in polity
This, in the New Testament, we find in
general yrin-iplcs only, and no where
frame,.! U! into fijT4.I . IJarfi is one
of the strongest evidences of the unerring
wisdom of the Christian Legislator, and of
, the inspiration of the Christian system.
The gospel was to be preached under all
kinds of civil government, from democracy
to monarchy. If the gospel system had
a fixed polity, it would be in constant col
lision with civil government somewhere,
aud in every age of the world, w'oich would
seriously retard, and often completely bar
its success.
The polity cf the New Testament is
neither a democracy, aristocracy, or mon
archy. It has properly no legislative or
judicial departments. All its liws are
already made its powers are wholly exe
cutive. But suppose wc apply the terms of civil
to ecclesiastical government; then, the
latter is a monarchy, in that Christ is its
sole Lawgiver; it is an aristocracy, in that
the word and ordinances are administered
by Christ's appointees ; it is a democracy,
in that the discipline of the Church is ad
ministered by the nikiisfcry and laity to
gether. Now we see it in operation. The
apostolical ministers were certainly itin
erants so were the prophets before them.
Were Christ and his Apostles ever settled
pastors? Never. It is said,, "He weit
about doing good." To his ministers he
said, "as ye go, preach!" They were
sent to seek for the people; and not to wait
for the. people to seek for them, as is the
case in all Congregational and similar
Churches. The Apostles were not sent to
fill vacant cnurches, but to prepare mate
rials, and build new ones. A settled pas
torate has its advantages no doubt, but
itinerancy has this advantage, that it is
scriptural and apostolical. While - the
church was under inspired teachers, they
were itinerants without exception. Many
designing to popularize church polity,
demand its conformity to the State. Can
any sensible man suppose that a fixed
church polity could assume every possible
form of civil government ? This delusion
is ancient.
"When Christianity came to be fully
settled in the world, they contrived to mod
el the external government of the church
as near as might be to the civil govern
ment of the lloman Empire. As every
city had its temporal magistrate, so every
city had its bishop ; as every province had
its proconsul, whose seat was in the me
tropolis, so also the church had its metro
poiitan.or Arshbishop and as every dio
ce e had it vicarii, so the church had her
primate. " Why is the Romish Church
blamed for demanding that the state should
conform to the churoa ? Is it not as reas
onable that the state should conform to
the church, as to ret.uire the. church to
comform to the state: If inspiration has
given us a fixed form of church polity, it
is-certainly the safes; to be governed by
inspiration, and heniethe better reason to
make the state confirm to the church.
Then we conclude tbst itinerancy is Apos
tolical. The Father sent the Son, the Son
sent the Disciples, and the Apostles sent
Peter and John Acts 8, 14 : and 13, 3 :
We think therefore, that the likeness be
tween the Methodist and Apostolic Chur
ches is clearly made out.
J. A. SPENCE.
Troy Ala.
From ths Bible Times.
The Communion Table.
'Surely the Lord Jtsus never designed
this So you said, dear brother, as you
'wept' beside the Lord's Table in a Bap
tist Church.
With you I say, 'the Lord Jesus never
designed this.' He 'never designed' that
his disciples should 'break the least of his
commandments,' and 'teach for the com
mandments of God, the traditions of men.'
He 'never designed' that the first and
plainest of his ordinances should be per
verted, set aside and contemned. Nd, he
designed that there should be 'one bap
tism,' and that none should lay claim to
the ' Lord's Table,' who refused to comply
with the order of his appointments.
You know full well that Baptists differ
in no particular from the established usages
of o'her denominations in making Baptism
a prerequisite to communion. For them
therefore to invite those who have not been
immersed, would be either a denial that
j Baptism is a prerequisite, or else an en
dorsement of a ceremony of Baptism which
they conscientiously regard as unscriptural.
But why need this question of Baptism
separate us ? All candid men admit that
Immersion is scriptural, why not then end
the dispute by all christians being 'buried
w ith Christ in baptism ?'
Would the cause of Christ suffer if Im
mersion was to prevail ? Would any prin
ciple of Bible truth thereby be compromis
ed? Would the sanctity of any conscience
be violated ? What are the obstacles to
audi a consummation of christian union
except the disinclinations of mere prefer
ence and the stubbornness of a palpable
sectarianism ?
Why not, Mr. Editor, turn your efforts
in this direction? Surely if one Commu
nion "TiiV.u. Ui saji-'a a desiteratum in the tri
umph of union, is 'one Baptism' auy leso
0 ? Ax Inquirer.
Philadelphia, Oct. 29, 1S50.
NOTES TO THE ABOVE COM MVXICATIOX.
It is only by analysis, that we can hope
to prosecute our inquiries successfully. For
instance, the above article by eur Baptist
brother, when analyzed, yields the follow
ing implications, in order :
1. That baptism by i miners' on, exclu
sive!", is one of Christ's commandments.
2. That any other baptism is merely a
human tradition.
3. That by any other mode, Christ's or
dinance is perverted, set aside and con
temned.
