best he can;" for he solemnly says, "Brother C. did not speak of any other class." How any man who has "some little self-respect remaining in his soul," should make such a statement, which every one who has read the article knows to be contrary to fact, is truly amazing, and must be accounted for by some one "older" than myself, and more experienced in the cause that requires such assertions in its defence. Those who have not read the article can easily do so, and they will then be able to judge how far they may rely upon the correctness of any statements made by the man who can say, that " Brother Campbell spoke of no other class than evangelists." Although "stripes under Moses" need not now be feared, J. H. would do well to bear in mind, that a greater than Moses has said, "By thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned." I may inform him, that many have read his former remarks and my reply, who have been able to see the bearing which one has upon the other, however much astonished he may be, to think that there are others who have "more penetration" than he: and who, I think, will also be able to see how little bearing his present reply has to my former. But I doubt much if another reader but himself has had penetration to see where I have "admitted now that support in Acts xx. does not mean maintenance." He says, that no truth-loving man will ever charge him with saying, that it is now more necessary that himself and others should be supported, than it was for the apostles to be relieved from serving tables. His words are," If the apostles at Jerusalem could not serve tables because they wanted to give themselves to the word of God and prayer, how much more is it necessary now, when we have no miraculous gifts, nor special inspiration of the Spirit, that we should do as Paul ordered Timothy, when he said, Meditate upon these things, give thyself wholly to them,' &c. Now if this language does not mean, that it is more necessary now that himself and others should be relieved from working, that they may do as Paul ordered Timothy, 'give themselves wholly to these things," I confess my inability to say what it means, and must just refer every reader to my very guarded remarks on this passage, leaving him to judge how far I am guilty of Although J. H. has been at the trouble to accuse me of what I never said, yet he cannot "trouble himself to expose my quibbles;" and although he has found sufficient time to seek me where there is no evidence that I have ever been, he cannot afford "time and space" to follow where my footprints are visible! Verily he is eccentric in his movements, capricious in his pursuits, and unfortunate in his conclusions. 66 As the reader is already referred to the remarks on Acts xx. 35, that he may judge for himself, I will offer nothing at present in defence of what I have said on that subject; but on 1 Timothy, v. 17-18, J. H. says, "What is honor in such a case? Is it mere respect? If I bow to a bishop, I must bow twice to one that rules well! Is that the solemn precept of Paul?" Whatever be the precept of Paul, it is surely as easy to understand what is meant by enjoining, that an elder that rules well be counted worthy of double honor, as by enjoining that he be counted worthy of double support. This same apostle, in another place says, Having food and raiment, let us therewith be content." Every man who is supported has both food and raiment, for support means a "rational competence," A. C. being judge; and how can we conceive of the apostle commanding that any man should receive the double of that with which he ought to be content? In my judgment, a bishop possessing the qualifications enumerated by Paul, and acting according to the instructions given by Paul, would neither be gratified with a bow, whether repeated twice or twenty times; nor accept of double support, although a church should have so much misguided liberality as to be willing to give it. I am treated to a number of passages in which the same word is rendered price, which is here rendered honor; but what purpose do they serve? the word in question were rendered the same here as in the passages quoted, the verse before us would then read, "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double price;" which would be an alteration, but not an emendation! Yet he says, "From these passages we conclude that Paul meant If no 66 double support." But when timee is not they admonish the unruly-their wants relieved when they are in need; and when the Chief Shepherd shall appear, they shall obtain their full reward. I regret that so much time has been wasted, and so much space occupied, with matter of a foreign and personal nature, rather than a serious examination of the subject; but for anything in this reply which may appear of that nature, my excuse is the same as Paul's to the Corinthians for "becoming a fool in glorying"-I have been