Cayce: 1927. PAGEREF _Toc30970130 \h 4

1927. PAGEREF _Toc30970131 \h 4

Cayce: 1928. PAGEREF _Toc30970132 \h 28

1928. PAGEREF _Toc30970133 \h 28

Cayce: 1929. PAGEREF _Toc30970134 \h 42

1929. PAGEREF _Toc30970135 \h 42

Cayce: 1930. PAGEREF _Toc30970136 \h 109

1930. PAGEREF _Toc30970137 \h 109

Cayce: 1931. PAGEREF _Toc30970138 \h 174

1931. PAGEREF _Toc30970139 \h 174

Cayce: 1932. PAGEREF _Toc30970140 \h 194

1932. PAGEREF _Toc30970141 \h 194

Cayce: 1933. PAGEREF _Toc30970142 \h 205

1933. PAGEREF _Toc30970143 \h 205

Cayce: 1934. PAGEREF _Toc30970144 \h 209

1934. PAGEREF _Toc30970145 \h 209

Cayce: 1935. PAGEREF _Toc30970146 \h 243

1935. PAGEREF _Toc30970147 \h 243

Cayce: 1936. PAGEREF _Toc30970148 \h 307

1936. PAGEREF _Toc30970149 \h 307

Cayce: 1937. PAGEREF _Toc30970150 \h 349

1937. PAGEREF _Toc30970151 \h 349

Cayce: 1938. PAGEREF _Toc30970152 \h 391

1938. PAGEREF _Toc30970153 \h 391

Cayce: 1939. PAGEREF _Toc30970154 \h 443

1939. PAGEREF _Toc30970155 \h 443

Cayce: 1940. PAGEREF _Toc30970156 \h 504

1940. PAGEREF _Toc30970157 \h 504

Cayce: 1941. PAGEREF _Toc30970158 \h 580

1941. PAGEREF _Toc30970159 \h 580

Cayce: 1942. PAGEREF _Toc30970160 \h 642

1942. PAGEREF _Toc30970161 \h 642

Chalcedon, The Council of PAGEREF _Toc30970162 \h 709

Charlemagne. PAGEREF _Toc30970163 \h 710

Charles Martel PAGEREF _Toc30970164 \h 711

Christ - Introduction. PAGEREF _Toc30970165 \h 711

Christ - Part 1 - The Offices of Christ PAGEREF _Toc30970166 \h 713

Christ - Part 2 - Our Prophet, Priest and King. PAGEREF _Toc30970167 \h 756

Christ - Part 3 - Christ's Humiliation. PAGEREF _Toc30970168 \h 798

Christ - Part 4 - Christ's Exaltation. PAGEREF _Toc30970169 \h 867

Christ, Jesus. PAGEREF _Toc30970170 \h 900

Christmas. PAGEREF _Toc30970171 \h 900

Christ's Person and Work. PAGEREF _Toc30970172 \h 901

Chrysostom, John. PAGEREF _Toc30970173 \h 901

Church Decorum, Rules of PAGEREF _Toc30970174 \h 901

CHURCH HISTORY by J. Harvey Daily. PAGEREF _Toc30970175 \h 901

Church of England, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970176 \h 948

Church of Scotland, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970177 \h 951

Church Order - 42 ARTICLES (from the internet) PAGEREF _Toc30970178 \h 951

Church, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970179 \h 1011

CIVILITY AND COURTESY.. PAGEREF _Toc30970180 \h 1030

Clark, John. PAGEREF _Toc30970181 \h 1031

Clement PAGEREF _Toc30970182 \h 1031

Colossians, The Book of PAGEREF _Toc30970183 \h 1031

COMFORT OF THE SCRIPTURES. PAGEREF _Toc30970184 \h 1031

Comments on Ephesians. PAGEREF _Toc30970185 \h 1073

Comments on Galatians. PAGEREF _Toc30970186 \h 1211

Comments on Philippians. PAGEREF _Toc30970187 \h 1339

Communion. PAGEREF _Toc30970188 \h 1443

CONDITIONALITY (Time Salvation) PAGEREF _Toc30970189 \h 1494

Conservatism vs Liberalism.. PAGEREF _Toc30970190 \h 1495

Constantine. PAGEREF _Toc30970191 \h 1500

Consubstantiation. PAGEREF _Toc30970192 \h 1504

Conversion. PAGEREF _Toc30970193 \h 1504

Corinthians,The Books of 1st and 2nd. PAGEREF _Toc30970194 \h 1510

Cornelius. PAGEREF _Toc30970195 \h 1511

Councils. PAGEREF _Toc30970196 \h 1512

Counseling. PAGEREF _Toc30970197 \h 1513

Covenanters, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970198 \h 1518

Covenants, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970199 \h 1518

Crandall, John. PAGEREF _Toc30970200 \h 1542

Create. PAGEREF _Toc30970201 \h 1542

Crusades, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970202 \h 1542

Dalton-Burnett Debate. PAGEREF _Toc30970203 \h 1545

Darkness at the Crucifixion of Christ, Three Hours. PAGEREF _Toc30970204 \h 1608

David. PAGEREF _Toc30970205 \h 1608

Deacon, The, And His Duties. PAGEREF _Toc30970206 \h 1610

Debates. PAGEREF _Toc30970207 \h 1616

Depravity, Total PAGEREF _Toc30970208 \h 1617

Dichotomy. PAGEREF _Toc30970209 \h 1623

Dinosaurs. PAGEREF _Toc30970210 \h 1623

Discipline. PAGEREF _Toc30970211 \h 1623

Divorce and Remarriage. PAGEREF _Toc30970212 \h 1623

Docetism.. PAGEREF _Toc30970213 \h 1623

Donation, The, of Pepin. PAGEREF _Toc30970214 \h 1623

Donatists. PAGEREF _Toc30970215 \h 1623

Donatus and the Donatists. PAGEREF _Toc30970216 \h 1623

Dualism.. PAGEREF _Toc30970217 \h 1625

Duns Scotus. PAGEREF _Toc30970218 \h 1625

Ebionites. PAGEREF _Toc30970219 \h 1625

Eck, John. PAGEREF _Toc30970220 \h 1625

Eckhart PAGEREF _Toc30970221 \h 1625

Ecolampadius, John. PAGEREF _Toc30970222 \h 1625

EFFECTUAL CALLING.. PAGEREF _Toc30970223 \h 1626

Election and Predestination. PAGEREF _Toc30970224 \h 1626

ELECTION: God chose individual people, not PROFILES of people. PAGEREF _Toc30970225 \h 1637

Eliakim.. PAGEREF _Toc30970226 \h 1638

England, The Church of PAGEREF _Toc30970227 \h 1638

EPHESIANS 2:1. PAGEREF _Toc30970228 \h 1638

Ephesians, The Book of PAGEREF _Toc30970229 \h 1640

Epistles, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970230 \h 1641

Erasmus, Desiderius. PAGEREF _Toc30970231 \h 1643

Eternal Children. PAGEREF _Toc30970232 \h 1644

Eternal Salvation and Time Salvation. PAGEREF _Toc30970233 \h 1644

Eternal Vital Union. PAGEREF _Toc30970234 \h 1690

Eusebius. PAGEREF _Toc30970235 \h 1690

Eutyches and Eutychianism.. PAGEREF _Toc30970236 \h 1690

EVEN CHRIST OUR PASSOVER.. PAGEREF _Toc30970237 \h 1690

EVIDENCE. PAGEREF _Toc30970238 \h 1701

Evolution. PAGEREF _Toc30970239 \h 1702

EVOLUTION: Why Do They Believe It?. PAGEREF _Toc30970240 \h 1719

Faith. PAGEREF _Toc30970241 \h 1732

FALLING FROM GRACE. PAGEREF _Toc30970242 \h 1739

FAMILY WORSHIP. PAGEREF _Toc30970243 \h 1760

FEAR THOU NOT. PAGEREF _Toc30970244 \h 1761

Feast Days, The, Under The Law Of Moses. PAGEREF _Toc30970245 \h 1761

Feet Washing. PAGEREF _Toc30970246 \h 1766

Fellowship. PAGEREF _Toc30970247 \h 1767

Fig Tree, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970248 \h 1775

Figures. PAGEREF _Toc30970249 \h 1775

First Conventicle Act, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970250 \h 1779

Five Points of Calvinism, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970251 \h 1780

Flagellants, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970252 \h 1781

Flaming Sword, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970253 \h 1782

Flood, The Genesis. PAGEREF _Toc30970254 \h 1782

FOR WE ARE HIS WORKMANSHIP. PAGEREF _Toc30970255 \h 1786

Foreign Missions. PAGEREF _Toc30970256 \h 1788

Fornication. PAGEREF _Toc30970257 \h 1795

FOUND UNTO GOD’S PRAISE. PAGEREF _Toc30970258 \h 1797

Four Hundred Years Affliction, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970259 \h 1799

Foxes, John, Book of Martyrs. PAGEREF _Toc30970260 \h 1799

Frederick Barbarossa. PAGEREF _Toc30970261 \h 1799

Frederick Elector of Saxony. PAGEREF _Toc30970262 \h 1799

Free Moral Agency. PAGEREF _Toc30970263 \h 1800

Freemasonry. PAGEREF _Toc30970264 \h 1803

Friends, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970265 \h 1803

Fuller, Andrew.. PAGEREF _Toc30970266 \h 1803

Future Identity. PAGEREF _Toc30970267 \h 1808

Galatians, The Book Of PAGEREF _Toc30970268 \h 1808

GAMBLING.. PAGEREF _Toc30970269 \h 1808

Genesis, The Book Of PAGEREF _Toc30970270 \h 1809

GIDEON and the Three Hundred. PAGEREF _Toc30970271 \h 1811

Gnosticism.. PAGEREF _Toc30970272 \h 1822

GOD’S RIGHT HAND: Glorious in Power PAGEREF _Toc30970273 \h 1823

GODLINESS WITH CONTENTMENT IS GREAT GAIN.. PAGEREF _Toc30970274 \h 1832

GOOD WORKS. PAGEREF _Toc30970275 \h 1833

Gospel Ministry, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970276 \h 1834

Gospel, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970277 \h 1834

Gospels, The Four PAGEREF _Toc30970278 \h 1854

Great Western Schism, The. PAGEREF _Toc30970279 \h 1856

Gregory I PAGEREF _Toc30970280 \h 1858

1927

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME FORTY-TWO January 1, 1927

This issue begins volume forty-two of The Primitive Baptist. We should have written an article for the last issue on the close of volume forty-one, but we were away from home on a tour in South Georgia when the manuscript was prepared for that issue of the paper, and we overlooked it. We beg our readers to pardon the oversight. We have been trying to make The Primitive Baptist an Old Baptist paper. As to how well we have succeeded in doing this we leave the readers to judge. We are well aware of the fact that we cannot please all. If the brethren or churches are in trouble in some section, and they call on us to go among them to help them adjust their differences and settle their troubles, and we do not go (let the reason be what it may), then we are severely criticised and found fault with because we do not go. If we answer the call and go to them and do the very best we can to get them together, then some find fault with us because we go among them and try to help them. Sometimes the criticism is very severe and rough. Sometimes we publish an article containing some sentiment that some person does not like. Perhaps he writes an article criticising the sentiment or expression of the other brother. To publish the article would put us under obligation to give the other brother space for a reply, and that would open our columns to a controversy. These controversies over points upon which we should have forbearance, and upon which differences of opinion should be allowed, are the things that frequently cause troubles that are uncalled for. Under such circumstances we must refuse publication. When we do that we usually incur the displeasure of the writer, and sometimes we get a "good dressing up." These are only a few of the things we have to meet with and encounter along the way. We are sure that if the Lord spares our life and we continue the publication of The Primitive Baptist there will be trials and conflicts during the year 1927, as well as all along through the years we may yet live. Still, we find no place to turn back or to be a deserter. We do not wish to be a "slacker." It is our desire to do our whole duty, as best we can, and to serve the Lord with reverence and with godly fear, and to serve His people with the ability He may see fit to give us.

These are trying times in many respects. We are living in a fast age, and all seem to be in a mad rush- no time for serious and weighty matters which should be of more concern to us than all the things of this world. The slump in the price of cotton makes us all think we must begin to curtail on our expenditures and cut down expenses at once. When we think of that, many of us begin to cut out expenditures at once toward church or religious things. Perhaps about the first thing we think of is to do without our church paper- not absolutely the first,' but about the first thing we think of may be this. So we write to the editor to stop our paper. Perhaps we continue taking the newspaper, which contains much reading matter our homes would be better off without. Perhaps we spend many times more than the price of the paper for gasoline for joy riding-and perhaps our children would be much better off if the joy riding were cut out. These are just a few things some of us might do well to think about. Many of the Lord's dear children are in isolated places and are deprived of the blessing and privilege of hearing the gospel preached. Many of them write us that all the preaching they get is what they get through The Primitive Baptist. If the paper is supported it thus carries a blessing and a joy to so many of the Lord's dear children who are deprived of the privilege many of us enjoy. If you are blessed with the privilege of attending the public service of the Lord and of meeting with His children, and you continue as a subscriber to the paper, you thus help to carry the blessing to those who are deprived of the privilege. Have you ever thought about how you are thus helping to carry such a blessing to so many of the Lord's dear children when you pay a year's subscription to The Primitive Baptist? The paper could not exist upon the subscriptions of those, only, who are in such an isolated condition. Others besides those in that condition must take the paper if it continues to exist. Are you not willing to help the small amount of the subscription price of the paper in such a work for the benefit of the Lord's little children who are thus deprived of the blessing you enjoy? Our readers know of the clubbing proposition which has peen published in every issue of the paper for several months-to take clubs of new subscribers at a reduced rate for the purpose of trying to increase the list of subscribers to where we could get the paper out weekly instead of twice a month. Some have thought this was not fair to the old subscribers. If a sufficient number of new subscribers could have been added to the list to justify us in sending the paper out weekly, the old subscribers would get the benefit of the increase without extra cost to them. Yet some have thought we should accept renewals at the same rate we offered for new subscribers. The truth of the matter is that if we were to reduce the price of the paper to that which we offered for these clubs of new names we would soon have to go out of business, for that price to all subscribers would not pay the actual cost of sending the paper out. Since the issue of April 1st, 1926, was sent out there has been a net gain of just 240 names to the list. This lacks a large number of being enough to justify us in making the change to a weekly. We are now discontinuing these club offers. We appreciate what the brethren have done in getting new subscribers. Several of the brethren have done good work in that way, but not enough have taken an interest in it to increase the list to where we could make the change to a weekly. If all would put forth an extra effort for the next few months to send in new subscribers perhaps we could make the change soon. Will you try and do your best along that line during this month? Ask the brethren and friends to try the paper one year at the regular rate. It is our desire to continue to try to make The Primitive Baptist an Old Baptist paper. It is our great desire to improve, and to try to make the paper a benefit to the cause of the Master. We desire to "strive for the things that make for peace, and the things wherewith one may edify another." We desire to conduct the paper in such a way as to promote the peace and happiness of the Lord's dear children. We are well aware that trials and conflicts and afflictions await us along the way, "but none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God."-Ac 20:24. We would be glad if our corresponding editors would take a little more interest in the paper than some of them have. Some of them never even so much as write us a line. We hope they will try to help us out a little more this year by writing and soliciting subscribers. Brethren, will you do this? We desire an interest in the prayers of all who love the cause we are trying to promote and who love our Lord Jesus. C. H. C.

LORDSHIP AMONG THE MINISTRY January 1, 1927

The following article was read in the meeting at Jackson, Tenn., which began on Friday before the fifth Sunday in October, 1926:

Brethren, you have assigned to me a hard subject, "The baneful effect of the spirit of lordship among the ministry," and I have had very little time to study the subject. We need to be warned against such a spirit, and we need to watch ourselves, that we do not allow ourselves to be governed by it. I understand a spirit of lordship to be a spirit of mastery; a spirit to rule, to control, to have things our way, or not at all. The very word minister conveys a meaning that is the opposite of lordship or master. It really means to serve, a servant. Jesus said, "Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you: but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your servant; even as the Son of man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many!"-Mt 20:25-28. To exercise lordship is to exercise dominion, to rule and to control, to exercise authority. Jesus says "it shall not be so among you." Hence it is very clear and manifest that such a spirit is not to prevail-and should not be indulged in by the ministry of the church of Christ. This text also shows very clearly that the minister is to be a servant, and not a lord or master; that he is not to exercise authority or dominion. Jesus our Saviour came to minister, to serve. The spirit of service is of the Lord, and the spirit of lordship is from beneath; it is a bad spirit. It brings trouble, sorrow and distress to the hearts of the Lord's dear children. It divides families, homes, neighborhoods and churches. But here the question may be asked,"Are not ministers to be overseers of the flock, and has not the Lord appointed them as such?" Yes, that is true. "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood."-Ac 20:28. This is the language of the eminent Apostle Paul to the elders of the church at Ephesus when he had sent for them to show what should be done, and how it should be done. An overseer is not a master or lord; that is, from a Scriptural standpoint. And an overseer, according to Paul's instruction here, is one that is to feed, not to rule or control, or to exercise dominion. The inspired Apostle Peter also gives us some instruction along the same line: "The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock."-1Pe 5:1-3. From this we see that for a minister to take the oversight of the flock, to be an overseer of the flock, is not for him to be a lord or a ruler over them, but to be an ensample to them. It is his work and his business to set right examples before them, so as to show by precept and example how the Lord would have His children live and walk and to conduct themselves here in this world. "Neither as being lords over God's heritage." The marginal reference says, "overruling." That is, not ruling over. The minister, or the elder, is positively forbidden to rule over God's heritage, or His people, or His church. He is to serve them and not to rule over them. As he is to serve them, they are to have authority over him, rather than for him to have authority over them. For him to assume authority to be a ruler and to assume lordship, is akin to the sin of presumption. "But the soul that doeth aught presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people."-Nu 15:30. For one of God's ministers to be governed by, or to manifest, the spirit of lordship is for him to presume to be what the Lord has not made him, which is presumption, or to act presumptuously; and he who acts presumptuously reproaches the Lord, and God says that "soul shall be cut off from among his people." In Eze 34:4 the Lord tells the shepherds of Israel that "with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them." The "them" were the children of Israel. By reading this chapter we will find that the children of Israel suffered as a result of the cruelty and the ruling of the shepherds. National Israel were a type of spiritual Israel. Surely no Primitive Baptist will deny this. As they were a type of spiritual Israel, and such a spirit among the shepherds in that day brought trouble, sorrow and distress, it will bring the same in this day among spiritual Israel. Perhaps it may not be amiss to call attention to the fact also that the Lord pronounced a curse upon the shepherds, and said,"Behold, I am against the shepherds, and I will require my flock at their hand."

