Part 20

The people of the world look upon a member of the church, that enters the dance, as let down, degraded, and his profession trailed in the dust. “Look there,” he exclaims, “that lady is a member of the church. I saw her immersed, and have seen her commune; she is no better than I am, and I know I am no Christian.” If the dancing professors could hear the numerous remarks thus made, in regard to their letting themselves down, degrading their profession and putting themselves on a level with the world, or below that level, their faces would burn, if they were not too much hardened to exercise a lively conscience.

We are only deceiving ourselves, and that too, most woefully, if we think that the dancers, theater-goers, horse-racers, gamblers and drunkards, claiming to be members of a church, are on their way to heaven. Their baptism is all nothing. Their communion is mockery, an insult to the Majesty of heaven and earth. Their sitting in choirs and taking into their polluted lips the pure words of praises, supplications and thanksgiving, in the midst of the pure worship of saints, is a desecration of the appointments of God.

When we think of saving men, we must not think merely of getting them into immersion, or into the church, but, in the true sense, we must turn them to God—turn them from their sins. The love of sin must be destroyed in them, and the love of God established. They must, in the full import of the term, be made “new creatures,” conformed to the image of Christ. We must see in them not simply a desire to see how near they can be like the world, and not be excluded from the church; how deep they can dip into the follies of the world, and not be lost; how near the verge of perdition they can run and not fall in. But they must “love not the world, nor the things of the world,” make it a matter of prayer, and study how to live and walk with God; how to have the continual care and gracious providence of God over them. No man is a profitable member of the church, that simply escapes being turned out, any more than he is a good citizen who barely escapes fines, imprisonment and the gallows, or who does everything and any thing that the law does not expressly _forbid_. A man may be a bad and worthless fellow and not be fined nor imprisoned. So a member of the church may be bad, and not only worthless but injurious to the church, and not be turned out. There may not be enough spiritual life, moral standing and respect for the law of God, in the church, to enforce the law of Christ.

May we awake to the state of things, cry aloud and spare not, and never cease our supplications to heaven till we see an improvement. We are only deceived in dancers to allow them to remain in the church, and thus permit them to enjoy the idea that they are Christians.

SAVED WITHOUT BAPTISM.

Jesus don’t say, “He that is not baptized shall be damned.” Suppose he does not. Baptism is a commandment. To do a commandment is an act of obedience. To refuse to do a commandment is to refuse to do an act of obedience. The Lord will take vengeance on them who know not God, and _obey not_ the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. But our friend says, “I believe if a man willfully and stubbornly refuses to receive the ordinance of baptism, that man will be lost.” What, then, of all those people who have the Bible in their houses, printed plainly in their mother tongue, and know that baptism is commanded, or may know it, as certainly as they know their names, and will not be baptized? And what of the preachers who encourage them in it? The Lord’s will is that they should obey—be baptized. They refuse to do this. They _know_ his will and _do it not_. Will they be saved?

But there are cases in which baptism is impossible. There are cases where the gospel can not be administered. Where the gospel can not be administered, we can not have the promise of the gospel. But will they not be saved by the _atonement_? The atonement is the reconciliation, and reconciliation is by the Mediator, or by the belief and obedience of the gospel. But what of those who can not hear the gospel? They are not gospel subjects. The gospel can not be administered to them. What will you do with them? Nothing. Where the gospel can be made known preach it to the people. Where they can believe and obey it, urge them to do it, that they may be saved. Gospel salvation is the only salvation we have anything to do with. It is freely and graciously offered to men who believe and obey the gospel. The work of the preacher is to preach the gospel to all and exhort all to obey it, showing that “God commands _all men everywhere_ to repent,” and that this repentance is in view of the judgment.

But what of infants? Gospel salvation, or the salvation of the commission, is salvation from sin, or remission of sins. Infants have never sinned, and need no remission of sins. They need nothing only precisely what a saint needs—to be raised from the dead, changed, immortalized and glorified.

RECOGNITION OF, BY SECTS.