4. That the 'one baptism' mentioned by
St. Paul means immersion in water.
5. That none should claim communion
without immersion.
G. That christians not immersed refuse
to comply with the order of Christ's ap
pointments. 7. That the Hsagcs of other denomina
tions may justify our own.
8. That to invite unimmersed persons
would be to deny baptism as a prerequsitc.
Now, is either one of these eight implica
tions according to the Bible ? But again :
our brother asks Why need this separate.
us? Sure enough ; why need it ? That is,
when the matter is analyzed, why need it
separate us at the Lord's Table 1 the
death-scene, where, if anywhere, it would
appear proper that our differences should
be forgotten. It must be remembered that
this difference does not separate us any
where else. In reading, praying, singing,
speaking in the pulpit or on the platform,
in all kinds of meetings, week day and
Sabbath, in streets or tents, halls or church
es, anywhere and everywhere, we may
unite, cordially and joyfully, without a
single restraint, acknowledging each other
as christians and christian ministers, living
and uving together as such but at the
Table we separate ! WHY ? What says
the bidce ?
In Statu Quo.
Father O'Leary was on his regular tour
collecting the stipends among the poor Irish
under his charge, and had just stopped in
upon Paddy Crogan, who was always ' too
poor to pay up. Paddy had just made a
sale of the"owld cow.' receiyng a sovereign
in payment, with which, of course, he was
loth to part, and was considering how to
invest it to the best advantage, when the
priest dropped in.
'Good morning, Patrick," said he, "I
have called for the stipends, and I hope
you are better off to day than the last
time I was here."
"Please yer riverence,"eaid Paddy, "I'm
niver a bit the better off, for divel the penny
have I in the house.''
"Well, Patrick, I suppose I will have to
pass it over nntil the next time, by which
1 hope you will try to save something for
the Church."
"I will, plase yer . riverence," said
Paddy, very humbly ; and so the priest
left him.
Paddy was in great glee at getting rid of
the priest without paying the stipends, and
ran to impart the tidings of his success to
the "owld woman," who was hoeing the
'pratees' in the patch near by.
" I say, Jennet, his riverence was
here."
'An' was he, sure?" replied Jennet.
"Yis; an' he axed me for the stipends,
an' och, be me faith, an' didn't I fix him
nice though." -
"An' how, Paddy, did ye pay him,
sure?"
' 'Devil a bit did I, for I towld him I
had niver a penn j in the house."
"O Patrick ! Patrick! how could yo
tell such an owdacious lie to his riverence ?
sure he'll send you to purgatory, an' many's
the long day 'twill be 'fore ye get out of
it
;Ah now, Jennet, darlint! an' don't be
takin' on after that fashion about it, for it
was only a smart transaction in a business
like way on my part, for divel a lie did I
tell his holiness: for it's yourself that
knows the sovereign I got for the owld cow
is every bit of money we have in the house,
and there's a dale of differen.ee between a
penny an a sovereign, Jennet."
Paddy's argument had a soothing effect
upon the tender conscience of Jennet, but
time passed on without th.e Crogan s mak
ing any preparations for the payment of
the stipends, though the sovereign still
remained in the house. The priest called
again, and Paddy resolved to tell the old
story.
"And how is it with you now, Patrick ?
have you the stipends for me V said the
priest, as he crossed the .hresliold.
"Ah, your riverence! an' you may
bclave me, for I'm poor enough, and niver
a penny in the house have I."
Fired with Paddy's prolonged delin
quency, the priest hit upon an expedient to
bring him to terms; so putting on a stern
and solemn look, and raising his finger in
a menacing manner, slowly, and with
great enphasis, said : "Patrick, 111 put you
in statu yio ; and tuiuia - lja ,ft
left the cabin.
But poor Paddy was not in the happy
mood now that he was when he tricked the
priest before. Statu quo as a place thatho
had never heard of, and the terrors of it
weighed heavily upon him. Starting from
his temporary stupor, lie ran to Jennet, cry
ing" "Jennet ! his riverence was here again,
and he axed me for the stipends, an'when
I towld him I bad niver a penny in tho
house said he, 'Patrick, I'll put you in
statu quo.''"
"O, howly mother, defend us !" cried
the terrified Jennet; "suro an' it must be
som? place worse than purgatory he's go
ing to send you to for lying ; run quick,
au' give him the sovereign."
Patrick awaited no further invitation.
Away he went, as fast as his pedal extrem
ities would carry him, to overtake the
priest.
"Your riverence ! your riverence !?'he
almost frantically yelled; "stop, your
riverence ! an' here's a sovereign I eot for
the owld cow, an' if ye'll only keep out of
statu quo you shall have the stipend?
hereafter whenever you call for fchem.''
Methodist Polity.
The New York Observer says: 4 'The
governing power in the Methodist Episco
pal Church is in the hands of the clergy
exclusively. The laymen have the sup
plies in their hands, but tho preachers,
with the control of vast sums already
raised, and a willing people, arc supreme.