This entire chapter might be good reading for us, that we may be warned and get a lesson there from that might do us some good. Let me quote at some length from this chapter, beginning with the first verse: And the word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Son of man, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel, prophesy, and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God unto the shepherds; Woe be to the shepherds of Israel that do feed themselves! should not the shepherds feed the flocks? Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: but ye feed not the flock. The diseased have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought again that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force and with cruelty have ye ruled them. And they were scattered, because there is no shepherd: and they became meat to all the beasts of the field, when they were scattered. My sheep wandered through all the mountains, and upon every high hill: yea, my flock was scattered upon all the face of the earth, and none did search or seek after them. Therefore, ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord; As I live, saith the Lord God, surely because my flock became a prey, and my flock became meat to every beast of the field, because there was no shepherd, neither did my shepherds search for my flock, but the shepherds fed themselves, and fed not my flock; therefore, O ye shepherds, hear the word of the Lord; Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I am against the shepherds; and I will require my flock at their hand, and cause them to cease from feeding the flock; neither shall the shepherds feed themselves any more; for I will deliver my flock from their mouth, that they may not be meat for them."-Eze 34:1-10. When the minister of the Lord is being controlled by a spirit of lordship, of master or ruler, the diseased are not strengthened, the sick are not healed, that which is broken is not bound up, that which is driven away is not brought again, and those who are lost are not found; the Lord's little children are scattered, and they wander in the desert hungry and crying for food, and are devoured by their adversaries. What a deplorable state and condition! Language fails me to describe the sorrows, distresses, sore afflictions and heartaches resulting from such a spirit! And such a great woe pronounced against the shepherds or ministers possessing such a spirit! Brethren, have we ever been possessed of it? Have any of us been "weighed in the balance and found wanting" along this line? If so, let us humble ourselves in dust and ashes; let us humble ourselves under the mighty hand of our God; let us humbly beg Him to forgive our folly and our wrongs, and that His fierce anger may be turned away from us, and that He may restore unto us the joys of His salvation and pour out a blessing upon us; that He may bring our children and neighbors and their children into His blessed fold, and that He would help us to feed them upon the pure and sincere milk of the word. If we have been acting under this bad and evil spirit, let us begin now, if we have not already done so, to endeavor, the best we possibly can, to make amends for our wrongs. We need to devote our time to the service the Lord requires of us. The minister is not to be a lord or master, but a servant. "For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake." -2Co 4:5. Let me digress long enough to say the apostle did not mean by the expression, "We preach not ourselves,'' that it is not us doing the preaching-that the Lord is preaching through us-but he meant that we do not preach our own power or authority, but that it is Christ Jesus the Lord, and His power, that we preach, and not ourselves; but '. 'ourselves your servants for Jesus' sake." The true minister is a servant of the Lord and a servant of the church-your servants. This fact that we are your servants is for Jesus' sake. The Lord calls His ministers and lays the obligation upon them. They are under obligation to the Lord and to the church. A servant is under obligation to the master, and the apostle says, "ourselves your servants"- not your lords or rulers. The master is the boss. When a servant gets the idea that he is the boss, and that the business cannot be conducted without him, he is then in such a condition that the business would get along better without him than with him. A true servant is willing to endure afflictions. "Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory."-2Ti 2:10. Paul also instructs Timothy to be a partaker of the afflictions of the gospel. {2Ti 1:8} We may rest assured that if we are the Lord's true ministers, and if we fill the place of servants to Him and His people, there are afflictions for us to endure. The fields are white unto harvest. The harvest is great, and the laborers are few. Are we praying the Lord of the harvest to send laborers into the harvest? How often do you hear a prayer to the Lord to send laborers in these days? We need them. We need faithful men. We need men that are true. We need men who love the cause of the Master. We need men who desire the welfare of the Lord's little children. May the Lord give us such men. C. H. Cayce.

CHURCH EVIDENCE January 15, 1927

A brother writes us as follows: "Will you please answer, through the columns of your paper, this question: What should a church do when a slanderous report is circulated on one of her members and the church believes the report, but has no church evidence to prove it?" Of course we understand the brother desires to know what course we think a church should pursue under such circumstances. We give our opinion, though we are well aware of the fact that we may be wrong. In the first place we would say that it is detrimental to the member as well as detrimental to the church for a slanderous report to be in circulation on the member. This being true, it seems evident to us that if the member is innocent he would want an investigation to be made by the church, so that the church could exonerate him from any guilt. So, from this standpoint, for the good and benefit and welfare of her member, who may have a slanderous report circulated against him, the church should thoroughly investigate the report. If it is found to be without foundation, then the church can and should exonerate the member. This would be for the good of the member and for the good of the church. On the other hand, if the member is guilty, the church should know it. The way for the church to know it is by investigating the matter thoroughly. If a member is guilty of some grave charge, and the matter is in general circulation, it is detrimental to the church to not investigate the matter and deal with the member according to the seriousness of the crime. As to the matter of church evidence, we only have to say that there may be matters which could never be proven by the testimony of a member of the church. A member of the church is not supposed to engage in many ungodly things the world engages in, or to visit many places men of the world visit. If a member of the church engages in some such practice, or visits some such places, he may do so and no Other member ever be a witness to the fact. Under such circumstances, if it is necessary to have the testimony of another church member, nothing could be done. Another member being a witness would prove that he himself had been engaged in something or been to some place, perhaps, where he had no business. Testimony of a credible witness, one who has a reputation for truth and veracity, should be accepted by the church when she has no evidence within her own borders. Of course all the circumstances in such a case should be weighed carefully and calmly. The church should be well assured that prejudice does not weigh in the matter of the testimony, and other matters concerning the affair. How important it is that the members of the church should live above reproach and above suspicion. They should live in such a way as to never bring reproach upon the cause of our blessed Master. May He help us to live in such a way as to honor and glorify His name. C. H. C.

ELDER PETTY'S NAME DROPPED February 1, 1927

We are very sorry, indeed, that it has become necessary to drop Elder M. E. Petty's name from our staff of corresponding editors. This will, perhaps, be a surprise to many of our readers, while many others are, no doubt, wondering already why we have not done so. We feel it is due to our readers and to Elder Petty that we here give some of our reasons for doing this. Our readers will remember that a peace meeting was called to be held at New Hope Church, in the Flint River Association, in Georgia, the fifth Sunday in last January, and that the meeting was held according to appointment. There were two Flint River Associations, or rather the Flint River Association had been divided for a number of years. It will be remembered that several of the churches in what is known as the Original Flint River Association did not represent in that meeting. The Original Flint River Association was the home association of Elder Petty. He was moderator of it. That meeting caused a disruption and division in Tired Creek Church. At Elder Petty's request we visited that section in the summer, or early fall, and went to as many of the churches on each side as we had the time to visit, for the purpose of making an effort to get the churches all together. We presented a proposition to each church which we termed "Gospel Terms of Peace," and every church endorsed it except Elder Petty's home church. When we got to Tired Creek we presented a proposition upon which that church could and did come together. Elder Petty stoutly refused to recognize the coming together of Tired Creek Church. When the Original Flint River Association met at Donaldsonville, according to previous arrangement and understanding, Elder Petty's church did not represent, though they had been in that association all the while; but it was understood that any of the churches which had endorsed the settlement might represent in either body they pleased. When the Little Flint River (we use this term only in order to designate or distinguish them from the others) met on Friday before the first Sunday in November at New Hope, Elder Petty's church had a letter and messengers there to represent in that body. But some of the churches of the Original Flint River had a grievance against that church, and had sent messengers with complaint and were ignored. So the Little Flint River refused to receive and seat the messengers from that church, and gave as their reason that some of the churches of the Original Flint River had a grievance against them, and advised them that if they would adjust their differences they might then be received. To have received them, the way matters stood, would have been to set aside all the adjustment of the trouble that had existed so long and destroyed all the work of settlement that had been done. Elder Petty has written us some very ugly letters since that association, and we have not made any reply. He also wrote some very ugly letters to Elder Turnip-seed. In a letter to Elder Turnipseed dated Nov. 29, 1926, Elder Petty says, "It is strange that Brother * * * who told me and wrote me letters (I have the letters yet) * * * * and later he worked around through you and Elders Cayce, Bartlett and others and got in with some of the disorderly churches that he found out that I wasn't willing to take into the peace meeting without a correction of their disorder, and made a trade with Elders * * * that you all would swallow the whole thing with all the disorder of four churches if they would combine with you to destroy me and church." Remember that Elder Petty claimed that the object of the peace meeting was to unite the two associations, or the two parties of the Flint River, and to get them all together. Here he says there were four churches he was not willing should be taken into the peace meeting. Those four churches were not in what we will designate as the Davis side, for he was there from his church to represent with them, as stated above. Where, then, were those four churches? Evidently they were four churches that were in the Original Flint River Association. Now what is the necessary conclusion? It cannot be otherwise than that he was engineering a plan to divide his own association. This statement from the brother in that letter plainly discloses this fact. We are sorry this is true, but we are not responsible for it. We begged and plead with Brother Petty when we were there visiting those churches, but our pleadings did no good. There can be no course, then, for us to pursue only to remove his name from our staff of corresponding editors. We truly hope he may see the error of his way and confess his wrongs and become reconciled to the brethren. C. H. C.

BACK ON THE STAFF February 1, 1927

For several years the name of Elder H. B. Wilkinson, of Claxton, Ga., was on our staff of corresponding editors. In some way, and we do not know how, his name was dropped off the staff. While we were on our tour in South Georgia in November we were with Elder Wilkinson and talked with him in regard to this matter, and he consented for us to put his name back on the staff. We are glad to do this, for we esteem him very highly, and do not know how his name came to be left off. On the trip mentioned we visited Brother Wilkinson's home church, and other churches of his care, and enjoyed our stay with those good brethren. We were with a number of other brethren in the ministry for several days, and enjoyed their company, among them being Elder Bowen. We would have been glad to have written a short account of the trip, but other matters interfered so that we could not do so. We enjoyed the trip, and appreciate the kindness shown us, though we feel unworthy of it. May the Lord bless them, every one of them, we met and showed us such kindness. We hope we may meet them again some day-if not in this world of troubles and sorrows, then in a better world beyond. We ask each one of you to remember us in your prayers. C. H. C.

SHOULD REPORT THEM February 1, 1927

We are in receipt of a letter containing the following statement and question: "I live in a neighborhood where they are making and selling whisky all the time. I have young boys, and they give my boys the whisky to drink. Will it be wrong for anyone to tell the officers and let them catch them-or just let it be, and have our boys and girls ruined?" To us it seems that there can be but one answer-and that is, report them, if you know who to report. We would try, too, to teach our children the great wrong in having anything to do with such traffic, how it will bring shame and ruin upon them. But we certainly would report people who would give the stuff to our children; and we would certainly try to help the officers to catch them. And we would be much grieved to live in such a community, especially if we could find no other sort there for our children to associate with. It seems to us that our country is getting in a mighty bad way morally and otherwise. May the good Lord help us. C. H. C.

CLAIM THEY ARE NOT EXCLUDED February 15, 1927

In our issue of January 1 is an article stating that C. Z. Hanks and others were excluded from South Fork Church in Texas. We have received an article in reply to that, in which they claim they are not excluded and that the church is divided, etc. Now, there we are. One side tells us they are excluded, and the other side tells us they are not excluded, and that it is a divided church over a question of order, and so on. Now, then, the thing that worries us is this: What do brethren want to bother us with such things for? If a church is divided why will they send an article to us for publication stating it is an act of the church, and thus involve us with other brethren when such things are published-and such things as we have no way of knowing the true status of affairs? Why send us something for the paper that lugs into our columns your local troubles? It is unjust and unfair to us and unjust to the cause. If you love the cause more than you do your own personal ambition, keep these things at home, and do not send such things to us for publication as will call for a reply and endless trouble and confusion and disputes. C. H. C.

THE THING IN THE WAY February 15, 1927

If Elders Newman and Fisher will agree to give up their works the last obstacle will have been removed, and lasting peace will be had, as far as the present issue is concerned. We could receive each one of their members upon their personal acknowledgments, and the union would then be peaceably effected. Otherwise there can never be had lasting peace between us.-E. C. M., in Glad Tidings, Jan. 28, 1927. From this it is to be clearly seen that Elder Mahurin's contention is that all the baptisms and ordinations that have been done by Elder Newman and the people he is in line with since they became separated from Elder Mahurin and those in line with him must be done over in order to a union with him and his people. Not only so, but each member in line with Elder Newman must make personal acknowledgments to them-to Elder Mahurin's churches. If that would not give somebody an endless job and an impossible task, we would like to know the reason why. It would extend from ocean to ocean and from the lakes to the gulf-that all must be baptized by the few who are in line with Elder Mahurin who have been baptized by any others except them since they separated from those in line with Elder Newman. We wonder if Elder Mahurin would like to have the job of looking up all those who have been baptized during these few years by others than those who are in line with him. We know that Elder Newman has been in Alabama, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, North Carolina and other states since the division in Texas. No doubt he has baptized some in some of these states. We have been in California and baptized some there and helped to organize some churches out there. Does Elder Mahurin want to go out there and get the consent of those people to re-organize those churches and to baptize those people again? If so, how would they know the work would be good after Elder Mahurin gets through with it? Elder Morgan would not accept it after Elder Mahurin does the work. We have also visited churches in Georgia-all the way to the Atlantic coast. We have been in meetings with some from Florida. We have also visited and preached for churches in Alabama, and we are in line with churches from the north to the south lines of the state. We have also been with brethren in Tennessee, and are in line with the churches in that state from the Mississippi River on the west to North Carolina on the east. The same in Kentucky. We are in direct correspondence with the Mountain Springs Association in Arkansas. The Mountain Springs is in correspondence with the Salem. These are in correspondence with others. Are they all in disorder? And will all of them have to find all the people they have baptized since Elder Mahurin and his people were separated from us and baptize them again? No, it would not do for us to do the work again, for that would not make it good. We would have to get Elder Mahurin to do the work for us. Then Elder Morgan would not accept it. When would we ever get the work done? And how could we know, or how could the parties know, when they have valid baptism? Who shall we appoint as supreme judges over this matter who shall sit in judgment and tell us when the work has been well done, and from whose decision there can be no appeal? According to the contention of Elder Mahurin and those who hold his view, there is not a Baptist in the South or Southwest who has orderly baptism-no not in the whole United States. There is not a church in the South or Southwest but what descended from the old Kehukee Association in North Carolina. Trace the line and see where these churches all came from, and you will find this statement true. That association was formed of Regular and Separate Baptists. The Separate Baptists started as a split off from the Baptist Church in Boston, the Separates being favorable to the revival by Whitfield, an Episcopalian from England. About a year after they split off from the Baptist Church there they were formed into a church, and called themselves Separate Baptists to distinguish them from the others who stood as they were before the Whitfield revival. That is where the Separates started. When the proposition was made for a union of the Regulars and Separates in North Carolina to form the Kehukee Association, the Separates objected to the union on the ground that the Regulars had baptized some in unbelief, or some who were not regenerated. If the fact that the Separates were split off in the start from the regular church in Boston made baptism administered by them invalid, then they had no valid baptism and could not administer it. If the fact that the Regulars had baptized or immersed some who were unregenerate put them in such a state of disorder that the baptism administered by them would not be good, then they could not administer valid baptism to those who had been immersed before regeneration. So those people were without valid baptism- and who could give it to them? According to the contention of some brethren now, valid baptism was ended right then and there, and none of us have it now! But some might say that the Regulars cleaned up and put away that work. Yes; but if they did put it away, and immerse again those who had been immersed before regeneration, then the wrong work done did not make all the other work invalid. They did not re-immerse the others they had baptized during that time. Therefore, what they did in immersing people who were not regenerated did not make baptism invalid that was administered by them. But the Regulars and Separates united and formed the Kehukee Association. Now, Elder Mahurin contends that Elder Newman and those in line with him are an excluded party, a split off faction, and that he (Elder Mahurin) and those in line with him are the true church and in true order, and have the only right to administer valid baptism; and he also contends that if they unite with Elder Newman's party, then all would be in gross disorder and none of them would have the right to, or could, administer gospel baptism. If his contention be true, then when the Regulars united with the Separates and formed the Kehukee Association, they all lost their identity and all lost their right and authority to administer gospel baptism. As that is where all our churches in the South and Southwest sprang from, then none of us have any valid baptism. Now, pray tell us, how much will Elder Mahurin, or any other man, be benefitted by quarreling over something which he does not have, and which no man in the whole country has? In Virginia and perhaps in other sections there was a division years ago, and one faction is known as Clark Baptists and another as Beebe Baptists. The Beebe Baptists are classed as Absoluters. Elder Mahurin contends that their baptism is not valid. Those Baptists designated as Beebe Baptists have frequently visited and preached in the Kehukee and other associations in North Carolina, as well as in other states. So have the brethren who are classed as Clark Baptists visited the brethren in North Carolina and other states and preached among them. The Beebe Baptists are as far north as Maine. According to Elder Mahurin's contention they do not have valid baptism-so he cannot get valid baptism there. Then come on west through all the Northern states and you will find where those churches came from. According to the contention of Elder Mahurin the "gates of hell" have prevailed, and the church of God is extinct-at least in the United States-and we wonder where he will find the church of God today. Brother Mahurin, where is the church? Tell us the country where you will find it, please. When you do this, please tell us upon what ground you say such is the church. Tell us, also, please, where they got their baptism; and please show by the proof that it is valid baptism, and not contaminated with what you are claiming is gross disorder. "Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest: for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things."-Ro 2:1. "Judge not, and ye shall not be judged: condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned: forgive, and ye shall be forgiven: give, and it shall be given unto you: good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again."-Lu 6:37-38. C. H. C.