What do we want recognition of any sects for? What do we want to come on a level with them for? Not one of them has a creed that is indorsed by any party but his own. There is not a party in Christendom that receives or believes the Methodist creed except the Methodist party. The same is true of every other party. Their creeds are not even popular, only as they agree in the _human-creed_ idea _that they must have a human creed_. What a coming down, for a man that has a creed that they all believe—the Bible—to come down on a level with a man, standing on a little _side platform_, discarded by every religious party, in the world, except his own. We do not want his recognition and do not intend to recognize him till he abandons his _side platform_. The Evangelical Alliance have been trying, twenty-five years or more, to make a platform and are as far from making one that these parties can stand on as they were at the beginning. What use have we for tampering in this way? We have a creed that every party in Christendom admits to be right. The Bible is that creed. We have a doctrine that they all admit to be right—“all Scripture given by inspiration of God,” as Paul says, “is profitable for _doctrine_.” There is no doubt about it. We have “the faith once for all delivered to the saints”—the belief “that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God,” and not a party among all the contending parties doubt or denies this faith. The doubts are not about what we hold, but about what these others hold. We hold and practice no doubtful baptism. The burial of a penitent believer in baptism is valid baptism with all the parties of any note.

We can take down the books from their own libraries and show from their standard works that all we hold, teach and practice, is found in their main works, indorsed and sanctioned in numerous ways. We are not standing upon any doubtful ground. We know we are right, and what remains for us to do is to make every possible effort to attain to a more perfect practice of what we know to be right, and not be trying to get recognition from any of these modern parties. They will never indorse us till we abandon our ground, and this, many among us will never do.

WEALTH OF ALEXANDER CAMPBELL.

First. This matter of gaining wealth does not depend _altogether_ nor _chiefly_ on loving money. If it depended altogether or chiefly on loving money, many more would gain wealth than do, for no doubt more love money as ardently as those that obtain it. Men who love money devote themselves to schemes of money-making, or what they consider such, and, in some instances, break at it, and come out bankrupt. A. Campbell never did devote himself to making money. But he was right in two respects: 1. He was a good manager in temporal things. 2. He was an economist. He knew the use of money and never wasted it. He built no fine houses, rode in no fine carriages and drove no fine horses. He was a plain man. He had everything necessary for comfort and nothing for show. We think he lived in the same house in which he was married, adding considerable, but plain buildings to it, affording accommodations for his numerous guests, but nothing costly or fine, in any part of it. In this he was a noble example. On the one hand not an indication of parsimoniousness, and on the other, not an item of extravagance. The same was true of the entire outfit, furniture, table and all. There was an abundance for all, and nothing wasteful or extravagant.

_Second._ This thing of gaining wealth is not fully to be explained. It is not to be ascribed entirely to the _art_ of man, to his great business capacity, his industry or energy, for we find plenty of men that have these qualities, but accumulate but little. Wealth gathers round some men as naturally as it departs from others, when no man can see the reason. Some call it fortune, others luck, and, in other cases we say, they know how to make it. True, there must be the industry, the energy, the management and economy; there must be the good judgment, sagacity, etc. These are main articles in running the world, but wealth bears no just proportion to these. We speak not of a fortuity, which brings an estate at once, but of the growing up of an estate. There is something lying back of all industry, economy, management, foreseeing sagacity, etc., call it fate, luck, fortune or providence, or what we may, that no philosophy or reason can fully explain. Men accumulate a vast estate without struggling for it, aiming at it, or seeming to think about it. Alex. Campbell was of this class. We can see that he managed well, that he wasted nothing, that he saw that business was in shape, etc., but this does not account for the amount that accumulated around him. Much of it came in a way that he knew not, and certainly never _planned_.

_Third._ Alex. Campbell did not _raise himself up_. God raised him, not for _himself_, nor for us to _glory in him_, but for _his own glorious purpose_, and he did not leave him without the _means_ to accomplish that great purpose. He always provides a way for a man to do the work for which he has raised him up. Alex. Campbell could not have gone, as he did, at his _own charges_, traveling thousands of miles, and for many long months at a time, and through immense districts of country, where he had no kind brethren to entertain him and support him, if the means had not been provided. Nor could he have started, maintained and sent forth a publication, coming in collision with all the religious publications in the world without the means to sustain him. God provided him the means, so that he never lacked. No man ever had the power to stop his mouth by cutting off his support. He stood independent, except upon God, who was with and prospered him. How could he have founded a seminary first and then a magnificent college and prosecuted his great work without means? How could he have supplied his extension table, always extended in his long dining hall, along which the vast numbers that visited him at all seasons, but specially on commencement occasions, sat, were fed and satisfied, and went away admiring their noble host, of whose munificence they had partaken, had not the Lord prospered him? God enabled him to give examples in generosity, hospitality, and to push on his great work. It was of the highest importance that he should be free from all pecuniary pressure and embarrassment, and the Lord kept him in that condition all the time—made “all grace abound” to him. Growing _rich_ and _money making_ from the _love_ of money, or _money’s sake_, were ideas that occupied no place in his great mind or heart. He made and used money, as God intended it, as a _means_ for doing the work of God, and _means_ that the work could not have been done without.