compelled. Your's in love, J. MILL. A SECOND REPLY TO J. H. DEAR BROTHER, In this month's Harbinger, J. H. takes notice of that which I ascribed as the cause of Brother Campbell's silence, when J. M.'s remarks upon the support of the ministry appeared in the Harbinger. Although he charges J. M. with the " modest interpretation," he has no doubt done so through mistake. I, therefore, feel myself called upon to notice the flourish which J. H. makes by way of effect, as to Brother C.'s silence, the more especially as it appears to me, that it is done for the purpose of diverting the reader's attention from the dilemma in which he and Brother Campbell have placed themselves. J. H. says, " After calculating the chances, he encountered Robert Owen; but, knowing when to be He says that" I will have to give up silent, he says nothing to James Mill! opposing the support of pastors, because His chance of success being good, he Paul speaks in the same style in 1 Tim. engaged Bishop Purcell; but, fearing v. 17-18, that he does in 1 Cor. ix." But certain defeat, he passes by James Mill! what impropriety is there in speaking HENCE HIS SILENCE!" Now if this has in the same style, although enforcing any meaning at all, it indicates that different duties?" Or what impropriety there was more to be feared from an is there in enforcing different obliga- encounter with R. Owen or Bishop Purtions, or urging different claims, from cell, than there was in engaging J. Mill; one and the same passage of Scripture? or, at least, that the idea of Brother C. The Pharisees sought glory of men, and fearing the consequences of an encounJesus says they have their reward-ter with J. M. after engaging such men Jude speaks of some who ran greedily as R. Owen and Bishop Purcell, is altoafter the error of Balaam for reward-gether out of the question. But, howand Jesus says, no one who gives a cup of water to a disciple, because he is a disciple, shall lose his reward. But the reward in each of these cases is not the same, any more than the means by which the rewards are obtained. The elders ought to be esteemed very highly in love for their work's sake their authority ought to be sustained when ever strange it may appear in America for one great man to encounter another, and at the same time to fear an encounter with a stripling, it is by no means uncommon in this country. We have known a Roman Catholic priest challenge all who inclined—if they had received a classical education, and had been appointed pastors of churches-to enter into combat with him; but when a humble layman entreated to have the same liberty extended to him, he was plainly told, that he was held in the same estimation by the priest, as J. H. seems to think J. M. is held by Brother C. viz. " he was beneath his notice." So that J. H.'s apology for Brother Campbell's silence, is likely to be taken for what it is worth; and I have reason to know, that the success which has attended his own effort, is likely to prevent some others from running the risk of an encounter with J. M. upon this subject. I should really like to know what the humblest disciple has to fear from an encounter with any champion of Infidelity, or any representative of the Pope's supremacy; and it is but a poor compliment which J. H. pays to the cause he has espoused, when he places any one who professes the same below the level of R. Owen or Bishop Purcell. Tell it not in Gath, publish it not in Lexington, that J. H. considers that one arrayed in infidel philosophy, or one who has been equipped at the Roman Catholic armoury, is more formidable, and less invulnerable, than one who is clothed with the armour of truth! For the benefit of all who look upon an Infidel as a dangerous opponent to the cause of Christianity, I will let Brother Campbell be heard upon the subject. He says, "Bad enough, indeed, | if we Christians are not able to produce a reason, or many good reasons, for our faith! A handsome compliment, truly, they present to the Christian community, who insinuate that they believe without reason, and cannot tell why! From such Christians, Christianity has more to fear than from Infidels." Such are the views of Brother Campbell, and for my own part, I would not give much for that faith which fails us, when we have only to encounter such champions as the two referred to by J. H. Your's, &c. ROBERT MILL. NOTE. We must now discontinue, at least for a time, these articles on ministerial support, which J. M. and J. H. have supplied for several months. It is our desire to insert the communication of any correspondent who may express his sentiments as becometh a man and a Christian; but we equally wish to impress upon our contributors, that the results sought to be attained should ever be, the instruction and edification of our readers. With regard to this much controverted subject, we shall say only a few words in passing. We take it for granted, that