THE DALLAS MEETING March 1, 1927

We left home Monday afternoon, Feb. 21, at 6 o'clock, for Dallas, Texas, arriving there Tuesday morning at 5:42. Elder John R. Harris got on the train at Thornton, Ark., and went with us. We were met at the station by Dr. W. W. Fowler, the editor of the Glad Tidings, who conveyed us to his home, where we remained until time to go to the place of meeting. A large number of brethren and sisters were in attendance at the meeting, which continued two days, Tuesday and Wednesday, Feb. 22, 23, and closed Wednesday night- that is, the preaching part of it closed then, the business part having closed that afternoon. Several discourses were delivered during the meeting. We did not get to hear all the preaching, as we were appointed with other brethren to serve on a committee appointed to draw up recommendations for the divided factions to endeavor to come together on. Twelve were appointed to serve on this committee. The following was drawn up by the committee and unanimously adopted by them for recommendation to the divided brethren and churches:

REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE We, your committee, realizing and recognizing the fact that in the unholy war which brought about the present condition of affairs and division among us, both in and between churches and associations, that there were irregularities, hasty actions taken, and wrong things done and said on both sides; and in view of the fact that it has been the practice of our people all along in the past in cases of divisions, for them to mutually confess their wrongs and to come together in peace-we therefore recommend that in this present division, either in churches or associations, those of them who desire peace and union to be restored, mutually confess all errors, wrongs and mistakes, and mutually forgive each other, and agree to bury the past in oblivion, and come together in peace and fellowship, recognizing each other's official work and endeavor to strive for the things that make for peace. Further, we recommend that if some churches are divided and they cannot agree to come together on the foregoing recommendation without special and particular investigation of their local condition, then we recommend that the two factions agree between themselves to call for a committee of brethren from outside the state, and who are not direct parties to the division in the state, to come and hear the evidence on both sides and recommend to them how they may adjust their differences and get together.

We further recommend that where parties have been excluded for immoral practice and received on confession of faith, that such parties should be required to go back to the church where they were withdrawn from and make satisfaction there for restoration. But a reconciliation of our people and their coming together is necessary first in order to an adjustment of irregularities of this kind. How-beit, nothing contained herein shall be construed as recommending the recognition of the official work of a church which has officially departed from a fundamental point of doctrine or practice and has been Scripturally dropped by orderly churches therefor.

Respectfully submitted,

Elders J. W. Herriage, H. G. Richards, S. B. KUYKENDALL, R. E. Wilson, J. A. Moore, J. S. Newman, Marion West, L. J. McCarty, Leon H. Clevenger, Jno. R. Harris, T. L. Webb, C. H. Cayce, Committee.

After the foregoing recommendations were unanimously voted for by the committee the same was read in open meeting and approved by all who voted. There were a few who did not vote, but not a messenger from a church voted against the approval, and no one seated in the meeting voted in opposition. Then a good old song was sung and the right hand extended amid shouts of praise to the Lord, brethren embracing each other, and tears of joy were shed. It was a wonderful meeting, and we believe much good will result. We feel that the brethren will now begin coming together and affiliating with each other. If they will visit this country we will gladly make appointments for them, and we are sure our churches will gladly receive them-we mean those who were at that meeting and endorse those recommendations and who will conform to the same. May the good Lord continue to work in the hearts of His dear people to labor for peace and for the union of our poor and divided people. We do not deem it necessary to publish the minutes of the entire meeting. The whole thing, including all that was said in the meeting, is to be published in pamphlet form, as a stenographer was employed to take all that was said. If any reader feels like helping to pay some of the expense of that stenographer, send your contribution to Dr. W. W. Fowler, 503 Medical Arts Building, Dallas, Tex., or to Elder J. L. Collings, Glen Rose, Texas, or to us, and we will send it to them. Or, if you will take some of the pamphlets when they are printed, write to either of the names given and say how many you will take. It is not known yet what the price will be, but a price will be put on them to just cover the cost if all are sold. We trust our readers will get some of them and circulate them among the brethren generally. C. H. C.

WILD GOURDS March 15,1927

Dear Brother Cayce:

I want to get your views on two verses of Scripture-Jer 26:3; 36:3. They both reveal to my understanding the purpose of God is not predestination. I will quote it: "If so be they will hearken, and turn every man from his evil way, that I may repent me of the evil which I purpose to do unto them, because of the evil of their doings."-Jer 26:3. "It may be that the house of Judah will hear all the evil which I purpose to do unto them, that they may return every man from his evil way, that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin."-Jer 36:3. It was the purpose of God to destroy Nineveh in forty days (Jonah). I know it says, in Isa 14:24 "The Lord of hosts hath sworn, saying, Surely as I have thought, so shall it come to pass; and as I have purposed, so shall it stand.'' Summing these Scriptures I have called, the purpose of God is not predestination. That word is not in the Bible. Predestinated is in there two times-Eph 1:5,11. The word predestinate is in there two times-Ro 8:29-30. The word predestination is an English word. The predestination of God is the righteousness of God, by grace in Jesus Christ for His people. "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. "-2Ti 1:9. Predestination of God has no reference to sin and wickedness whatever. Absolute predestination of all things is not Bible doctrine; but it is wild gourds from a wild vine of wickedness -not from the fruitful vine of righteousness, which is Jesus Christ. If this is not published in your paper it will not hurt my feelings, but write me your views on these Scriptures. From your unworthy brother in Christ, Elder J. B. Johnson. Sword's Creek, Va.

As we understand the meaning of the words there is little difference between purpose and predestination. To purpose to do a thing is to determine to do that thing before it is done. To predestinate a thing is to pre-determine that thing, or to determine the thing beforehand. So we see but little difference. In the Scriptures cited God purposed to punish those people for their wickedness. In Jer 26:12,15, we have this language,"The Lord sent me to prophesy against this house and against this city all the words that ye have heard. Therefore now amend your ways and your doings, and obey the voice of the Lord your God; and the Lord will repent Him of the evil that He hath pronounced against you." He continues in Jer 26:14-15, "As for me, behold, I am in your hand: do with me as seemeth good and meet unto you. But know ye for certain, that if ye put me to death, ye shall surely bring innocent blood upon yourselves, and upon this city, and upon the inhabitants thereof: for of a truth the Lord hath sent me unto you to speak all these words in your ears.'' Some of the priests and some of the Israelites did not believe what the prophet had spoken, and they threatened his life because he thus prophesied unto them. His prophecy was that the Lord had purposed to punish them for their wickedness and for their transgressions, but that if they would repent and turn from their transgressions and sins the Lord would not visit that punishment upon them. This was the teaching of the Prophet Jeremiah unto Israel, and national Israel was a type of spiritual Israel. Just as some of the priests and people of Israel then would put the prophet to death for thus prophesying, so some preachers and people today would put the Lord's true ministers to death for preaching the same doctrine. Those blessings and punishments for national Israel were natural or temporal. To spiritual Israel those blessings and punishments are spiritual and are experienced by them here in this life, or in the gospel Canaan, which is the church. This does not make God changeable, for it is His law. His law promises blessings in obedience and punishment for disobedience. God has so purposed, and He brings it to pass. He has purposed to chastise His children for their transgressions and disobedience. In Ps 89:26-36 David tells something of the Lord's promise concerning Christ and His children. He says, "He shall cry unto me, Thou art my Father, my God and the rock of my salvation. Also I will make Him my firstborn, higher that the kings of earth. My mercy will I keep for Him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with Him. His seed also will I make to endure for ever, and His throne as the days of heaven. If His children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; if they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my loving kindness will I not utterly take from Him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David (which is Christ). His seed shall endure forever, and His throne as the sun before me.'' Here is the declaration of the purpose of God to chastise His children if, they transgress His law; yet He has sworn to His Son that they-His children-shall endure, or live, forever. As He has sworn that they shall live forever, then the chastisement or punishment is not eternal, but is to be visited upon them here in this life, or in this world, and not in the next world. In this connection read the entire Eze 18. This doctrine that the Lord's people may enjoy blessings in obedience that they do not enjoy in disobedience, and are punished and chastised here in this life for their wrong doing, is a doctrine that God Himself has set forth, no matter how much it may be despised by some of the emissaries of Satan. C. H. C.

A CORRECTION March 15, 1927

Elder C. H. Cayce:

Dear Brother in Hope-I read in your last paper, The Primitive Baptist, a piece written by Elder N. J. Hinson, telling of his tour in Virginia and North Carolina. He says they are passing through a great war with the Absoluters. He also says it is useless for anyone to claim that the trouble in that country is the result of the so-called disorder of Elder Wilson. Elder Hinson only visited five churches out of twenty-six here in the Bear Creek Association. Surely it is unreasonable for him to know the sentiment of the people in our association-I suppose twenty-one churches here that he never visited. I have been living in this association most sixteen years. I have never heard one of our members, much less our preachers, advocate such doctrine. Our people have been accused of it, but it is untrue. Our association passed an act several years ago not to allow the doctrine of the absolute predestination of all things preached in our stand, and they have never departed from that act. If any man or preacher comes to our association advocating the doctrine of the absolute predestination of all things, or any other new doctrine, I have no idea they would be seated. Our preachers are all sound in doctrine. We have never had any trouble in this association from our people preaching or believing any new doctrine, neither do they use any of those extreme expressions. No use for anyone to misrepresent us. Most of the brethren in our association want peace, like we once had, and are striving to that end. May the Lord continue to bless us in our efforts for peace, and may our good brethren here ever be found contending for the true principles as taught in the Bible, and that we may be careful always to tell the truth and never misrepresent any of God's little children. Brother Cayce, pray for us, that we may have sweet union among us again, and soon get rid of so much disorder and misrepresenting one another. That is no way for God's little children to live. Mrs. W. C. Edwards. Please publish this in The Primitive Baptist so that the people may see that some of us here have been misrepresented.

REMARKS

If our readers will get the paper for January 1st and read the article again from Elder Hinson they will see very clearly that what he said about the trouble in Virginia and North Carolina was not said with direct reference to any division or trouble in the Bear Creek Association, but that he was speaking about the trouble there in a general way and what gave rise to it. The trouble around Danville did originate over doctrine, and the Danville people said so themselves, as has already been published. In fact, they so published in a statement they sent out. What about Elder T. M. Stanley, who was once in the Bear Creek Association? Did he not advocate the doctrine of the absolute predestination of all things? Is not this same Elder Stanley now in line with the party of Danville Church who claim they excluded Elder Wilson? Are they not all in line with the Lone Pilgrim and the doctrine advocated in that paper? If some of the Bear Creek Association do not believe that doctrine, will they line up with it? Will you stand with such a doctrine, when you do not believe it? We are sure there are good Baptists in the Bear Creek Association who do not believe that doctrine, and we hope they will not line up with it. C. H. C.

PAYING THE PREACHER May 1, 1927

It seems to us that Sister Hester fails to understand one point mentioned in her letter above-in regard to paying the preacher, "then who shall pay the members who go a distance?" Whether the members are near to the church or far from it, they call the preacher to serve them. They desire the preacher "to go a warfare" for them. They want him to fight for the truth for them; to fight for the principles of doctrine they hold to. The apostle asks the question,"Who goeth a warfare at his own charges?" When our boys went across the waters to fight the German army, they had to forsake all they had and go. But they did not go at their own charges. The government furnished them food and clothing, and some provisions have been made for those dependent upon them. The apostle uses this to show us how we should care for our soldiers who fight for us under the banner of Prince Immanuel. It was God's way under the law that the Israelites should care for, take care of, the prophets whom the Lord sent to them and for them. They did not always do it. At one time Elijah had to flee for his life; but God sent him food by the ravens. If the prophet had been cared for as God commanded, the food would have been supplied by Israel instead of the ravens. We need men in the ministry who are willing to make sacrifices and who are willing to endure hardness; and then we need members in the church who are willing to care for them as the Lord directs. May the Lord help us all to discharge our every duty. C. H. C.

JOHN'S BAPTISM AND THE COMMUNION June 15, 1927

We received from Friend Tom Dyer, Dresden, Tenn., a request for our views on a question put this way by him: "When John was baptizing before Christ came, what was that baptizing for? The reason I ask is that John baptized before Christ came, and we baptize after we have received the gift of God." He also asks for Bible reason for close communion. John baptized to make ready a people prepared for the Lord. John did not prepare the people, but made them ready. He baptized none only those who gave evidence of a true repentance. Some demanded baptism of him who did not give such evidence and he refused to baptize them. He made the people ready by baptizing them. They were ready for the gospel kingdom, or the church. The Lord established His church after He had also been baptized by John. He established the church of persons John had baptized. John baptized people who had been born of God, and so do we. The church is composed of baptized believers, and that is the kind of material the Lord used in establishing His church.

As to the communion. That is an ordinance in the church-not out of it. To have a right at the Lord's table in His kingdom, one must first come into that kingdom. He must first become a member of the church and first be baptized, in order to have a right to the Lord's table. For the baptism to be true baptism it must be administered by the authority of a true gospel church, for the ordinances were delivered to the church by the apostles for her keeping. Those who had been baptized were the ones who broke bread, in the days of the apostles. See Ac 2:42. If the Primitive Baptist Church is the church of Christ (and it is) then other orders do not have the authority to administer baptism. As those people have not been baptized, then they have no right to the Lord's table, which is in His kingdom-the Old Baptist Church-and we have no right to take it outside and give it to them. We make these few brief remarks trusting they may be some benefit to the brother making the request. C. H. C.

MISSIONARIES DO HARM IN CHINA June 15, 1927

Those who are engaging so much in the foreign missionary enterprise, claiming that if they only had money enough they would soon be able to take the world for Christ, have put out a lot of glowing reports of the great work they have accomplished in China. They have also occasionally made great reports of wonderful accomplishments in other countries. If we were to judge from some of the things they have written we would think that China was ready to come bodily over from their heathen doctrines and to embrace Christianity, or right on the verge of doing so. Somebody gets a good fat "rake-off" in this mission business, and deludes the people, and thereby gets gain. Occasionally some person tells the truth about these missionary operations. Such persons are those who have no ax to grind and no financial loss to sustain by telling the truth-and so they "let the cat out of the bag." In Martin, Tenn., the town where we formerly lived, is published a newspaper called the Weakley County Press. We get the paper. In the issue of that paper of May 6, 1927, is a letter from Lieutenant John Ford Luten, a former Martin boy, and whom we knew in his boyhood days. He is with the Medical Corps of the U. S. Marines, and is on active duty in the war zone in China. On March 23 he wrote a letter to his grandfather and grandmother, Mr. and Mrs. J. W. Hutcherson, of Martin. This letter is published in the Press. Lieutenant Luten says that the missionaries actually do harm in China instead of good. For the benefit of our readers we copy the letter from the Press in full. Read it, and get some of the missionary fanatics to read it too, if you can. It may do some of the poor deluded people some good. C. H. C.

THE ARTICLE AND LETTER

The following letter was written by Lieutenant John Ford Luten, a former Martin boy, to his grandparents, Mr. and Mrs. J. W. Hutcherson, of Martin. Lieutenant Luten is connected with the Medical Corps of the Marines and is on active duty in the Chinese war zone. The letter will give an insight to real conditions as they now exist in China: Ichang, China, March 23, 1927.

Dear Grandpa and Grandma:

I am sorry to hear that you have not been receiving any communication from me but I have been writing more or less consistently. You must stop and realize that I am over one thousand miles inland on the Yangtze River, that a state of war exists, and that most of our mail is brought by gunboats, which are few and far between. People in America cannot fully appreciate the terrible state of affairs at the present time, and cannot understand the insults and abuses the white race are forced to endure from these Chinese swine. They are the most dirty, filthy, contemptible, lying form of animal ever put in the form of man. I cannot understand why an intelligent and educated race would spend their money and exhaust their efforts in trying to convert Chinese to our way of thinking, when the money could far better be spent at home for moral uplift and welfare of our own nation. The missionaries out here have not reported the truth to the American public, which is laboring under the greatest of all delusions. They have not accomplished one bit of good; in fact, have made matters worse. An oriental mind works exactly opposite from the occidental mind. They take what they can gain by western ideas and use it for their own gain, then they turn like a rattlesnake and strike the helping hand. A Chinaman is the most unappreciative person in the world. He thinks that kindness merely shows weakness, and he takes advantage of it. I will refer you to two books which will give you an insight into conditions in China and Chinese character, one by Rodney Gilbert, "What's Wrong With China," the other by Jay Denby, "Letters of a Shanghai Griffin." It's high time that the American public should be accurately and truthfully informed about existing conditions in China, and retaliate for the insults to American citizens and our flag. We should be feared and respected, rather than looked upon as a weak and cringing race, as the Chinese see us. Enough for the China question, but get these two books and tell your friends the truth as I have told you. My wife could hardly write, as she has been forced to evacuate Ichang and is at present in Shanghai, which is over one thousand.miles away. We are forced to live aboard ship and cannot get down river until the water rises, as our ship draws too much water. We are expecting the balloon to go up any minute and will eventually have to fight our way down. Only a few weeks ago I was on my way to the hospital ashore to treat some of these down-trodden Chinese (down-trodden-hell!) and I was attacked by a mob of Chinese coolies just for the simple reason that I was a foreigner. I stood my ground and fought, but little chance did I have. It ended by an armed guard from the ship attacking and driving back the mob with bayonets after my uniform had been almost completely torn off and I was bruised and cut. After the commanding officer threatened to shell the city an official apology was sent over by the Chinese authorities with regret. Anyone can write apologies every day. This is only one of the numerous incidents that have occurred and always followed by an apology, the officials themselves instigating and ordering the coolies to make open attacks on foreigners. If the people in the United States could only know the truth of the whole situation. Lieut. Jno. Ford Luten, M. C. U. S. S. El Cano.