_Fourth._ But how did so large an estate accumulate if he did not love money, or love “filthy lucre?” We answer that a large amount of his estate came to him as he explained to us, when we visited him, in the only conversation we ever had with him about his temporal affairs, and that a very brief one. We can not remember the particulars, but we do remember distinctly all that is of any interest here. Several large items—items that would have changed the amount _largely_—came to him without the most distant idea of ever making money. This occurred in his listening to the importunities of friends to loan them money, and securing it by mortgaging lands then cheap, and these lands thus finally falling into his hands, by the failure of his friends, to whom he had loaned the money, to pay. These lands remained in his hands many years, and he was not necessitated to sell them. As the country improved and railroads were constructed, these lands proved to be in important places, where in many years they grew up in into heavy amounts in value. In this there was no _far seeing_ nor _reaching_ for “filthy lucre,” nor any thought of obtaining it. He simply listened to the requests of his friends to _help them_, and in many long years it turned out to yield him a heavy amount.

_Fifth._ His talents put forth in Bethany, the works he issued from there and the establishment of the college, made employment for many persons, called a number of these as educators and students, established the church there, and resulted in building up quite a village. This enhanced the value of the fine tract of land owned by him there, and certainly without his foreseeing and working to that end, made a considerable item in the estate he left behind him.

_Sixth._ The sale of his various works toward the latter part of his life brought a considerable income. This could not have been foreseen and planned to make money. In the early part of his life, and the time he put forth his most vigorous efforts, he had no assurance that such works as he issued would ever be a source of profit. Men who start out to make money do not start out _against_ the main current of mankind. We have some now whose business is _making money_, but they do not start out nor travel the road trod by Alex. Campbell. They do not make a square issue with the religious world, nor war upon the men in power. They do not generally think that is the way to the gold mines. Had he been starting with money in his eye, his keen perception would have seen something of more promise than a square fight with the popular clergy of the world; the creeds, councils, conferences, assemblies, etc. It, however, turned out that his productions found a sale that resulted in an income. There was no close management or calculating on his part, nor careful looking after the matter.

But the pen of Alex. Campbell was a terror to men who did not love “the right way of the Lord,” and his words were burning; but the idea that he was morose and unamiable is entirely an erroneous one. His very nature was amiable and lovely; and, in his devotions, he was as humble as a child. We never heard any man who could pray like he could. His terms, in addressing our heavenly Father, were characterized with a sense of the absolute dependence, profound awe and reverence of us, the creatures of mercy, and the simplicity of a child. All was easy and utterly without affectation.

The reader may think we have occupied too much space with this matter. We think not. There are great lessons in these matters.

FAITH, REPENTANCE, AND BAPTISM, DO NOT PARDON.

Faith changes, purifies or christianizes the heart, or converts the subject in heart. Repentance changes, purifies or christianizes the man in character, or converts him in character. But this is all simply a change _in_ the man, but no change in his relation or state. It is simply preparing the man to enter into a justified state, or a state of pardon. There is no forgiveness of sin in all this. There is no salvation of the soul from sin here. The salvation of the soul from sin, pardon or forgiveness of sins, is as distinct from all the preparation of heart and life, or all the change in the subject, as heaven or earth, as the work of God and the work of man. _Man_ believes, repents, feels and confesses, but _God_ pardons. No believing, repenting, feeling or confessing, saves the soul or pardons. It is God that pardons. Nor does baptism save the soul. It, too, is but the act of the creature; but it is the initiatory rite, consummating or transition act, where pardon is promised in the divine process. The candidate is baptized “_into_ the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.” All the prophets bear witness of him, that through his name, whoever believeth in him, shall receive remission of sin. His is the only name given under heaven and among men whereby man can be saved. When we come into his name, there is salvation, or forgiveness of sins. As many as have been “baptized into Christ, have been baptized _into_ his death.” In his death, his blood flowed to wash away sin. When man comes into his death, he comes to his blood that cleanses from all sin. When he enters the body of Christ, he comes to the life, to all spiritual blessings in Christ, to the salvation of our God.

PROTRACTED MEETINGS, EXCITEMENTS. ETC.