if the apostles were present, all the disciples of Jesus would consider themselves greatly honored in awarding to them ministerial supportan ample supply of food and raiment, with which the disciple of Jesus, if he can get nothing more whereby he may be enabled to do good to others, is commanded to be contented. But, to maintain the cause of Christ in the world, and to supply in any way the wants of the poor, something more than food and raiment must be provided. Money answereth all things, while the love of it is " the root of all evil." We often inquire how it fared, in this respect, with such worthy and devoted officers of the church as Tychicus, Epaphroditus, Aristarchus, Epaphras, Archippus, and many others of the same class; and what position, as to maintenance, they would have occupied in our day. But perhaps it might be said, they were not pastors or rulers in the church. Well, we shall not attempt now to establish the affirmative. A brother, writing respecting this controversy, says— "I am sorry for this controversy between J. H. and J. M. in the Harbinger. They are both able proclaimers of the gospel, and pleaders for the principles of this Reformation; yet to me their disputes are neither a reform nor a stand-still, but a retrogression, or anything rather than what we should have expected from brethren in the Lord, and far less from preachwith J. H.'s letter in the May number, but I ers of the gospel of peace. I am not satisfied do not write to dispute with him on the subject. Brother Campbell knows when to speak and when to be silent, and he is a Christian. His silence at this time has gained afresh on my esteem for him. I hope that you will give us no more pro and con. on this profitless topic, but that these brethren will "Let love through all their actions run, And all their words be mildLive like the blessed virgin's son, That sweet and holy child. And as his stature grew, And God his Father too." If any brethren wish to serve the Devil and his cause by disputation, let them write to each QUERY AND REPLY. AT a Vegetarian Lecture, the following question was put to the meeting "How can the swine, cursed and forbid den under the law, be used or eaten by Christians as a blessing, under the gospel?" By answering the above in your magazine, you will much oblige one of your constant readers, C. W. other denizens of our globe desire to ITEMS OF NEWS. LONDON, (ST. PANCRAS) AUGUST 11, 1851. Dear brother: I am happy to inform you, that three individuals became obedient to the gospel, by making the good confession, that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, being baptized for the remission of sins, through faith in the blood of Christ. I We might reply to the querist thus-expect that others will soon obey the "How can a garment made of cotton same gospel, through the labors of Broand wool, forbidden to be worn under ther D. King, and other members of the the law of Moses, be used for clothing church in St. Pancras. How true it is, with impunity under the gospel of that where faith, love, and hope preChrist?" Is there not as much pro- vail, and are put into action, there the priety in putting the one interrogatory cause of God prospers, both in the edias the other? Why "every creature of fication of the brethren and the conGod is good, and nothing to be re- version of the world! Brother King fused, if it be received with thanksgiv- gave the last of four lectures yesterday ing. By this clearly-defined rule we evening, in Providence chapel, Elstreeunderstand, then, that the Heavenly street, on "Christianity and MormonFather's provision of food and raiment, ism: the glory of the one, the error for supplying the wants of the children and delusion of the other." The design of men, is free from any restriction of the above addresses was, to enlighten whatever. Man is regarded as a free the public as to the dangers and evils of agent: he may eat and drink such the " Latter-day Saint" imposition, and commodities as experience assures him to do so by a kindly examination of to be the best calculated to promote his their own authorities, that the honest sustenance and health - and he may might be assisted in their searching for clothe himself in such garments as most truth. Much good has resulted both to contribute to his comfort. There is no the church and the world. I am sure fear of this freedom being abused by the that the brethren who had not examincivilized and intelligent. No wise man ed Mormonism previously to the debecomes a bacchanalian or an epicure, livery of the lectures, could not have or dresses like an harlequin, that he imagined it to be so gross an imposture. may be readily distinguished amongst Alas! the poor ignorant Mormons are men. A vegetarian may become an not likely to benefit much from the lecepicure, as well as one who partakes of tures, for I have never met with a peoanimal food; indeed we have been in-ple so ignorant. Your's affectionately, formed respecting some who appear to be as fond of food as they are immoderate in the quantity they consume. We know that in some parts of France frogs are regarded as a dainty dish; and in Russia the flesh of horses is resorted to by some of the inhabitants, to satisfy the cravings of hunger. Should FRANCIS APPERSON. ST. HELENS.