JESUS AND HIS FRIENDS August 1, 1927

We received a copy of a Sunday school leaflet, "Beginners' Bible Stories," published by the Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention, the title of the story in this leaflet being "Jesus and His Friends." In order that the reader may see for himself just what these money-hunters and proselyters will resort to we copy the story in full: Jesus and some of His friends were going to eat supper together. Two of His friends, Peter and John, had gone ahead of the others to see that everything was ready. The supper was to be in a large room upstairs. Everything was just as it ought to be-a large table with seats all around it. There was nice, cool water for bathing their feet, for the streets were so dusty. They always liked to take off their sandals and bathe their tired feet before eating. Peter and John heard the others coming up the stairs, step-step-step-step. When they entered the room, Jesus looked around. No one offered to bathe their feet, and there was no servant there to do it. Jesus' feet were so tired, and He wanted the dust washed off of them. He was sorry His friends had not thought of showing their love by doing it. They had the nicest seat of all for Jesus. Jesus sat down, but His friends all wanted the seats next to Him. They quarreled about it. One said: "I'm older than you, and I think I ought to sit next to Jesus." Another one said: "Well, I've known Jesus longer than you have, so I think I ought to sit by Him." Jesus was so sorry they were quarreling about sitting next to Him at the table. He wanted to teach them the best way to show their love. He got up, took off His coat, and put a towel around His waist. Then He poured some cool water in a basin and commenced bathing the feet of His friends. They looked at each other-they were so sorry they had not thought to wash each other's feet. How they wished they had bathed Jesus' tired feet, instead of trying to sit by Him! Peter felt ashamed, und said: "Jesus, you must not do this for me." But Jesus looked at him and said, "It is because I love you, that I want to show you how to help." So Jesus went around the table, and bathed their feet, and wiped them with the towel He had put around Him. When He had finished, He put away the basin of water and the towel, and put on His coat and sat down at the table. Then He looked at His friends and said, "The way to show your love is by helping people." Jesus' friends never forgot how He showed them how to help, and after that they tried to show their love to people by helping them. We confess that we do not remember to have ever read more falsehood and a more glaring, bold, bald-faced misrepresentation of facts than is contained in the foregoing. And that, too, under the pretext of teaching the children how to be Christians, how to follow the Lord, and how to attain to the glory world. This Sunday school leaflet of falsehoods sets forth the idea that Jesus washed the feet of His friends before the eating of the supper, and John plainly says that "supper being ended." The leaflet says that seats were all around the table. How do they know that? How do they know Peter and John heard the others coming up the stairs? How do they know the disciples quarreled about who should sit next to Jesus? Not a word that we remember about that in the Book. It is only a falsehood of the whole cloth of their own making. And what they say some of the disciples said, "I am older than you," and "I have known Him longer than you have." This is simply manufactured by these bigots and drawn from their own vain imagination. And "they were so sorry they had not thought to wash each other's feet." How did the writer find that out? Peter did not know what the Lord was doing- did not know why He washed their feet; did not know the meaning of it. If it had been because their feet were dusty and they usually washed their feet before eating supper, Peter would have known-or else he was an idiot. Was he an idiot? No. Hence it was not as this set of humbugs teach in this little Sunday school leaflet. "Peter felt ashamed, and said: 'Jesus, you must not do this for me.'" No such thing was said, and these publishers and the writers knew better. None of the things these folks say were said can be found in the Book. It is simply a plain case of garbling, misrepresenting, and telling of falsehoods in order to get the lesson they propose to teach, and to evade and deny what is plainly put down in God's word. And such as this carried on in the name of Christianity and under the hypocritical pretext of helping to save souls. May the good Lord deliver us from such a blasphemous set of pretenders. C. H. C.

WHALE SWALLOWED JONAH August 15, 1927

The idea which men have advanced that a whale could not swallow a man is a mistake. Perhaps many of them could not. But when we were in California we saw the skeleton of a whale at Long Beach, which we are sure could have swallowed a man. That whale came ashore at the foot of Almatos Ave., May 20, 1897, and was captured there. It was a species of the Giant Blue, and was sixty-four feet long and weighed sixty tons-120,000 pounds. Its collar bone was nearly four feet across, and the swallow was between six and eight inches in diameter, without stretching. There is still another species of whale that has a still larger swallow than this, and yet this one had a swallow large enough to take a man in. Yet, it is true the Bible says,"The Lord prepared a great fish." Jonah learned a lesson in that whale which many of the Lord's people have to learn-especially those the Lord puts in the ministry. Many of them take a course in "whale college," and learn the lesson Jonah learned. Then sometimes they go back to that college and take a "post graduate" course. It seems they have to learn the lesson over and over, sometimes. C. H. C.

PUBLISHED BY REQUEST August 15, 1927

Dear Brother Cayce: I think that your mind to refrain from strife and contention so far as in you lieth is good, for it is not contending earnestly for the faith delivered once to the saints. So you are right in suppressing all matters which in your judgment lack the word "earnestly.'' I appreciate the good brotherly spirit in which you have written, although some of it has not as yet been shown me in what I hope is a Christian experience, as you present it. However, if we can enjoy the same spirit, I hope we may not fall out over the diversity of operations. I do not believe that the children of God while here in the flesh on earth will, any two of them or more, ever see wholly or entirely eye to eye, for to such charity or forbearance would mean nothing. I had such a severe trial being rid of the law and my own works, which I once trusted in as good enough to secure salvation for me, that I may have gone to an extreme in crying "grace, grace unto it." I feel like your letter is worth a place in The Primitive Baptist and return it for your disposal. I am, I hope, yours in the things that make for peace and the things wherewith one may edify another. Yours in hope of eternal life, Everett R. Kinney.

THE LETTER

E. R. Kinney:

Dear Brother-Pressure of important letters, preparing manuscript for the paper, filling appointments, and such things have kept me from answering your appreciated letter of March 16 until now. I would be glad to see you and talk with you face to face, or that I had time to write a long letter, but will content myself as best I can with what little I may have the time to write hurriedly just now. I presume the debates you mention reading-at least one of them-is a debate which I was engaged in. Permit me to say, though, that I have quit debating, and may never have another. But I never engaged in one except by request of an Old Baptist Church, such requests having been made by the church in conference. It is not the expectation to reach or to benefit the man we debate with, but some hearer who may be an honest seeker after truth. He hears the truth preached that way, in comparison with the error, and thus the truth shines the brighter. I have seen persons come to the church and ask for a home who said they were convinced by hearing debates. It is true, though, that men sometimes do not conduct such debates in the right spirit. But there is one thing in which I think you do not rightly understand our people who hold to what is termed by some as conditional or time salvation. I gather from your letter you think they have an idea that they direct their own steps. I think you do not understand them on this. They do not think it is in them to direct their own steps. "It is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." The parent directs the steps of the child, but the child does not always follow the direction. The Lord directs the steps of His children, but His children sometimes rebel and do not walk as the Lord directs. Apply this to your own experience, and I am sure that you will confess that you have sometimes felt remorse of conscience that you did not do what you felt the Lord had directed you to do. In fact, you have said just that much in telling me you had said things unkindly, or about that-retaliating in kind, following the fleshly inclinations. It is the man that does the walking. If he walks as God directs, he walks right, does right. If he walks after the flesh, the fleshly lusts, he walks wrong. When those churches "fit and fit until they fit themselves out," it was on account of their wrong doing that they went out-the result of their own wrongs. Of course if they had not "fit and fit" they would not have "fit themselves out," and would have continued to exist and to enjoy the smiles of the Lord. Their destruction was the result of their own wrongs; as you rightly say, too, this is always the case, whether "absoluters" or "limited predestinarians." Strife among brethren results in death and desolation in the church.' What a pity that brethren will engage in such. For myself I would that they would cease. I prefer that these unholy discussions be kept out of my paper. It is hard to do that. If I allow something to slip in that favors what some do not like, it is likely to bring a reply, and some will think hard of me if I do not allow the reply in the paper, and if I do allow it, then some on the other side think I have not treated them right-and so there it goes. After calling this fact to mind, and carefully thinking over the matter, and I trust, trying to pray over it, I have thought it might not be best for the cause to publish the letters I wrote to ask your permission to publish, which Brother Parker sent to me. I feel sure that the unholy war they are having now in Virginia and North Carolina is wrong, and I believe the time will come when the brethren will be sorry for it-perhaps after many who are leaders in it are gone. The coming generation will see the evil of it and the devastation wrought by it. They may have some of the kind of meetings we have been having in some portions of the south and west called peace meetings, in which the brethren are trying to get together who were divided years ago. In some of those wars I was a helper, and I am sorry of it now. I want to try to get out of such work if possible and do nothing to help in a strife. Have I come to the right conclusion that it is best to publish no more than what seems absolutely necessary in regard to the war they are having over in Virginia and North Carolina? Be candid with me. (Yes, indeed I think so.-Kinney.)

Now in regard to visiting this country. We have a little church in North Little Rock. They hold the unworthy writer as pastor. When I am not away on a tour I try to be with them on the third Sunday in the month and Saturday afternoon before. They are few in number, but they love the truth as we understand the Bible to teach, and they rejoice in and love the glorious doctrine of salvation by grace, and that we should honor the Lord by a godly walk and pious conversation-that we should honor Him who has called us out of darkness into light. We also have a little band here in Fordyce. The regular meeting time is the second Sunday and Saturday before in each month. My humble little home is on an adjoining lot to the church. We would gladly welcome you to our home and at our church here in Fordyce or at Little Rock. Assuring you of the fact that you have my Christian love and fellowship, and asking an interest in your prayers, I remain, Yours in humble hope, C. H. Cayce.

WINE USED IN SACRAMENT August 15, 1927

Brother Thomas J. Braswell, Winter Garden, Fla., asks us if the Lord used wine in the institution of the sacramental supper, or did He use grape juice. When the element that is used to represent the blood of the Saviour is mentioned in the New Testament it is called the fruit of the vine. It should be remembered that the Lord instituted the sacramental supper at the time of the eating of the last passover supper with His disciples. Grape juice was not used in the passover supper. Wine was used in that supper. Wine is the fermented juice of the grape. Grape juice has to be adulterated to keep it from fermenting. It is a flagrant violation to use adulterated things in any service of God. Unfermented juice cannot, in any way, typify the agony of the Lord. Fermented juice would fittingly typify His agony. In the passover unleavened bread and wine were used. These things were the substance of the passover. Without them the passover supper was worthless. Other articles might be omitted from that supper without question, but if the bread or the wine were omitted, the supper was valueless. The Lord took the substance of the supper-the unleavened bread and the wine-and instituted the sacramental supper. As these things were the articles He used, it would be the height of presumption to substitute something else. We simply would not administer the communion when grape juice is used instead of wine, nor would we engage in that service when such substitute is used. C. H. C.

Ro 9:13 August 15, 1927

Brother H. D. S. Helton, Valeria, Ky., requests our views of Ro 9:13, which reads, "As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." In order to see what led up to this statement by the apostle in quoting from the language of prophecy it is necessary to read a few verses, beginning with verse 7, "Neither because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but in Isaac shall thy seed be called. That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed. For this is the word of promise. At this time will I come and Sarah shall have a son. And not only this; but when Rebecca also had conceived by one, even, by our father Isaac; (for the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calleth:) it was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." We find in Ge 25:23 that before Jacob and Esau were born the Lord said to Rebecca concerning them, "The elder shall serve the younger." This only shows God's choice of them before they were born, and the choice could not, therefore, have been made because of any good done by Jacob or evil done by Esau. God's choice manifests His love. Hence, God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were born, and made choice of one (Jacob) and bestowed the blessing upon him, and passed Esau by. Paul explains this in verse 11, "For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of Him that calleth." For this reason it was said unto Rebecca, "The elder shall serve the younger." Why should the elder serve the younger? Because God had made choice of Jacob. Why did God make choice of Jacob? Because He loved him. God's choice of a poor sinner is a manifestation of His everlasting love. His love is everlasting. It is unchangeable. It is always the same. Nothing can separate one from it. There is much in this, but we do not have time now to write more. May the Lord bless this to the good of the readers. C. H. C.

TRIP IN ALABAMA September 15, 1927

May 26th we (Elder Cayce, the children and I) started to Alabama in our car. We arrived at Vina, Ala., Friday night at eight thirty. We went to the home of Sister Josie Duckett. She did not know we were coming, but made us feel welcome. We enjoyed being in her home. Saturday we went to Brownsboro, Ala., to my parents, B. B. Lawler's. Monday night Elder J. J? Turnipseed came to go with us. Monday night Elder H. P. Houk and daughter came over. Before they left, papa called us around the family altar, and after singing and prayer, Brother Turnipseed talked a few minutes. 'Twas good to be at dear old home. Papa, mama, many of my sisters, brothers and their families were around the family altar one more time. I thank God for such noble, dear Old Baptist parents. Tuesday, we left the children with mama, and Elder Turnipseed, Claudis, the baby (William Hartsel), and I went to Decatur, Ala. Had services there Tuesday and Wednesday nights. One dear sister joined by experience Wednesday night. Thursday morning we went to Birmingham to the home of Elder Turnipseed. Many Baptists came in and we had an enjoyable evening. Friday morning Elder and Sister Turnipseed went with us to Ozark, Ala., to the home of Brother Byrd, a good Old Baptist home. We spent two weeks among the Baptists in that section. I failed to keep a record of the homes we visited, and do not remember the names of all. I am still feasting on the good time I had while with those dear people. They were all strangers to me when I left home, but when I met them I felt that we belonged to the same family. Elder Turnipseed and Claudis did some wonderful preaching. I felt that it was indeed good to be there. We left Ozark June 12th for Montgomery. Spent Sunday night with Brother Turnipseed's son in town. Monday we went to Birmingham to the home of Brother Turnipseed. Tuesday morning Brother Turnipseed was called to the bedside of Brother Harden. We were with Sister Turnipseed until Thursday evening. Thursday night we stayed with Elder Parker. Friday morning Elder Parker went with us into the Mount Zion Association. We visited in this association until June 22nd. Elder Yancey's daughter joined while we were there. Claudis baptized her the first Sunday in July. From here we went to Woodville, Ala., and were at old Union Church June 23rd and 24th. Then we went back to Brownsboro to mama's and to our children. Words fail to express my feelings. If I could only tell what I felt and how I felt on this trip, I would. I shall never forget the heavenly feasts and the noble Baptists that we met. Sister Turnipseed is a fine traveling companion and a wonderful Baptist. I enjoyed being with her so much. Many asked that I write them when I got home. You see from this that I can't, but I trust that you will cast the mantle of charity over my many imperfections, and that each one will take this as a personal note to you. I desire to be remembered in your prayers. I feel to need the prayers of the righteous. May the good Lord graciously bless each one, is my prayer. Yours in hope, Mrs. C. H. Cayce.

OUR TRIP IN TEXAS October 15, 1927

We left home on Wednesday afternoon at 6 o'clock, August 3, to fill the appointments which had been arranged for us in Texas by Elders J. H. Fisher, L. J. McCarty and others. We arrived in Abilene Thursday afternoon at 4, and filled the first appointment there that night. Several brethren met us at the train, one of them being Elder Fisher. From there we went to the West Providence Association, which convened on Friday about sixteen miles from Abilene. It was a great meeting. The home ministers of the association are Elders J. F. Richardson, Robert Lee, Texas, who is the good and highly esteemed moderator; J. W. West, J. B. Owens, W. L. Barrett, R. B. Hester and J. J. Edwards. They were all present. Brother J. W. Hendrickson, McCauley, Texas, is the efficient clerk. The following visiting ministers were present: Elders J. H. Fisher, Newcastle; J. N. Hudson, Houston; C. J. L. Bolinger, Cone; Joe Meece, Kirkland; L. N. Barrow, Houston; O. Strickland, Munday; J. H. Alldridge, Lubbock; J. G. Grant, Hico; J. L. Collings, Glen Rose; L. J. McCarty, Hart; J. C. Foster, Atwell; Licentiate W. L. Jackson, Burkett; all of Texas; and C. H. Cayce, of Fordyce, Ark. There were eighteen additions to the church during the meeting, and we think sixteen of them were by experience and baptism. We could not find language to express the sweetness and the joy of the meeting. It will be long remembered by many who were there. From the West Providence Association filled appointments at the following places: Anson, Sunday night; White Pond, Monday night; Roby, Tuesday; Snyder, Wednesday and Thursday; Crosbyton, Saturday and Sunday; Lakeview, Monday; Cottonwood, Tuesday; Grow, Tuesday night; Little Flock, near Munday, Wednesday; Mt. Zion, near Graham, Thursday. Good congregations were present at each place, and the meetings were all pleasant, and good interest seemed to be manifested at every meeting. From Mt. Zion Church we went to Dublin, in company with Elder Fisher and Elder McCarty and wife, to attend the Duffau Association, Friday, Saturday and Sunday. The following named ministers were present: Elders L. J. McCarty, J. R. Richardson, W. R. Blackmon, Martin Stone, J. H. Fisher, W. F. Baker, J. S. Newman, J. N. Hudson, C. J. Holcomb, J. L. Collings, J. M. Dowell, M. Hardwick, J. G. Grant, B. J. Driver, A. B. Chambers, W. J. Chambers, J. E. Senter, J. J. Edwards, J. E. Roberts, J. F. Perkins, W. Y. Norman, J. C. Foster and the writer. If we remember correctly, Elder J. J. Edwards is the able moderator and A. H. Roden is the efficient clerk. There were five additions to the church during this meeting. This was another enjoyable association, and a large crowd in attendance. It will be long remembered by many who were there. At this meeting we met some brethren and sisters whom we knew in old Mississippi when we were just a boy. It was a great pleasure to us to meet them once more. After the Duffau Association we filled appointments at Tuscola, Loraine and Coahoma. There were good, congregations and good interest at each place. Then we went to the West Texas Association at Tahoka, Friday, Saturday and fourth Sunday in August. The following ministers were present: Elders J. S. Newman, J. H. Fisher, O. Strickland, J. B. Owens, J. W. West, L. N. Barrow, J. C. Lewis, J. N. Hudson, Franklin Baker, L. J. McCarty, J. C. Foster, F. M. Griffin, J. I Colwell, R. B. Hester, C. H. Cayce, C. J. L. Bolinger; Licentiates W. L. Jackson, G. C. Miller, S. J. Ellis, Harrell Boyce, Oscar Moyers, W. C. Cleveland, Otis Richardson, W. L. Bolinger and J. W. Huey. During this meeting there were twenty-six additions to the church, twenty-two of them by experience and baptism. To say that it was a good meeting does not fittingly describe it. It was all of that, and more. We cannot find words to describe the joy of it. We do not think we shall forget it while memory lasts. On Monday and Tuesday following we filled appointments at Tulia, where we had another sweet meeting. There were three additions to this church by experience and baptism. Elder L. J. McCarty is the able pastor of this church, as well as at Tahoka, and he is loved and held in high esteem by his brethren. He is also the moderator of the association, and Elder Bolinger is the clerk. Elder McCarty was with us from the Duffau Association, and conveyed us all the way around. It was delightful to us to be in company with him. The more we were with him the more we loved him, and we so much hated to part when the time came for us to leave Tulia. We left there Tuesday evening and went to Amarillo, where we had to lie over until 4:30 Wednesday morning. We left there at about that time and arrived in Little Rock Thursday morning at 2:35, where we were met by our wife and children, who drove up there Wednesday afternoon. We went to the home of Mr. and Sister Rewis and got a little rest. Elder Jacob Sandage met us there Thursday morning, and we all drove to Rushing and attended the Mountain Springs Association. We failed to get a list of the ministers present. It was a good meeting, and the good Lord surely was in the place. After the Mountain Springs Association closed on Sunday we drove back to Little Rock and Elder Sandage preached there that night. Monday we returned home, with our family. We were sure glad to meet them on Thursday morning at Little Rock, having been gone from them so long, and we were all glad to get home once more on Monday evening. Then on Thursday evening before the second Sunday in September we drove over to Donaldson with our family and spent part of the night with Brother W. H. Fuller, and on Friday morning early we drove from there to the Salem Association, about eighteen miles west of Danville, Ark., in company with Brother and Sister Fuller and Sister Ragan, of Donaldson. We failed to get a list of the ministers in attendance at this meeting; but there we had the pleasure of once more meeting the following aged ministers who have been in the service from forty to fifty years: Elders W. A. Bar-ham, R. L. Piles and M. J. Ryan. These are able ministers of the New Testament and dearly loved by their brethren in their section, as well as by the brethren elsewhere who know them. Brother Joe Loyd, of Blue Mountain, is the efficient clerk of this association, and is highly esteemed by the brethren. This was another great meeting. After the meeting closed Sunday we drove home that night, arriving home at 11:25, tired and worn out. We were glad to get home and to be here a few days, though we do not get much rest, as work has "piled up" while we were away. But it is a change, and that gives us a little rest.