It has been a question of serious doubt with some of the most excellent on earth, whether the protracted meeting is compatible with the genius of the Christian Institution, and whether more evil does not attend it than good. But from the day we engaged in the service of our Redeemer, to this hour, we have had no doubt of the propriety of protracted efforts for the conversion of men. It is true, these efforts may be made in such a _manner_; such policies and appliances may be employed and a resort may be made to such means of excitement, as would be wholly unjustifiable. But this may be done on any other occasion, as well as at the protracted meeting, and the fault is not in the protracted effort, but in the _means_ employed.

All efforts made to excite men without enlightening them; to rouse the feelings without informing the judgment; to produce action without the knowledge how to act, are wholly unscriptural, and equally at war with the best interests of mankind. To hold a protracted meeting, while talented orators shall picture to men, in the most startling manner, the sinfulness of sin, the lost condition of man, the awfulness of death, the ineffable bliss of heaven, and the unutterable horrors of hell, without giving any adequate instructions how to obtain deliverance from sin, or the dangers of punishment, and an ultimate admission into the felicities of the eternal state of the blessed, we all admit to be as irrational as unscriptural. Indeed, we can not conceive anything more incompatible with all enlightenment and all revelation, than to awaken the human soul to a sense of its danger, without affording a knowledge of the means of escape. That such, however, is the case in thousands of the revival movements of our times, no intelligent person can deny. Who has not seen the penitent, when the invitation has been extended, come, inquiring, “What must I do to be saved?” and not a man on the ground who could answer the question. Who has not heard the preacher invite, persuade and entreat the sinner to come to the Lord, assuring him that he who seeks shall find—he who comes shall in no wise be cast out—that if any man knocks at the door, the Lord will open to him, and, when persons, induced through such invitation, come seeking the way, not a man present could point it out? We have all witnessed occasions of this kind. Nay, more, we have known such seekers to come, time after time, seeking, honestly and devoutly seeking, but still not finding! Yes, this is not the worst. We have heard the preacher advise them to join the church, that probably the Lord would bless them, that persons had been known to “get religion” after joining the church, etc., etc., and we have known them to take this advice, join the church, and remain for years, _seeking_ all the time, and still failing to find! Every community can testify the same.

Now it is not strange that men should become sceptics, under the influence of such a system as this. It is a failure. It makes false promises, and men try them and find them to be false. Such a system promises, that they who seek shall find, and hundreds, even thousands, have sought—have done, and have done _honestly_, all the preachers pointed out for them to do, and have failed to find. They know positively that the system is a _failure_, for they have tried it, and found it to be such. It is precisely what we might expect, that persons trying such a system, seeking and striving honestly for years and not finding, should be brought to doubt that there is any truth or reality in the whole concern; and we have no doubt, that such unenlightened excitement will be chargeable with a large amount of the unbelief, so rapidly increasing in our times.

But if the preachers on all such occasions, were enlightened, so that when any sinner is awakened, becomes penitent, and desirous to know what he should do to be saved, and he _could_ and _would_ tell him forthwith what God required him to do, in the unequivocal language of the New Testament, who can fail to see that the results would be entirely different? This, we affirm, may and should be the case in every instance, and we hesitate not to say, in the most unequivocal language, that such _is the case_ under the preaching of enlightened men. We go even further, and declare with all possible emphasis, that God never authorized any man to preach who could not, on any occasion, point out to the believing, inquiring penitent, what he should do to be saved, or what he should do to enter into the kingdom of God. We have it recorded from the Lord’s own lips, and from the lips of his inspired apostles, what they directed inquirers or seekers to do, to obtain pardon and admission into Christ’s kingdom, and any preacher who can not or can, but has not the honor to do it, give their holy and infallible directions to the dying sinner, _seeking_ his way to God, was never called, sent nor authorized by God to preach the gospel, and should not be regarded as such.

It is also of the highest importance that we employ gospel means for the awakening sinners and arousing them from their slumbers. Some preachers have contracted the habit of making an immense variety of appeals to affecting occurrences—describing sympathetic scenes, simply for the purpose of producing feeling in the audience. Great injury may be done in this way, by arousing human sympathy, moving the soul and causing men to act, who do not love the Lord and have not had the first serious thought of consecrating their lives to his holy service. We say not this, because we fear too much excitement, too much feeling, or too much interest, but because the excitement is not of the right kind. The work is of no value unless it be the Lord’s work.—It is not his work unless done by his acknowledged and approved instrumentalities. The gospel is his power for salvation. The excitement produced in a community by preaching Christ—the work produced in the heart by preaching the gospel, is the Lord’s work. It is a divine cause, producing a divine effect. But if the cause be merely human, the effect can be no more than human.