-A lecture on the subject of baptism was delivered in the Town-hall of the above place, on the evening of the 20th instant, to a very crowded auditory, by Brother T. Coop, of Wigan. Mr. Bailey, a Wesleyan local preacher, presided. The lecturer having explained the reasons which had induced him to appear before them, and commented upon the opposition which prevented him from stating his views at the conclusion of a lecture on Mormonism, proceeded to expatiate upon the importance of the subject, and the frequency of discussions concerning it. After alluding to infant baptism creeping into the church as it became connected with the state, and imbued with the influence of the "man of sin," he showed from Scripture who were the proper subjects of baptism, and the mode or action in which the rite was administered. Having established these parts of the argument, he proved, by various extracts from the divine word, that there was no analogy between infant baptism and circumcision, concluding by instancing the sermon of Peter on the day of Pentecost. At the close of the lecture, a lengthened discussion ensued, those who differed from the lecturer contending that baptism was not essential to salvation. Mr. Coop, in reply, said the Saviour had placed it on record, "He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved." He then proposed a vote of thanks to the Chairman. Mr. Turner seconded the motion, urging all present to read the Scriptures for themselves, and not to take for granted what anybody says. He had been a Wesleyan minister, and had preached in the Wesleyan chapel in that town, and frequently in the surrounding villages and other parts of the country, for a period of 20 years. His attention was directed to this important subject. He read, considered, deliberated upon it, and after earnest prayer, was immersed into the name of Jesus. For that act alone, after twenty years' labor as a local preacher, he was suspended; but he did not regret the step he took. -The proceedings lasted three hours. ASPATRIA, AUGUST 14. Dear brother: I am requested by the disciples in Cockermouth, to give you information, that three individuals, during the last month, have gladly received the word and been baptized, attending, the same day, the first of the week, to the apostles' doctrine, the fellowship, the breaking of bread, and prayers (Acts ii. 41-2.) One of the three, I rejoice to say, is my brother in the flesh. Your's in love, J. F. BANFF, AUGUST 13.- Dear brother: I am glad to inform you that we immersed an intelligent young man on Friday morning, into the name of Jesus, for the remission of sin; and he united with the congregation on the first day of the week, in showing the Lord's death till he come. Let us hold fast our confidence steadfast unto the end, making the very difficulties we meet with subservient to our sanctification, and fitness to be presented spotless at His coming. A. CAMERON. LETTER FROM JERUSALEM. [The following letter from Dr. Barclay, who was sent by the brethren in Ohio, as a missionary to Jerusalem, will doubtless be read with great interest.] Jerusalem, May 1, 1851. DEAR BROTHER, We are not only contented but perfectly delighted with "Jerusalem, our happy home." This place seems to be as remarkably distinguished, at the present day, for its polyglottal inhabitants and visitors, as it was at the ever memorable Pentecostal feast. But still, most of the people speak Arabic, more or less perfectly. Hence, our first great object is to acquire the knowledge of this difficult tongue, and we already begin to stammer a little in its grunting ventriloquials; yet so numerous are my other engagements, that I have as yet made no progress worth boasting of. We are truly sorry to find that so far as communication with the people is concerned, the little classical Arabic we learned from books while in London and on our way here, is altogether unavailing-being so entirely different from the vulgar tongue. Deeming it entirely inconsistent with the object we had in view in coming here, to put under a bushel that light which, though it emanated from this consecrated spot, has yet ceased to illuminate it for so many long centuries, I have made it my business to become acquainted with the chief men of the city, and to be much in contact with the people; this, mainly through the kindness of Mr. Sinyauke, a missionary of the London Missionary Society, and Mr. Murad, an excellent teacher, who has also kindly acted as interpreter, I have been enabled in a great measure to accomplish. |