The brethren were all good and kind to us-far better than we feel to deserve, from the first of the trip in Texas on, all the way through until our home coming. We shall never forget their great kindness to us. May the good Lord shower down His richest blessings upon them. The Lord is surely blessing His people in Texas now, and where they have come together and quit their warring with each other, they are a happy people, and fellowship abounds and love flows freely from breast to breast, and the Lord's little children are coming home. May the good work go on. The few wh6 are opposing the coming together of the Lord's people cannot stop it. The Lord's time has come to favor Zion, and He is bringing His people together. To Him be praise forever more. We ask an interest in the prayers of the Lord's children. Pray Him to help us to strive for the things that make for peace, and the things wherewith we may edify one another. C. H. C.

ELDER PETTY GONE PROGRESSIVE October 15, 1927

We have received the information that Elder M. E. Petty, who has been worrying the brethren so much for the past year or more in Southeast Georgia, has gone to the Progressives. Our information is that his church had him under a charge and that on Friday or Friday night before the meeting time of his church on Saturday he joined the Progressives, which was Friday before the first Sunday in September. As a number of brethren have asked us as to what Elder Petty is doing we make this statement as a matter of information for them. We are sorry Elder Petty has pursued such a course as he has. "God is not mocked. Whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." We trust that he may yet some day see the error of his way and be brought to repentance. C. H. C.

END OF VOLUME FOUR

1928

Editorial Writings From The Primitive Baptist

Beginning with 1928

By Elder C. H. Cayce

Volume V 1939

CAYCE PUBLISHING COMPANY THORNTON, ARKANSAS

TO

My Beloved Wife who has untiringly labored with me and for me during these many years, and TO My Dear Children who are so attentive to their poor old father, and TO My Sainted Father and Mother who cared for me when I could not care for myself, and TO My Dear Brethren and Sisters who have been so kind and good to poor me all these years is this and any following volumes Lovingly Dedicated

PREFACE

We have received many words of endorsement of the previous volumes of our Editorial Writings. We have also had some words of criticism. Every reader has not endorsed everything that each volume contained. We could hardly expect that they should. But we are trying to faithfully reproduce what we said in our editorial writings in The Primitive Baptist during the years since we began the work of trying to edit the paper. Our dear companion insisted for several years that we undertake this work, before we could "muster up the courage" to undertake it. Her opinion was that it would be of benefit to the cause of the Master. This volume, with the previous volumes, together with the volumes which may follow, if we are permitted to continue the work until the same shall have been brought up to date, will show that our people-the Primitive Baptists-are still standing where they have always stood. They will also show, conclusively, that we have occupied the same ground during all our public life. Some things herein will be of value, from a historical standpoint, in the years to come. If we know our poor heart our desire in the publication of these volumes is the glory of God and the advancement of His blessed cause, and the benefit of His humble poor. The price we have been selling the books for is clear proof of the fact that the making of money is not the object in view. We desire that the Lord's dear children who are blinded by false teachers may be enabled, by the reading of some of these pages, to see where the true church is, and where the truth may be found. May the blessings of our Lord rest upon the reader, is the humble prayer of The Author Thornton, Arkansas, August 2, 1938

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME XLIII

January 1, 1928

This issue begins the forty-third volume of The Primitive Baptist. Forty-two volumes have been completed. Forty-two years ago the first issue of the paper made its appearance at Fulton, Ky. Many trials and conflicts have been endured, and many difficulties have been encountered-yet the paper still lives. It was published by our dear father and edited by him until he "fell at his post" in August, 1905, since which time we have been trying, as best we could, to send the paper out under the same banner and contending for the same principles of eternal truth. We have seen no cause to make any change, so far as doctrinal principles are concerned. On that line we make no promise of any change for the present volume. If we ever make any change in that line we will have to be first convinced that we have the wrong Bible and the wrong experience. It is our desire to humbly and faithfully contend for the same principles of eternal truth that the paper has contended for through all these forty-two years. We are aware of the fact that we have made mistakes-and we are sorry of every mistake and every wrong and every uncouth expression we have made- but we are not sorry of standing for, or contending for, any of the principles we have contended for all these years. We hoped that we would be able to begin publishing the paper weekly again on the first of this year, but we cannot do so. If all our corresponding editors, our brethren in the ministry, and our subscribers will all "put their shoulder to the wheel," and all help all they can, they can increase our list of subscribers enough this year to enable us to send it out weekly-perhaps before the year is out. Brethren, will you help? If each subscriber would only send one new one, that would double the list. We are aware that some of the readers cannot do this, but others can send two, some can send more. Ask the brethren and friends to subscribe for the paper. It will not hurt you to do this, and it will harm no one. How many of you will try it? During the past year some have helped much in this way and we trust that we appreciate all that has been done. Some of our corresponding editors have seemed to be asleep, as far as The Primitive Baptist is concerned, for a long time. We would be glad if they would wake up and let us hear from them occasionally. "Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ shall give thee light." We are glad that so many of the brethren and sisters have had a mind to write for the paper, and trust they will continue. True, we have not been able to publish all the articles that have been sent to us, on account of a lack of space. We have just so much space to fill, and we cannot publish any more articles than we have space for. We trust that no one will think hard of us for not publishing any article they may have written. We feel that we should try to select such matter as we think will be best for the cause in a general way. We may make mistakes in our judgment, but we cannot shift the responsibility off on another. All that we can promise on this line is that we shall continue to try to do the best we can under the circumstances. As we have often requested before, we now request again, that you will please keep your church troubles at home. Please do not send them to us for publication in the paper. Again we say, PLEASE DO NOT SEND THEM TO US. Such things are of no comfort or consolation to the Lord's dear children, and we desire to publish such things as will have a tendency to build up, and not tear down or destroy. You can be of much help to us along this line. Write us about your good meetings, and tell your hopes and fears, and of the Lord's sweet and sure promises to His children. Let us "provoke one another unto love and good works." Let us all try to serve the Lord better and more devotedly than we have in the past. Let us try to "be helpers, one of another." Let us try to lend each other a helping hand, and try to help each other along in the sweet and delightful service of the Master. "Let brotherly love continue." Let us all try to improve our ways. Will you try to help us to try to improve, and remember us in your prayers? C. H. C.

ANOTHER NAME ADDED

January 15, 1928

Elder J. H. Chance, R. 4, Cochran, Ga., has consented for us to add his name to our editorial staff. We are glad to have this dear brother associated with us. He promises to write for the paper, and to do what he can to increase the circulation. We trust that his labors may be blessed of the Lord to the good of His dear children and to the upbuilding of the cause. We trust that others of our corresponding editors will try to get up a little more zeal and put forth a little more effort during this year than they have for some time past. Some of our corresponding editors are awake along this line, and we appreciate their labors and their help. We trust that our labors together may be blessed of the Lord to the good of the cause. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO JOHN R. WHITFIELD

January 15, 1928

Permit us, dear brother, to make a few remarks concerning the matter of conditions as mentioned in your good article. The expression, "If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land; but if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured by the sword; for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it,'' plainly implies conditions. The very meaning of the language is that in order for them to eat the good of the land, and enjoy the blessings in the land, they must be willing and obedient. Their being permitted to do the eating depended upon that. On the other hand, if they refused and rebelled, they should be devoured by the sword. Being devoured by the sword depended upon their refusing and rebelling. One followed as a result of the other. Their eating the good of the land followed as a result of being willing and obedient. Their being devoured by the sword followed as a result of their refusing and rebelling. This language was addressed to Israel; and blessings were promised them on condition of being willing and obedient. Their eating the good of the land was contingent upon them being willing and obedient. The same thing is true today with spiritual Israel. Jesus said, "If ye know these things, happy are ye, if ye do them." Here is a happiness promised as a result of doing these things. It is necessary to know them first, and then do them. One must be a child of God first, in order to know these things. Then when the child of God knows these things, and does them, a happiness follows as a result-a happiness contingent upon the doing of these things. You have realized the truthfulness of this matter by experience. These remarks are made in love to you and the cause. C. H. C.

AT OXFORD, MISSISSIPPI

February 1, 1928

We had a request to be with the church in Oxford, Miss., for a three days meeting embracing the first Sunday in this month (January, 1928). We left home at 1:45 on Thursday night before the first Sunday and arrived at Oxford at 10:28 Friday morning. Brother R. L. Bell met us at the train. We went to his home for a few moments and then to the church. Had meeting there Friday, P'riday night, Saturday, Saturday night, and Sunday. There had been much rain in that section and the roads were bad, so the congregations were small at each service; but the services were all sweet and pleasant. We felt that the Lord was good to us and enabled us to speak to the comfort of the saints. On Sunday morning Elder W. L. Smith, who is the beloved pastor of the church, the writer and Deacons Smith and Waldrip, at the request of the church, formed ourselves into a presbytery for the purpose of ordaining Brother J. R. Heard to the full work of the gospel ministry and Brother R. L. Bell to the office of deacon. After examination of the brethren the ordination was proceeded with by prayer and the laying on of hands. We left Oxford at 3 o'clock Sunday afternoon and arrived home at 4:15 Monday morning and found all as well as when we left, for which we trust we felt thankful. While in Oxford we visited dear Sister Morris, the widow of Elder A. B. Morris, as she was not well and not able to be at the meeting. We also visited Sister Murray, who is also old and feeble, and was not able to be at the meeting. We also visited Sister Henrietta Goodwin, whom we have known from childhood. Sister Goodwin was able to be at meeting only on Sunday. We spent one night in the good home of Brother Heard and Sister McCharen. Sister McCharen is a daughter of Elder and Sister Morris. The good brethren and sisters were good to us-much better than we feel to deserve, and we enjoyed the stay with them, and feel that we want to go there again before this year is gone, if the Lord will. May the Lord's richest blessings rest upon them. We have been visiting that church occasionally for many years. We were with them when the church first moved to Oxford, and preached the first sermon in the house there. Many changes have come since then, but the Lord is still with them. We trust that they may continue faithful and true to the Master, and we are sure He will continue to bless them, though they pass through trials along the way. We shall not forget their many acts of kindness to us, not only on this trip, but at other times when we were with them, and the words of encouragement and comfort they have spoken to us. May the good Lord bless them abundantly, is our humble prayer. We trust they will remember us in prayer to the Lord. C. H. C.

MEETING AT LITTLE ROCK

April 1, 1928

At our last meeting in Little Rock (third Sunday in February) a brother, Edwin E. Fulks, of Vilonia, Ark., offered himself for membership with the church, and was gladly received. He requested that we administer the ordinance of baptism, and that it be attended to at the next meeting. We are expecting, the Lord willing, to go to Little Rock tomorrow and be with them at the regular service this month (March). We beg the Lord to be with us and to help us to attend to the duties that may be ours in His service, and that the dear brother may obtain the sweet rest that the Lord's little children find in the path of obedience. Brother Fulks came from the Missionaries, and has served them for a number of years as Sunday school superintendent, but got his eyes open to the truth by reading Old Baptist papers, books, and his Bible. After writing the above we received a telephone message that Brother H. C. Bryant, of Warren, Ark., had passed away and we were wanted to attend the funeral with Elder Jno. R. Harris at 2 o'clock on Sunday. So we could not go to Little Rock this time. Another good man is gone. May the Lord bless his bereaved ones. C. H. C.

ELDER FISHER'S NAME DROPPED

May 15, 1928

In another place in this paper will be found an article from Elder J. H. Fisher in which he makes some announcement regarding the Glad Tidings. Brother Fisher's name has been on the editorial staff of The Primitive Baptist for some time. When he bought the Glad Tidings he wrote us to remove his name from our staff, as he had bought that paper. We have hesitated to remove his name, and thought best to wait awhile. We regret to give him up from our staff; but of course we could not refuse to grant his request. We hope he will still write occasionally for The Primitive Baptist. And we trust the good Lord may bless his efforts in laboring for the peace and unity of our people in the publication of the Glad Tidings, as well as in his efforts in traveling and preaching the glorious gospel of the grace of God. We are glad to labor with him in any way we can for the good of Zion and for the glory of our heavenly Master. ' May the Lord grant to bless the dear brother in every way that seemeth good to Him. C. H. C.

MOVING TO THORNTON

July 1, 1928

For some time we have been at work erecting a new office building and a dwelling at Thornton, Ark., preparatory to moving to that place. The house our wife earned in the contest two years ago, which most of our readers know about, was cashed in by the company who awarded it to her. They paid her a good price in cash, at her request, instead of shipping the house to her. We had the opportunity of buying a large hotel building at Thornton with a few acres of ground at what we thought was a bargain price. So we made the purchase and had the building torn down, and used the lumber and material in erecting a dwelling and office building, and they are just about completed at this writing. We ' are expecting, therefore, to move to Thornton in a few ' days, and it is probable that this issue of the paper will be mailed from that place. For a little more than two years we have had this paper printed by the Advocate Publishing Company, to whom we sold our printing plant nearly three years ago. We have placed an order for a new press and type, which we expect to have installed within a few weeks, and then we will print the paper ourselves in our new office at Thornton. When we get moved we will be glad for all our readers and friends to call on us-visit us and see us and see our new office and machinery. It is our intention now to change the paper to a weekly on the first of next year. That is our intention and desire, and will do so if it is possible. From now on our address will be Thornton, Ark. As soon as we get moved and matters all straightened out we hope to be able to do more writing for the paper than we have been doing. C. H. C.

OBEY GOD OR MAN?

August 15, 1928

In another place in this paper is a reply to an article which appeared in our columns some time ago from Elder J. A. Monsees. We do not care to notice anything especially in the article more than one expression, which is this-: "Whom should we obey, God or man? I might do about like Elders Cayce and Newman did- obey men rather than God." In this expression Elder Ross accuses us and Elder Newman of obeying men and not obeying God. Perhaps Brother Ross can tell how he learned that we did not obey God because we did not visit the churches of the Progressives. If we had any special impression of mind to visit the Progressives we never found it out. We did have an inclination to go to South Georgia and to make some enquiry to try to find out if the indications were for an adjustment of differences between our people and the Progressives. We tried to follow that impression, and so made the trip. We did not find the conditions such as to make us believe it would be prudent or right to undertake an effort to get the two parties together. We are well aware of the fact that when people are at variance and are not "ripe" for a settlement it is far better to let them alone. To do otherwise is to make bad matters worse. That we were right in our conclusion is clearly proven and manifest in an article in the Banner-Herald of August 1, 1928. In that paper is an article headed, "A Basis for Lasting Peace," by the editor. In that article we find the following paragraphs: We think it highly commendable for any church, using an instrument in their song service, to forbear such use in deference to the feelings of brethren who oppose such practice; and we think it equally commendable for those brethren who oppose such practice to manifest charity toward those who see no evil in it and are not willing to discard their brethren by making such a bar to fellowship. The use of an instrument in song service in the church does not affect the doctrine or ordinances of the church and is a matter which must at last be left to each sovereign church to decide for herself. To our mind this is evidence that those brethren are not ready to discard or put away the organs from their churches. They preferred the organ to the fellowship of the great body of Primitive Baptists, and they still have them and are not willing to dispense with them. Our people have spoken on this question-they did so several years ago-and we stand with the great body of Baptists on this question, and have stood there all the while. To attempt to revive that question now, and to attempt to get our people to reverse themselves on the question, would be to simply raise another war in our own ranks-and we here speak plainly but kindly-we are not going to do it. God does not require it, and to do so we would be obeying men rather than God. That matter is something which belongs to the Baptists in that country (South Georgia and Alabama) more than others. For us or others to go there and meddle with that matter, unless they ask us to come and help them get matters settled and adjusted, would be simply to meddle where we feel we have no business. Perhaps meddling where we have no business has had something to do in causing trouble in days gone by. We feel like it may be about time to do so no more. We feel like we are obeying God in pursuing that course-perhaps not, though, if we obeyed men in doing that way. We are ready to help brethren labor for peace and union with any of the brethren in any faction who are orderly in their walk and live godly lives, provided they are ready to lay down the thing that causes trouble. The introduction of organs in our churches has always caused trouble among us, and it always will. To unite with those who have them after having separated from them years ago, would simply be to unite with more trouble. Let them show that they want to unite with our people in peace by putting those things out, and then we may be ready to labor for a union, and thus obey God in laboring for union and not for trouble and confusion. The same principle prevails in laboring for union with those who have advocated and gone with the doctrine of the absolute predestination of all things. Advocating that doctrine among us has always caused trouble, and always will. Let those who advocate it, and who are not willing to lay it aside, stay among themselves and not bother us. If any are willing to lay that down, and to labor for peace and union with our people, then we are willing to help labor to that end. But we are not willing to help to labor for union with them unless they are willing to lay that aside, for to unite with them and for them to preach and advocate that doctrine among us would only cause us trouble again. We have had enough trouble in our ranks, and we do not care to help bring something among us that we are well aware would cause more trouble. Perhaps one church of God does not have the right or the authority to declare non-fellowship for another church of God. One sister in a family may go wrong and bring shame and disgrace on the family and on the other sisters and the brothers in that family. The other brothers and sisters cannot disinherit or put the wayward sister out of relationship; but they can refuse to associate with and keep company with that wayward sister until she mends her ways-and they should do it. Churches bear a sisterly relationship with each other. When a sister church walks disorderly and brings shame on the family the other sisters can and should refuse to keep company and associate with her until she mends her ways. If all would do that instead of so many trying to uphold her in her wrongs, it would have a greater influence to bring them to the right path. A church has the right to withdraw fellowship from a member, and no other church has the right to interfere; but no church has the right to hold a member in fellowship who is a disgrace to the cause, and who brings shame on sister churches by a wrong and ungodly life. A church is not a sovereign to do as she pleases; but is a sovereign to execute the laws of the King, and no farther. She is not a sovereign to do that which brings grief and sorrow to her sister churches who are satisfied to have, to do, to believe, and to practice what is in the Book, and nothing else. May the Lord help us to follow the path marked out in His Word. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO (MISS) INEZ VAUGHN

September 15, 1928

It will be observed that the above letter was not written for publication, but we trust the sister will not think hard of us for putting it in the paper. It was written some time ago. Our readers will remember that we stated in our issue of July 1 that we had a great many letters which we had not been able to answer on account of being so busy building and moving when at home. The above is one of the letters we had on hand. We note that the sister states she was away from home at school. This being true, we do not know whether she is now at home or still in Roanoke, and we do not know her home address. The only way we know, then, to reach her is through the paper. It seems to us that the good Lord has shown her a great lesson and a great truth in the dream she relates. Worldly religionists do not know the Saviour in their service and worship. They are yet like the builders in ancient times. The builders anciently rejected the stone which has become the head of the corner. They did not understand, or know, where the place and work of that stone was, and they do not know yet. It is true that the ministry is a gift from the Lord to the church, but preachers are just men. The apostle said, "I also am a man." They should set right examples before others; but they make mistakes and do wrong, as well as other folks. They are to be esteemed for their work's sake, and not because they are better than others. May the good Lord bless you, dear sister, and enable you to walk in His ways and to show forth His praise by an orderly walk and godly conversation. C. H. C.