Harper's Weekly says : 'The rules of the
Methodist Episcopal Church, like those of
the Roman Catholic, do not grant tho lay
men any voice in the government of the
Church, which is wholly in the hands of
the clergy.' To say nothing of Scripture,
this polity needs to be Americanized.''
On which the Chicago Advocate re
marks :
"The above has been floating among
the secular press, which just now seems
greatly exercised as to our economy, and
is just such an item as the Observer and
Weekly would be likely to get up. That
the laity have no voice in the government
of the Church is simply untrue. Look at
facts :
"1. All our churches and parsonages
are held by laymen.
"2. Our salaries 'allowances' as
Methodist preachers, are fixed by laymen,
and from their decision there is no ap
peal. "3. Reception to prob:tion and full
membership in our Church can only be
made by the ministry upon lay recommen
dation.
"4. The court of trial for a laymen is
a committee of laymen.
"5. His appeal from an adver.-e decis
ion is to a body of laymen.
"b. JJie Church its pastors nrccbos
1 en by the people by laymen to be
preachers and pastors.
"No clerical conclave caa empower any
man not repeatedly endorsed as the 'mess
enger oi tho churches,' with pastoral au
thority. "We respectfully recommend to the
Observer to secure to the laity powerJ
faintly appr ximating the above, ere it
reads us any additional lectures on the
excessive power of Methodist clergy "
Bear! ngr the Cross.
One pleasant summer eve, poor, de
formed girl had wandered alone to one of
the public squares in P seating her
self beneath a tree, where she could seo
the fountain sending up its playful waters.
She forgot for a while her loneliness ; bat
presently a party of young ladies came by,
and one, in thoughtless merriment, ex
claimed :
"Do look at that little wretch's back V
Ml turned, and with curious eyes gazed
UP0Q ter- 1 was seated on an opposite
bench ; and as they passed on, marked tho
tears as they overflowed the eyes of tho
sensitivo child. Approaching her, I en
deavored to speak consoling words. With
a slight caress of Iier little hand, and eyes
blinded with tears, sho looked up to me
and said : "Thank you, ma'am, for being
i so kind. My Sabbath school teacher says
! my cross has been placed upon my back
j but oh ! kind lady, when people look upon
me so proudly, and tho boys call me ugly
names, and tho girls won't let me play
with them, then I feel so badly, and I
cannot help crying. Do tell me, lady,
will Jesus never take my cross away ?"
Years passed by, and oneo more at my
bparding-houso I met the child, now grown
! to womanhood. Her countenance was
; spiritually beautiful, but she still boro the
! burden of her childhood. Being together
! for some weeks, an intimacy sprang up be-
tween us ; and oue day, as wo Bat covers
j ing, sho alluded to our first meeting "My
i misfortune," said she, "was long a sourco
! of greviou9 unhappiness ; but, thank God
! there at last came to me an answer to my
; oft-asked question : Shall I never cease
I to bear this cross V" And, going to bcr
I portfolio, she handerd mo the following
lines, oiMur-ujt.
j my consolation."
"'ru 'ostlino has been
; The tear will fall, O Father,
When 1 sec
Those curious glanci"!
Fixed on me.
How long this cross, my Savior, must 1
bear ?
Until thine eyes no more can shed a tear.''
The flush will rue, O Father,
When I hear
Those rude, insulting words
The bitter jeer.
How long, O Lord, must I, with tremb
ling fear
"Till thou these mocking words, no more
cans't bear !"
Sad are my thoughts; 0 Father,
Well I know,
OftimeB neglects are mine,
For this deep woe.
How long, kind Parent, must I check each
sob ?
"Until thy heart no'more with pain can
throb."
Then all my life, O Father,
Teach me how.
Beneath the galling cross
To humbly bow.
O ! shall I never cease to feel thy rod ?
"All trials cease in heaven, at home with
God."
A Prencher's Wny to the greatest
Usefulness.
In Morphy's oversight of a chess-board,
or Napoleon's oversight of Solferino, tho
secret of success has been a wide compre
hension, not a view of here und there a
point, with two or three antagonisms, or
mutual dependences, but of a multiform
range of means with complexncss of de
tails toward one great end. A balloon
observation was desirable preparatory to a
great battle. If as ministers we would
accomplish something momentous, let us
by abstraction and introversion get the ful
lest view possible of our powers for use
fulness and of the fields for their operation.
As we move in places of clerical battle,
let ns not heedlessly or stumblingly get
into some treadmill, some unenlarging
routine for our precious days. If we walk
aright and our eyes open, each ascending
step will enable us to look farther and plan
wider for the Divine glory in the salvation
ot souls Let us test ourselves. Do we
find daily a favorable varying, a change
by growth, not a monotonous stand-still,
or, worse, an unfavorable varying.a change
j by decrease in the closet, tho study, the
j resting-parlor ? If we are failing of the
greatest uscfulucs, 0 let us at once awake
before God to the remedy, lest our powers
become rigid or collapsed in indolent hab
its. Fire in Atlanta. On last Wednesday
night a destructive fire occurred at Atlanta.
Ga. Three children were
the amount of propert;
tinaated at 300,(
O