1Co 15:22-23

October 1, 1928

For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at His coming.-1Co 15:22-23.

We have been requested to give our views on this text, especially the clause,"But every man in his own order."

In this chapter the apostle is treating directly and especially upon the subject of the resurrection of the bodies of the saints. The idea of a general resurrection, both of the just and the unjust, is taught in other parts of the Bible; but in this chapter the apostle is not treating upon the resurrection of the unjust, but of the Lord's children. Keeping in mind that he is treating upon this subject, then we know what people he is talking about when he says,"For as in Adam all die." All whom? All the Lord's children, those of whom he is writing. They all die. They are dying every day. He does not say here "for as in Adam all died"-but "all die"-in the present tense. All Adam's race died in him when he transgressed the law in Eden; but here' the apostle says they (God's children) "all die." He could not, then, in this language refer to the fall in Eden, but refers to the natural or physical death. God's people die that way, the same as other folks do. But though they do die in Adam, as natural beings, yet "in Christ shall all be made alive." They shall be made alive in Christ.

When the body dies, the spirit does not die, but goes to God who gave it. The soul does not die. "Though the body dies on account of sin, yet the spirit lives on account of righteousness.." The same thing shall be made alive that dies. It is the body that dies; hence it is the body that shall be made alive. This shall be done at the time of which the apostle is writing in this chapter, which is the resurrection from the dead.

"But every man in his own order." What every man? Every man of whom he is writing. Of whom is he writing? God's children. Hence, the bodies of all God's children shall be raised and made alive in Christ. They are to be both raised and made alive in Christ. "Christ the firstfruits." Under the law it was required that the first ripe fruit of the harvest should be offered unto the Lord, and if the offering was accepted by the Lord, this made sure the entire crop. This first ripe fruit was the first fruit of the crop. Christ became the first fruit of them that slept. As the first fruit He was raised when He had offered Himself as a spotless offering unto the Lord. The Father accepted the offering which He made, and "this made sure the entire crop being harvested. The resurrection of the saints is just as sure, then, as it is sure that Christ was raised. When will they be raised? "At His coming." When He comes back to earth again to gather His jewels home, they will all be raised and made alive in Christ. All those who are His will then be raised and made spiritual. "There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body." "It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body." Then will God's predestination concerning them be fully accomplished. "For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He did predestinate, them He also called: and whom He called, them He also justified: and whom He justified, them He also glorified."-Ro 8:29-30.

Amidst all the sorrows, trials and conflicts that are incident to this life, we are trusting and hoping, confidently (sometimes) looking forward to that time, for that blessed home beyond. May the sweet assurance of this comfort your hearts in all your trials. C. H. C.

ELDER HASSELL DEAD

October 1, 1928

We were made sad on learning of the death of Elder Sylvester Hassell, which occurred on August 18, 1928. Elder Hassell was truly a great and wonderful man. He was a man of great talent and learning, and was truly great in true humility and devotion to the cause of the Master. The following from the pen of Elder R. H. Pittman, editor of the Advocate and Messenger, better expresses what we desire should be said in our columns concerning this dear brother than we have words to express: Brother Hassell is dead! These sad words were first heard by me as they were whispered in my ear during the morning service at the Ketocton Association Sunday, August 19, 1928, and as the news spread many hearts were saddened and tears of sorrow shed. And upon reaching home Sunday night I found a telegram from Charles Hassell awaiting me, and regret very much that I could not attend the funeral services of this dear man of God. He was very near and dear to me. For thirty-five years we have been very close friends, and during the last years of his life we were closely and intimately connected. His editorial service on the Advocate and Messenger was a blessing to thousands and an inspiration to his co-workers, with whom he was in perfect harmony. The writer was last with him in January in a meeting in which he labored for reconciliation of estranged brethren; and on July 16th -his last letter to me-he said "I would be glad to see you again." But no more shall we meet in this life. He has been called up higher; and heaven to me is a little dearer, because of his going. He was ready to be offered, and the time of his departure was at hand. He fought a good fight, finished his course, and kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for him a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, shall give him at that day; and not to him only, but to all them also that love His appearing. "And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying; neither shall there be any more pain.'' Elder Sylvester Hassell, of Williamston, N. C, minister, historian, teacher, was doubtless the best authority on church history in North Carolina, and possibly in this age. He stood among the foremost thinkers and writers of the United States. His ancestors came from England to North Carolina in the Eighteenth Century. His parents were Elder C. B. Hassell and his first wife, Mary Davis. He was born in Williamston, N. C, July 28, 1842, and died there Aug. 18, 1928, having reached the ripe age of 86 years and 20 days. He was educated at the Williamston Academy and the University of North Carolina, taking a high stand at both, and graduating with honors. He was proficient in several languages; was principal of a school for young men in Wilson, N. C, and professor of languages in a northern college for some years. He published, in 1886, the Church History, the most complete work of its kind ever published by our people, and a monument more lasting than granite to him and to his father, who began the work. In 1892 he became associate editor of the Gospel Messenger, and in 1896, its proprietor and managing editor, which position he retained nearly twenty years, when the paper was sold to Elder Z. C. Hull, of Atlanta, Ga., from whom it was purchased by the writer in 1923, and all this time Elder Hassell has been on the editorial staff. ******** Truly he was a prince in Israel. As I am able to judge, it has not been my privilege to know one who bore more marks of real greatness. In manners, humble and retiring as a little child; in general information, he has been called "a walking encyclopedia;" in service, untiring and unselfish; in character, irreproachable and unstained; in deportment, gentle, kind, tender. More than any man I ever knew he suffered long and remained kind; envied not; was not puffed up; did not behave himself unseemly; sought not his own; was not easily provoked; thought no evil; rejoiced not in iniquity, but rejoiced in the truth. His motto as historian, editor, preacher and teacher was "Speaking the truth in love;" and this he did uncompromisingly with error in friend or foe. Neither the tie of blood nor the bond of fellowship was sufficiently strong to draw him from the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. And the Bible was, to him, God's literal, spiritual and eternal truth, and he defended its truths with tongue and pen possibly more valiantly and ably than any man in this age. Spurgeon is reported to have said that Hassell's History contained less error than any book he ever read. A professor of language in Wake Forrest College recently said that all of us shall have to go to Hassell's History of the Church for authoritative information on this subject. And thus it is true that "though dead he yet speak-eth,'' and will continue to speak (certainly among the people called Baptists) so long as there is love for principles and practices upon which the Apostolic Church was founded. God does not raise up many such men; "not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called." But He does call some, and our precious Brother Hassell, who has gone home to glory, was one of them. We shall miss him; his churches will miss his loving service; the Kehukee Association, which he has for thirty-five years served as moderator, will miss his wise counsel; and thousands of readers will miss his timely, instructive and spiritual editorials. Worldly wisdom and human efforts can never fill his place; only God can prepare and send another such servant to labor in His vineyard. May we all pray that this He will do. The funeral services were conducted by Elder J. C. Moore, of Whitakers, N. C, a son of the late Elder Andrew J. Moore, who was a lifelong friend and associate of Elder Hassell. It was his wish that this son of his nearest friend in life perform the simple rites for the dead when his day of rest had come. Elder Moore was visibly moved by the solemnity of the burden laid upon him, but after reading the 103rd Psalm he feelingly and beautifully spoke of the deceased and of their love and fellowship. Other ministers who spoke briefly included Elder N. S. Harrison, of Washington County, Elder S. B. Denny, of Wilson, and Elder A. B. Denson, of Rocky Mount. Two hymns, both favorites of Elder Hassell, were used; "Rock of Ages" at the beginning of the services and "How Firm a Foundation" at the conclusion. Almost every Primitive Baptist minister in eastern North Carolina attended the services; also Congressmen Lindsay Warren, a lifelong admirer and personal friend of Elder Hassell; Josephus Daniels, whose youthful schooling was had at his hands and whose admiration and affection for him began from that day and has never ended; R. O. Everett, of Durham, John D. Gold, of Wilson; and scores of others from over the entire eastern end of the state were there. Three sons of Elder Hassell -Frank, Charles and Calvin-all of prominence, are left of his immediate family to mourn the loss of a loving father. The casket was borne through the throng of sorrowing friends to the waiting hearse. The long walk from the house to the street was lined on either side with flowers. The march to the grave was begun, and there, with simple rites, the casket was lowered into the grave. "For this corruption must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. * * * * Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not in vain in the Lord.'' The above beautiful tribute is copied from the Advocate and Messenger. We mourn the loss of this great man in Israel. May the Lord help us all to be submissive to His holy will and sustain us by His grace. C. H. C.

REQUESTS NAME DROPPED

October 1, 1928

A few days ago (in September) we received the following note from Elder W. E. Brush: Elder C. H. Cayce: Dear Brother-Will you please drop my name from the editorial staff of The Primitive Baptist, and oblige, your brother, I hope, W. E. Brush. In compliance with Brother Brush's request we have dropped his name from the staff. We do not know why he made the request, but we comply with it with no ill will whatever. C. H. C.

OUR ASSOCIATION

October 15, 1928

Our association (the South Arkansas) met with our church (Cane Creek) here in Thornton, beginning on Friday before the third Sunday in September. We had ten visiting preachers with us: Elders J. W. West, Crosbyton, Texas; S. N. Redford, Harlingen, Texas; W. W. Fowler, Dallas, Texas; B. Isaacs, Rosebud, Ark.; W. A. Barham, Watalula, Ark.; G. W. Reed, Harvey, Ark.; R. L. Piles, Hon, Ark.; G. A. Jones, Prescott, Ark.; P. E. Whitwell, Little Rock, Ark.; C. M. Monk, Jonesboro, La. The home ministers present during the meeting were Elders John R. Harris, Thornton, Ark.; J. P. Baker, Wilmar, Ark.; A. D. Cencibaugh, Donaldson, Ark.; W. E. Hargett, El Dorado, Ark.; J. W. Guest, Lono, Ark.; G. P. Woodall, Athens, La.; and C. H. Cayce, Thornton, Ark. A good crowd was in attendance each day, and the Lord blessed the ministers with a fruitful mind at each service, and they preached the gospel in its sweetness to the comfort and benefit of the Lord's humble poor. Two willing souls were encouraged to take up their cross during the meeting and come home to their friends, telling what great things the Lord had done for them. They were baptized on Sunday morning by Elder John R. Harris. May the Lord bless them and help them to show forth the praise of the Lord while they live in the world, is our prayer. This was a wonderful meeting to us. Love and sweet fellowship reigned throughout the whole meeting. There was not a jar of any kind nor a discordant note sounded. The Lord's divine presence was sweetly manifested, and we were all loth to leave the place, and yet glad we had enjoyed the great privilege and blessing of meeting together in this great assembly. May the Lord be praised, and may He grant us more such great blessings. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO ELDER D. M. VAIL

October 15, 1928

We do not feel that we have any special light on the text, {Ro 7:24} but think the apostle was writing concerning his experience along life's way. He still had the same old sinful nature to contend with that he always had, and this sinful nature and disposition which he had gave him much trouble and concern. He longed to be free from sin, and to live above and without it. Sin in his members, with which he had to contend, is called a body of death. He felt and realized that he could not deliver himself from it. Evidently his only hope was in the Lord. It appears to us that this is the experience and hope of the Lord's dear children in this present age as well as then; and if this describes your feeling and experience, it is an evidence that you are a child of grace. C. H. C.

FLINT RIVER ASSOCIATION

November 1, 1928

We had the pleasure of attending the Flint River Association in North Alabama on Friday, Saturday and first Sunday in October, 1928. It was held with old Flint River Church, near Brownsboro, Ala., the oldest Baptist Church in the state. That church was constituted on the second day of October, 1808, which was the first Sunday. The centennial of the constitution of that church was celebrated there on the first Sunday in October, 1908, and Friday and Saturday before, and we had the pleasure of attending that meeting. That was twenty years ago. There have been many changes during those years, but the principles of truth remain the same. This was a glorious meeting. If we are not mistaken there were about sixteen ministers in attendance, and the preaching was all harmonious. Two dear sisters came forward on Sunday and asked for a home in this old church. They were gladly received, and the time of their baptism was set for the second Sunday, the regular meeting time of the church there. May the good Lord be praised for His goodness and mercy. Let us try to serve Him more and better what short time we have left for us to stay here in this old world. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO ELDER J. W. WEST

December 1, 1928

We appreciate the above good letter. We appreciated having you at our association, and also in our humble home. We appreciated having all the dear brethren and sisters in our home who came to see us, though we do not feel worthy to have them under our roof. We cannot treat them as well as we desire to, but they are welcome, and we want them to feel that way. May the Lord bless and keep you, dear brother, and lead you on in the good old way. We are glad you are still having good meetings out there, and that the Lord's rich blessings are still being showered down upon the good brethren and sisters. "If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land." This is just as true now as it was when it was written. The Lord has not changed. Yes, we want to visit Texas again. Perhaps we can take the good wife and children and make a trip out there next summer. We will try to do so, if it seems that the Lord so directs. Pray for us. In love, C. H. C.

BROTHER HOLLINGSWORTH'S LETTER December 15, 1928

Elsewhere in this issue is a letter from Brother W. W. Hollingsworth, of Bessemer, Ala., urging the readers to try to get some new subscribers for The Primitive Baptist. We trust you will all read his letter, and then put forth your best efforts to carry out his suggestions, and send us a lot of new subscribers by the first of the year. Brother Hollingsworth intended for his letter to be in our issue for December 1st, but it got to the office just a little too late for that issue. It has been our desire to change the paper back to a weekly from the first of the year 1929, but we just cannot do that. There has not been enough increase in the subscription list the past year to justify us in making the change to a weekly, and involving the necessary additional expense. It would cost more to get the paper out weekly-considerably more. It will be necessary to have a lot more subscribers to justify us in making the change. We cannot afford to try to get the paper out at a loss. It must be made to pay its cost or we cannot continue to send it out. Unless we have enough subscribers for it to pay its cost to send it out weekly we just cannot send it out that often. If every reader of the paper who is in a position to do so would put forth some effort, by asking others to subscribe for the paper, no doubt enough new subscribers could be sent in to enable us to make the change in a very short time. Some of those who are isolated and not living near other Primitive Baptists could write to some person they know and ask them to subscribe for the paper. This would do good and would help. If we know our poor heart our sincere desire in publishing The Primitive Baptist is to try to comfort, instruct, and benefit the Lord's dear children, and to build up and promote the cause of the Master-the cause we all love so well. If it were a matter of financial choice there are other things we could engage in that would be much more remunerative. Much more money could be made by us in engaging in other things. We have felt to make a sacrifice in this respect all these years since we have been connected with the paper, even before the death of our dear father. It has been our desire all along, and it is yet, to give all the reading matter possible for the money. For these reasons it is our sincere desire to have enough subscribers to enable us to send the paper out weekly. To this end we need the assistance and help of our readers. We are giving our whole time to the work of the Master in publishing His truth from the pulpit and the press to the very best of our ability. Is it asking too much to ask you to help us what you can in getting new subcribers for the paper? Will you help? C. H. C.

CLOSE OF VOLUME XLIII

December 15,1928

This issue closes the forty-third volume of The Primitive Baptist. For forty-three years this paper has been published under practically the same management, it having been established by our sainted father on January 1, 1886, and published by him until August, 1905, when he fell in the service of the Master. Since that time it has been our lot to continue the editing and publishing of the paper to the present time. Sometimes the road has been rough and steep, in more ways than one. We have met with difficulties along the way; but the Lord has brought us thus far, and in Him is our trust and confidence. Sometimes it seemed that our way was all hedged in, and we could see no way to press on farther; but in a way not expected the way would be opened up so that we were enabled to go forward again. The same doctrine and principles that the paper stood for from the beginning are the same that have been contended for all along to the present. We have seen no reason for any change along this line. Principles are eternal and never change. What was a principle of truth forty-three years ago is a principle of truth today. Truth needs no amendments or additions or subtractions. Yes, we have made mistakes. We are very well aware of that fact, and we are sorry of every mistake we have ever made. It is our sincere desire to not make the same mistake twice. It is our desire to try to profit by the mistakes we have made in trying to avoid them for the future. We have tried to conduct The Primitive Baptist in such a way as to comfort, instruct, edify and build up the Lord's dear children, and in defense of the Primitive or Old School Baptist cause. We have tried to publish an Old Baptist paper. How well we have succeeded is for the brotherhood to say. Our circulation signifies that many are pleased along this line. Still, the circulation is not what we would like for it to be. We had hoped that we would have a circulation large enough by this time to justify us in going back to a weekly on the first of the incoming year, but we are disappointed in this. We yet hope that the circulation may increase enough to enable us to change to a weekly before the year 1929 is gone. How many of you will help us to reach this by sending in new subscribers right away? If any of our brethren and sisters, or any of our readers, have been hurt with us, and felt that we have not done as we should in any particular, we beg your forgiveness. It is not our desire to wound the feelings of any of the Lord's dear children, not even the least one. Please throw the mantle of charity over our many imperfections, and pardon what you may see amiss in us. Help us all you can in the spread of the truth. Pray the Lord to direct us in the right way and to sustain us by His grace. Until the first of the New Year we now bid all our readers adieu, humbly praying the Lord's richest blessings may rest upon all. C. H. C.

1929

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME XLIV

January 1, 1929

With this issue we begin the forty-fourth volume of The Primitive Baptist. For forty-three years this paper has gone forth on its mission of endeavor to "contend earnestly for the faith that was once delivered to the saints." Now another year is ushering in, and we desire to begin the toils and conflicts with renewed energy and vigor, inspired by the good hope, which we trust has been given us by the Lord through grace, and quietly trusting in His glorious and precious promises and His power and faithfulness to perform the same. We feel to be encouraged when we think of some of the things that have transpired during the last year or two. Many of our people, where they have been separated and divided for years, have been adjusting their little differences, forgiving each other, as the Lord has admonished and directed, and have been coming together in peace and love. This gives us renewed hope of a better day for our dear people. On the other hand, when we see the great lethargy and indifference which seems to exist in some places; when we see the war and strife among the brethren going on in some sections, it makes us feel cast down and discouraged. In olden times when Israel engaged in warfare among themselves, the Lord's chastening hand fell heavily upon them; and we fear like troubles or distresses will befall us today. "When ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another." We so much deplore such conditions existing among our dear people at any place. May the Lord have mercy upon us. "This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men."-Paul. It is our sincere desire to endeavor to encourage the Lord's little children to be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable. The good works are those things the Lord has commanded in His word. The things He has not commanded are not good works. It is profitable to engage in those good works. The inspired apostle so teaches in this text, and we are disposed to believe it. There is something gained in that which is profitable. If nothing is gained by engaging in or doing a thing, then that thing is unprofitable.

It is unprofitable for the Lord's dear children to be engaged in doing the things the Lord has not commanded, and especially in doing the things He has expressly forbidden. Something is to be gained by them in doing the things He has commanded, for those things are profitable unto men. We do not believe one can do these good works in and of himself. We are sure that no one can do these good works without the Lord's help. Though this is true, yet we need not try to make excuse for ourselves for not doing them by saying the Lord did not help us. Jesus said to His disciples, "Without me ye can do nothing.'' We should always remember from whence all our strength and help comes. It all comes from the Lord, and He has told us that He is a very present help in every time of trouble, or in every time of need. Then if we fail to do these things and engage in things we should not engage in, it is not because we were without the Lord or that He failed to be present as a help that we needed. The fault lies with us, and we are the blameworthy characters, and we are the ones who will be sure to suffer the penalty. If we have a good hope, a sweet hope, a precious hope, it is because the good Lord gave it to us by His glorious, unmerited, rich and discriminating grace. Having done so much for us, sure He is worthy of our service and all our praise. "Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His righteousness." "Let the dead bury their dead; but go thou and preach the kingdom of God." We should not let father, mother, brother, sister, wife, children, houses or lands, or any earthly tie or pleasure come between us and the service of our blessed and glorious Redeemer. The service of God should be first, and other things (earthly things) be secondary. Both cannot be first with us. "He that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life."-Jesus. "He is the true light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.'' He does not light every man that cometh into this natural world. The natural sun lighteth every man that cometh into this natural world. "The Lord God is a sun and shield." He is the spiritual light, the spiritual sun. He lighteth every man that cometh into the spiritual realm. We come into that realm by being born into it, just as we came into the natural realm by being born into it. If we follow Jesus we must have our faces turned toward Him, and He is before us and goes before us then. If we are not following Him we have our faces turned from Him, and we are walking away from Him. As we walk away from Him, and are not following Him, we walk in our own shadow-in the dark; and we then cannot see just where we are going. Hence we stumble and fall. "He that doeth these things shall never fall." With our faces turned toward Him, and in following Him, we have our faces turned toward the light; we walk in the light; we can see where we are placing our feet; "there is none occasion of stumbling in him.'' The remainder of our days, whether many or few, we desire should be devoted to His praise and to His service and to the service of His humble poor. The Lord's people are a poor and afflicted people. We feel to be the poorest of them all-"less than the least of all saints." We have no righteousness to plead. All our hope and trust and confidence is in the Lord. We need the prayers, the help and encouragement of the Lord's dear children. We desire to be granted an humble place with them what few remaining days we have here in this world of trouble, sorrows, distresses, disappointments and sad bereavements. There is no other place we can go. There is no other home for us. The dear Old Baptists, notwithstanding all their faults, their mistakes, their shortcomings, their wars and quarrels among themselves, are our people. They are the dearest people on earth to us. We are not espousing the cause of any faction among them. We desire to press forward in the "strait" path the Lord has directed His children to walk in, and try to labor for unity and peace among this best people in the world. May the Lord's richest blessings rest upon them, and may He help us to live more devoted to Him and to serve Him better. Will each of you pray for us and help us along the way? Is this asking too much of you? C. H. C.

ENJOYS THE PAPER

January 1, 1929

Elder C. H. Cayce: Dear Brother-Yes, I read The Primitive Baptist, and really enjoy reading it, for it is full of good articles that are food for a hungering child of God. According to my estimation each and every copy has at least one article that, alone, is worth the price of the paper for a whole year. As I seldom hear any gospel preaching I enjoy reading the good paper to the fullest extent. I can truthfully say I find no fault to the paper. Some articles are good; others better; and if, perchance, I did find something a little out of line with my reasoning I would not try to find fault-only would think they or I were a little out of line, and try as best I can to keep myself in line; and if they are out of line, it is only an error of the mind and not of the heart, hoping and believing that in due time they may be set right. I am not a good hand to solicit subscribers, but I will endeavor to send you one or two names in the near future. Realizing, as I do, that there are so many of God's dear little children who are hungering for the nourishment that The Primitive Baptist would afford them, but who are not financially able to pay the subscription price; and often hearing Arminian preachers, while taking up a collection, quote "it is more blessed to give than to receive," makes me wonder why those who want to build up the circulation of the beloved paper in order to make it a weekly (and I presume we all do) pay subscription two, three, and five years in advance, having no assurance that we will live that long to enjoy the reading; besides, if we all paid five years in advance it would be a great benefit to the editor now, but where would be the income for the next four years? Would it not be more enjoyable to those whom the Lord has prospered with this world's goods to pay subscription for one or more of these poor and afflicted children of God, who are so hungry for the very kind of food The Primitive Baptist will supply. Now, brother, please throw the mantle of charity over me. A sinner saved by grace, if saved, J. B. F. Lasater. Clarksville, Ark.

REMARKS

We appreciate the above kind letter, which was written in March, 1928, but we could not get to it very well any sooner. However, it is just as good now as when it was written. Many of the Lord's dear children, we are sure, would enjoy reading The Primitive Baptist who are not really able to pay for it. We do not want one dear child of God to be deprived of that joy and comfort on account of their poverty in the goods of this world. We are already sending the paper to many who are not able to pay for it, and are ready to send it to others who are in like condition. Many have sent contributions to help send the paper to such persons. When anyone sends one dollar for that purpose, we send the paper a whole year to some poor person for that amount. In other words, we give a dollar for that purpose every time we get a dollar contributed for that object. When you send us one dollar to help pay for the paper for the poor and unfortunate, someone gets the paper a whole year for that dollar. As to some paying for the paper for several years, we suggest that if one hundred do that this year, and one hundred do the same thing next year, and another hundred do the same thing the next year, and another hundred the next, and so on, all along, the income would not be cut down in any one year, but we would have a little less work to pay for in keeping the accounts with the subscribers. Both the above things help the editor to some extent, and the first suggestion helps to send comfort to the Lord's dear children who are poor and afflicted. When one subscribes for the paper for himself, he thereby helps to support the paper and to keep it going, and thus helps to provide a way to comfort those who are poor and destitute and who are deprived of the privilege of hearing preaching. Let us all put forth a little more effort and see if we can be more help along this line. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO ELDER W. P. MERRELL

January 1, 1929

We feel unworthy of such expressions of love and confidence and sweet fellowship from any of the Lord's dear children, especially one of His dear humble servants. We often feel that our labors are and have been all in vain, and were it not for such expressions of encouragement as the above which we sometimes receive, we feel that we would have gone down in despair. But such as this encourages us to press on again, trusting alone in Israel's God. But it seems that we cannot long remember these encouraging things, for there are so many things encountered to discourage us and to cause us to feel sad and cast down. Our dear companion has been a wonderful help to us to press on in the service. Pray for us. C. H. C.

THIRTY-NINE YEARS AGO

January 15, 1929

On Saturday night, January 4, 1890, we made our first effort to speak in the name of the Master. It was at the home of a Brother Morris, in Wayne County, Tenn., between Waynesboro and Savannah. Our dear sainted father, Elder S. F. Cayce, Elder J. P. Pilkington and Elder M. L. Rhodes were present. There may have been other ministers present, but we do not remember them. It was just after a discussion at Waynesboro between our father, Elder S. F. Cayce, and J. A. Harding, who represented the Campbellites. We attended the debate. After the debate some of us went to the home of the Brother Morris, and there that night we were prevailed upon to make our first attempt to speak. We remember well with what great fear and trembling we arose to make the effort. We also remember well that in trying to introduce the service we tried to line and the congregation sang that good old song which has been one of our favorites all these years, Amazing grace! how sweet the sound! That saved a wretch like me. When we had tried, in our poor stammering way, to offer a few words in prayer, we read Eph 2:8-9 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God. Not of works, lest any man should boast." We tried to talk for a few moments in connection with that language. Then we took our seat, feeling ashamed of the poor effort, and buried our face in father's lap and wept like a child. Yet we remember how father and others wept and tried to encourage and console us, and how they told us that what little we had said was gospel truth. On Friday, Dec. 28, 1928, we were passing along the road from Waynesboro to Savannah, our family with us. We stopped at the old place, and we and our wife got out of the car and viewed the place. We went in and took a look at the room where we stood, and could see in our memory the faces of some who were there on that occasion thirty-nine years ago, so memorable to us. Our poor heart was filled with gratitude and thankfulness to God for His mercies extended to us all these years, in bringing us safely through the many dangers, toils and snares which we have encountered. We called to mind the reading and the singing of that good old hymn mentioned, and the lines, Through many dangers, toils and snares, I have already come; 'Tis grace has brought me safe thus far, And grace will lead me home. We thought of how we loved the sweet doctrine of grace then, and of how it has been "our meat and drink" until now; and how it is still our sweet hope that grace will lead us home. Well, we just cannot tell you all about how we felt, and the thoughts and meditations which passed through our mind. On Saturday and first Sunday in this month was our regular meeting time here in Thornton. On Sunday we felt deeply impressed with what we have here been telling you about, and so we tried to tell something about these things, and lined the same good old hymn and the congregation sang it. Then we tried to talk awhile from the same text. When we had concluded Elder John R. Harris made a sweet talk. Though there were not very many present, on account of so much sickness, so many having flu, and the inclemency of the weather, yet we had a sweet and pleasant service. May the Lord be praised for His goodness, and may He help us all to press on in His delightful service, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

BROTHER FAIRCHILD IN MISSISSIPPI

February 15, 1929

We see that Elder J. W. Fairchild is now located at Stringer, Miss. We note, also, that his name now appears on the editorial staff of the Banner-Herald, of which Elder Wm. H. Crouse is editor and manager. The paper is published in Georgia. The paper has some good articles appearing in its columns from time to time. It is a Progressive paper. C. H. C.

DEACONS AND PREACHERS

February 15, 1929

Since so many have been having something to say about the deacons and preachers we feel just now that we desire to say a few words. Much has been said about the duty of deacons. We feel like saying several things about the duty of preachers, but cannot say just now what we would like to say on that line. Perhaps we can say something on that line later on, at some time in the future, if the Lord will. Let us kindly call attention, just here, that Paul has told us that even so "hath the Lord ordained that they that preach the gospel should live of the gospel." He also calls our attention to the fact that he had the power or authority to lead about a wife as well as the other apostles and other brethren. He had that same right. But he also tells us that he had not used the authority or power which he rightly had, that he might preach the gospel, the glad tidings, freely. He says "I am debtor * * * so, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.'' It seems to us that the mind of the apostle was to make sacrifices and to endure whatever might befall him, that none of these things should interfere with his labor in preaching the glorious gospel of the Son of God. He would preach, whether the brethren contributed to his necessities or not. And he does not tell us the Lord ordained that a man should live of the gospel who is not engaged in preaching it. In other words, he does not teach in this that the Lord has ordained that a man should preach one day in a week or month and live seven days a week or the whole month of the gospel. If a man spends only one or two days in the week in preaching, it is not right or Scriptural that he and his family should live in idleness the rest of the time by the liberalities of the brethren. We feel sure that if a man will devote such time to the ministry as the Lord requires of him that a way will be provided for the support of himself and those dependent on him. The Lord will put it into the heart of somebody to see after their needs-not their wants. The Lord's way was for Israel to care for the prophets He sent unto them. They failed to care for Elijah, and he had to flee for his life; but the Lord sent food to him by the ravens. He is able to do that yet; and He is faithful. We need men in the ministry who are willing to endure hardness and privations and toils and afflictions, as good soldiers; who are ready to stand with their faces like flint toward the enemies of truth and righteousness, and who will not shun to teach any part of what the Bible teaches, but who will teach it all in the spirit of love and meekness, without fear of man. May the Lord grant to send such men forth to labor in His vineyard. The laborers are few and the harvest is great. Our humble opinion is that if a man who occupies the pulpit as a preacher who is faithful to declare the whole counsel of God, doing this in the right spirit, and is conservative, and is called upon to devote his whole time to this work, that he and his family will be cared for to the extent of their real needs. If he is not cared for, we feel like he could justly conclude that he is either in the wrong field of labor or that there has been something wrong with his work or teaching. We freely confess, with other brethren, that our people have not always cared for their pastor as we think the Bible teaches they should. Yet we also say that where this duty has been taught in the right way they are free and liberal and care for their ministers. We know they have been far better to us than we feel to deserve. They have been so good to us that we simply feel like we belong to them, and that they have a right to all our labor and efforts. We can never repay what they have done for us. Thank God for the privilege of living with a people who have been so good to us. We do not mean to say or to leave the impression that we have never made a trip at our own expense, for we have done that a number of times. Yet we feel like the Lord has put it into the heart of others to make it up, and those who failed to do what the Lord has taught in His word they should do are the losers. They have failed to enjoy the blessings the Lord bestows upon His obedient children. Hence the apostle let the brethren know that it was for their good and not for his own benefit that he taught them this duty. A man who teaches this truth just for his own advantage, that he may get a contribution from the brethren, is in the wrong, we think. The preacher should have something for his children to do, as well as something for himself to do when not engaged in preaching. It is not right that his children be brought up in idleness and taught to depend upon others for a support. It is no dishonor for one to labor with his hands. Our father spent much time in the ministry. For a number of years his whole life was devoted to publishing the truth by tongue and pen. When at home he worked hard. He schooled his children the best he could in the public schools, but he also taught them to labor with their hands. We remember one winter we walked two miles to school, and during that winter we cut wood from the stump, and got it to the house, to run two fireplaces. Circumstances made it necessary to have both fires night and morning. This was before he began publishing The Primitive Baptist. After he began publishing the paper we worked in the office and went to school very little any more. His other children worked, too. We remember that one Christmas we worked all Christmas eve night to get to lay off on Christmas day, and then had to work till noon that day. We are not relating these things for sympathy, but to emphasize the fact that it is right for the minister's family to work. Referring to the minister mentioned by Brother Blackshear in his article in another place in this paper who had thirty-two children. Surely all those children were not dependent at one time upon that preacher for a support. If so, we wonder how he ever supplied them. Sure the deacons would have had a time getting up clothing, food, and all other things such a family might use-especially if it had been as times are now, with such luxuries as many people think they must have. Wonder if the brethren bought cars for all that family to ride in! Laying aside levity, we will say that though we do not know that preacher, or who he was, yet we are of the opinion that if he was faithful to his calling, and reared his children as the Lord directs, his and their needs were supplied. No doubt, though, that they lacked many of the luxuries that many people enjoyed. Most of the Lord's ministers are poor in the goods of this world, and it has ever been so. No doubt one reason the Lord has it so is that the temptations of riches are great and have a tendency to draw them away from the service of God and His humble poor. They must be poor themselves in order to know how to sympathize with the poor. Paul knew what it was to be poor. The Saviour had not where to lay His head. Would it not be a good thing for some of us preachers to try to investigate the good Book a little more to try to learn what our duty is, and then try to do it? Let us try to learn there just what to teach, and how to teach it. Let us try to learn there if it is not our duty to be ready and willing to make sacrifices, as well as for the brotherhood to make them. Then let us be conservative, and not try to teach that the whole burden should be placed on others, and none on ourselves. For ourselves we feel like sharing the burdens with our precious brethren, and for them, and not requiring them to bear all the burdens and us go free. We want to be down, or up, with them. We are sure it is a mistake to ordain a man to the ministry who does not have the qualifications inspiration has given. And it is also a mistake to ordain a man to the office of deacon who does not possess the qualifications. Ordination will not make a man a preacher. Neither will ordination make a man a deacon. When a man is ordained for a deacon, when he is not a deacon, he is simply put into a place where he does not belong. He does not fit there, and he will not be a blessing to the church in that place. "Consider what I say, and the Lord give thee understanding in all things."-Paul. Let us consider all these things. May the good Lord help us to do as He would have us do, and to honor Him in all our doings. C. H. C.

FROM THE GOSPEL STANDARD

February 15, 1929

It seems that some of the same conditions exist among the Particular Baptists of England that exist among our people in the United States. We have read with interest the leading article in the Gospel Standard for January, 1929, by Mr. J. K. Popham, the editor of that magazine. We wish we had space to copy the whole article, but it is so long that we do not have space for it all. But we will copy one paragraph from it, and suggest a careful reading and study of it. C. H. C.

THE PARAGRAPH

The next thing to notice is our practice. If it is found faulty, it will undoubtedly be the fruit of the loss of a proper sense of the paramount importance of doctrine, and a consequent neglect of it in our ministry, with a more or less shallow experience in our hearts of God and His glorious gospel. But practice is a tender point. We may allow a defect in judgment and experience, but an accusation against our conduct is intolerable. But are we clean? Is church discipline understood, known, and attended to? Is it not a fact that a member of a church may leave it, or be withdrawn from as a disorderly person, and be received by another church of the same faith and order among us without any reference to the first church, and in utter disregard of Matt, xviii. 17? Yea, and he may go forth and preach, and be received and encouraged by some of our ministers. Ought this to be? Again, have not some of our churches departed from the ancient simplicity of public worship? We have now our trained choirs, and in some of our chapels we find organs. Probably we shall yet have the choirs curtained off from the congregations. It is not denied that harmonious singing to the accompaniment of a well played organ is most pleasing to a musical ear, but let it not be forgotten that that sound is confined within the walls of the building, while an unmusical voice, harsh and unpleasing may all the while be one sound which expresses melody and grace in the heart. {Eph 5:19; Col 3:16} I have known causes where the people could not sing in their services, the hymns being read, and the Lord was present, as His mighty works among the people proved. But that was many years ago. Once more, are we not grievously worldly? Women and girls among us have their hair cut off, and their dresses made after the fashion of the day. And they are to be seen in our choirs, and worse, some of them are members of churches, and, while openly violating the Spirit's teaching, {1Co 9:13-16} dare to go to the Lord's table, and are permitted. Paul could say,"But if any than seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God" (verse 16). Alas! we of the "Gospel Standard" denomination cannot so speak. All our ancient landmarks are in danger of being removed, our standards are low, even moral standards. GOD WAS THERE FIRST March 1, 1929

In some notes sent us from the Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, of some talks made by different speakers there during the "Founder's Week Conference," was the following concerning an address delivered by J. Alexander Clark. Mr. Clark tells that God was with the natives in Central Africa long before he was there. This is plain and irrefutable evidence of the truthfulness of the doctrine advocated by the Primitive Baptists-that God is not dependent upon Bibles, preachers, churches, Sunday schools, leagues, societies, or the efforts of men to regenerate sinners-that in the work of regenerating sinners God does not use the gospel. He regenerates sinners as He pleases, whether the preacher is there or not. The tale the modern preachers tell that the Africans and other so-called heathen are dying and going to hell daily by the multiplied thousands for the lack of money and preachers is a hoax-a plain and palpable falsehood. It is told to get the hard-earned dollars from the people. They are simply making merchandise of the people. C. H. C. Mr. J. Alexander Clarke, from nearly thirty years of service in the Katanga highlands of Central Africa, held profound attention while telling of the victories of divine grace among the people whose language he has reduced to writing, and into which he has translated the New Testament. "Let me tell you of some of the amazing discoveries we made concerning that African people," said Mr. Clarke. "We found them a peaceable folk, extending a hearty welcome to all white men who went into that land. I had the privilege of going north into the Lubaland, one of the districts of Kotanga, and there I found a people never before visited by the white man, and this is the discovery that I made: Long before I set foot in Lubaland, God had been there. God had been there silently, yet eloquently testifying of His own power and deity, for all Africans of that tribe believe in God. In my study of the language and research work connected with the translation of the Holy Scriptures I found many names for God-the Father of Creation, the Ancient of many days, the breasted One (One who plays the part of mother to us). So God is known there. Then you say, 'Why go to them?' Not only did I find this great belief in God, but also a consciousness of sin. They fear 'Bulang,' the Forger of the eternal hills. And so we find them every new moon coming with reeking blood and pouring it out at the family altar and crying out to God. Here we have this people with the knowledge of God but no joy, no happiness, only foreboding, fear and distress. And that is why we go to them with the evangel of God's great love, for in the evangel we have the final and full revelation of God.''

UNREASONABLE DEMAND

March 1, 1929

We received a letter a few days ago from a sister in which she said, "I want a little advice from you. My husband and I are Missionary Baptists, and he objects to me taking your paper, but I hate to part with it. Do you think it right for me to take it anyway?" This is a question which is embarrassing to answer, but we will try to comply with it. Our religious preferences and privileges are personal and individual matters, and no person on earth has any right to object or interfere with the same. Such a spirit is not that of Protestantism, in its originality. It is not the spirit of liberty or freedom. It is a spirit of tyranny and domination. It is the same spirit manifested by Rome in the days of the inquisition and persecution. If the husband is taking a paper that he likes to read, the wife has the same right to object to his taking such paper as he has to object to her taking the religious paper of her choice. The avowed and declared Baptist principles have always been for freedom-freedom of thought, freedom of worship, and freedom of service according to the dictates of our own conscience. If a man claims to be a Baptist-either a Missionary or Primitive-he must stand for freedom if he stands for what he claims to be. We do not advise the sister to continue taking the paper of her choice against the wishes of her husband; neither do we advise her to quit. We simply state these plain facts as above, and leave her to exercise her own choice and pleasure in the matter without any suggestion from us as to what course she should pursue. It is a matter between her and her Saviour. C. H. C.

AN ANONYMOUS LETTER

March 15, 1929

We received a letter which did not have the writer's name signed to it asking about a statement made in the last issue of The Primitive Baptist by Elder Lee Hanks in his article. We will say for the information of the writer, if he does not already know it, that no attention is paid to an unsigned letter. If a person wants the editor to answer his letter he must give his name, though the name will not be published if the writer asks that his name be withheld from publication. If the writer wishes his question answered he must let the editor know who he is. C. H. C.

CHANGE MADE

March 15, 1929

For several months we have been trying to prayerfully consider the matter of having so many corresponding editors on the editorial staff of The Primitive Baptist and of continuing the Signal Department. We have tried to consider the matter from every standpoint we could think of. Our conclusion was that it is frequently the case that so many corresponding editors are carried on the staff for the prestige it is supposed to give the paper. Perhaps that was one thing which influenced us in soliciting the brethren to allow their names to be put on our staff as corresponding editors. We do not say this is what influenced us, but it may have had its weight. We have been made to wonder, in our considering the matter, if The Primitive Baptist is kept up and supported mainly on account of the names of the corresponding editors which appeared on the staff. In considering the matter and trying to pray over it we were made to feel that if this is the reason why the paper is kept up, then it ought to fail and go out of existence. In other words, if the paper itself is not worthy of support from the brotherhood, then it is not worthy of support at all, and should fail. This brought us to the conclusion that it might be best to drop the names of all the brethren from the editorial staff, and let the paper be tried out on its own merits. According to this feeling in the matter we wrote a letter to each brother whose name was on the editorial staff and asked his opinion in regard to the matter of dropping all the names from the staff and discontinuing the Signal Department. We heard from all but three. Some of them may have written us, but if they did we failed to get the letter. We enclosed an addressed and stamped envelope for a reply. One brother wrote: "I have for some time seen this as you do, but thought it a matter that rests entirely with you." Another brother said: "You are no doubt right in dropping all the associate editors and the Signal Department as you suggest, and I do not see how any could feel hurt with you for doing such. Too many associate editors are worse than none, because no one feels that he should exercise any particular interest in the paper, or that it is necessary for him to write for publication." Another brother said, among other things, "I really feel that your impressions along this line are not at all bad." Another brother wrote: "Will give you my thoughts on the subject. First. The Primitive Baptist is yours, owned and managed by yourself, and I have no desire to complain at you for the manner in which you handle it. Second. It is our paper, published in the interest of the Old Baptists, and every Old Baptist ought to do all he can to uphold it and support it. I have thought it was profitable for the paper to have corresponding editors to act as agents, soliciting subscriptions and writing for the paper, but I am sure that most, if not all, who are on your staff have gone to 'sleep.' I scarcely ever see anything in the paper from the most of them. I am guilty." This brother wrote more that we want to quote farther on in this article. But what we have quoted above from these brethren mainly expresses what they all wrote us in reply to our letter. Now there is another matter we wish to mention here which we did not mention in our letter to the brethren. That is this: Sometimes some local trouble comes up in the section where one of the editors live, and this places us in an embarrassing position, for we may be called on to take some part in that local trouble. We do not say such exists now, but we have had some experience in trouble coming up where some corresponding editor was involved, either directly or indirectly. When such things come up it is hard to steer clear of the trouble, and harder still to keep some from thinking we are taking sides. To try to avoid this in the future we have felt it would be best to drop all the names from the staff. Having received the letters we did from the brethren in reply to our letter, we have decided that perhaps the best course to pursue now would be to drop the names of the corresponding editors from the staff and to discontinue the Signal Department. This step is approved by Brother Collings and all the brethren on his staff-so they all expressed themselves in reply to our letter. We are taking this step in all good feeling toward every brother whose name was on the staff, and humbly beg that none of them feel hurt toward us. We sincerely believe it is the best thing to do, considering all things pertaining thereto. Referring to the statement above from one dear brother,"I have thought it was profitable for the paper to have corresponding editors to act as agents," etc. Perhaps it is sometimes profitable for the paper, but that brings in the financial side of the matter, and brings us right back to what we before said. That may be partly, at least, what influences in getting names on the editorial staff. We have come to the conclusion that if the financial part of it has had such influence it was the wrong influence. We mean to say that the interest and the good of the cause is the influence that we have been made to feel is what should prompt and govern in the matter. It is true that the paper cannot exist without financial support, but the financial part of the matter should not be the first incentive. Certainly no one can feel that we are taking the step we are here taking on account of financial interest. As we stated in our letter to the brethren, we desire that they write for the paper when they feel so impressed, and we also desire that they do all they can consistently to help extend the circulation of the paper. We desire them to do this only and solely on the merits of the paper and the benefit they may feel that the paper is to the cause of the Master. If they honestly believe and feel that the paper is not worth the price to the Lord's dear children, then we do not ask or expect them to do a single thing toward helping to extend the circulation. If the paper is not worthy of support on its merit, without prestige of the brethren's names, then let it go down. We do not wish to "ride on the reputation" of others. They have burdens enough of their own without having to lend us their names and reputation to "ride on" to succeed with the paper. Above, we said a brother wrote more which we wished to quote farther on. He said: "I think if you would drop such fellows as me, and perhaps some others, and give the others a 'jacking up,' and have them write often enough to keep a good supply of good interesting editorials on hand for you to put in the paper-and let me suggest that you write more, too; then I think, again, that it would be best to cut out the personal correspondence that is not of much interest except to those who are personally concerned; and further that you insist that all who contribute to the paper be short and pointed in their writing-then I think we would have a better paper. I know quite well that you can't do all this; you can only publish what is sent in." Much of what this dear brother has here said is good; very good. We admit our shortcoming in not writing more for the paper ourself. We could render many reasons and excuses as to why we have not written more, but they would do no good now. The best we know along that line is to try to resolve to try to do better from now on. We will only say that some things which we have had to pass through and endure have had some effect in regard to our writing. But we will try again to do better along this line. Pray the Lord to help us. Another thing-that personal correspondence. It is sent to us with the request or expectation of it being published; yet we have not published near all such matter as has been sent. But when we do not, then perhaps some think we have not treated them right. But we have so much more matter sent us for the paper than we have room for that we could not publish all if we desired to do so, and if we thought it would be best for the cause. The paper will only hold so much in each issue and no more-and we cannot stand the expense of printing and sending out more issues. So what are we to do? The only course we know is to try to select from what we have such as we feel is best and insert that and let the rest wait. We are behind now from last November. But please remember that the more we have on hand the more we have to select from. So do not quit writing on this account. We do sincerely wish that all would try to be short and pointed in their writing. Do not try to cover too much ground in one article. Better write two or three short articles, each one complete, on the same subject, than to have one long article. Long articles are tedious and frequently become tiresome. Reader interest is lost in continued articles. Please be brief. We especially insist that the writers of obituaries be brief and leave out all poetry. Another thing: Please do not try to compose or write poetry, unless you know something about poetical feet, and something about rythm. Simply finding words that rhyme and putting them at the end of the lines is not writing poetry. We have been very much embarrassed with productions along this line by good meaning brethren and sisters. Pleadingly, we ask, please don't. We will, the Lord willing, have an important change to announce in the paper soon. But we have had to give up the idea of making the paper a weekly now. Perhaps, if it is the Lord's will, we can do that some day, but not now. There are not subscribers enough to justify it. But we have a change to announce very soon that we believe will please all our readers. Please pray the Lord to help us publish the paper with no other end in view than the comfort, benefit, consolation, encouragement, and instruction of His humble poor, the advancement of His blessed cause and truth, and the glory of His adorable name. C. H. C.

NO SIN, NO SALVATION

April 1, 1929

The Absoluters have been charged by our people with believing and advocating the idea that sin was necessary in order to salvation, and occasionally one has denied it, when it seemed evident it was to their advantage to deny it. But it has come out in print, in clear cold type, on page 17 of the Lone Pilgrim for January, 1929, published at Selma, N. C, by Elder H. F. Hutchens, editor and proprietor. The article is headed "Predestination," by Elder J. R. Hatcher, and is a letter written by him dated Lyles, Tenn., May 12, 1927, and addressed to Elder James W. Linn, Hammond, W. Va. Of course Elder Hutchens endorses the sentiment in the article, as he published it without criticism. If he does not endorse it, and will say so in plain English, we will be glad to tell our readers so. Here is what Elder Hatcher says: "In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." They ate and they did die, and God executed His judgment on them, and they did die. This death was in the purpose and foreknowledge of God, and God meant it for good; for if they had not eaten thereof how could we poor sinners have been saved? There you have it, in plain terms! Of course the contention is that without sin there could have been no salvation-not one of all the race of Adam could ever possibly enter the glory world had they not committed this sin! This does not make salvation in heaven depend upon good works performed by a member of Adam's family-no, not on that! But upon what does such salvation depend? According to this article it depends upon sin-disobedience to the just and holy law of the infinitely just Creator! If no one could have been saved without this, then salvation depends upon this. If salvation depends upon sin, then does not sin make salvation certain? If not, why not? If sin does not make salvation certain, then salvation does not depend upon sin, as Elder Hatcher says it does. If salvation depends upon sin, as Elder Hatcher says, then it necessarily follows that the more sin one commits the more certain his salvation would be. Do some of these fellows want to commit more sin in order to make their salvation more certain? The original Arminian theory is that the eternal salvation of the sinner depends upon the good deeds that he performs. But we suppose these Absoluters have a new and improved patent on the original Arminian theory. If eternal salvation depends upon the good deeds one performs, of course the more good deeds one does the more certain his salvation would be. Hence the idea taught by the Arminian world has been this: Perform a great many good and commendable deeds, and thereby be certain of entering the glory world at and after death. To say the least of it, the old Arminian theory might encourage to right moral living, if it could do no more, when presented in this light. But this new invention of conditional salvation makes sin and wickedness the condition instead of right living and good deeds. It bids a premium on sin and wickedness. According to this theory if a man desires to make his eternal salvation sure, then he should lie, steal, kill, commit adultery, rape, swear, rob, murder-and if any other sin can be conceived of, do that also! Why? Because Elder Hatcher says eternal salvation depends upon sin! O Lord God, how merciful thou art, to spare men to enjoy life and health who will thus blaspheme thy holy and righteous and matchless name! "And not rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm that we say,) Let us do. evil, that good may come?"-Ro 3:8. Here the eminent Apostle Paul informs us that some reported, or told, that he advocated the idea of doing evil that good may come, but that such a report on him was a slanderous one. If anyone should tell that Elder Hatcher advocates the doctrine of doing evil that good may come, and that such a doctrine is maintained in the Lone Pilgrim (Lone Pilgrinder, as Brother Copeland calls it), it would not be a slanderous report, but would be the truth told on them. As Paul denied advocating such a doctrine, and as it is advocated in that paper by Elder Hatcher, then they do not advocate the same doctrine Paul did. Did Paul advocate the true doctrine? or do these modern teachers advocate it? We are inclined to think these modern teachers are wrong and that Paul was right. But let us go back and examine some other things said in the article from Elder Hatcher. On page 4 we find this paragraph: Right HERE His compass stands, perfectly levelled by the power of the Eternal Jehovah, and right HERE is where the truth existed, and where the Fountain was, and our God was, is, and will always be the FIRST great CAUSE of ALL THINGS, and upon IT, ALL worlds, creatures and things must depend. The emphasis is his. Note that he says that God "was, is, and will always be the first great cause of all things." Is it not passingly strange that some will advocate such a theory as this, and then some of their brethren will deny that they believe that God is the author of sin, or that sin comes from God as the great fountain from whence all things emanate? Let us try this just a little: Who caused Adam to violate God's law in the Garden? The answer would be, Eve. Then, who caused Eve to cause Adam to transgress? The answer would be, Satan. Then, who caused Satan to cause Eve to cause Adam to transgress? The answer would necessarily be, God caused Satan to cause Eve to cause Adam to transgress. Then, where did that sin come from? Where did it originate? No man under heaven can escape the inevitable conclusion that it came from God. Does sin come from God? Did it ever come from Him? No! a thousand times NO! "A God of truth and without iniquity.''-De 32:4. He was without iniquity when Moses penned this language; and as He changes not, He has always been without it. As He has always been without it, then it never came from Him, and He is not now and never has been the first great cause of sin. As He is not the first great cause of sin, then He is not the first great cause of all things."Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be."-Jas 3:10. If God is the first great cause of all things, then He is the first great cause of some things that ought not so to be, or else James was mistaken. Was James mistaken? If so, how did you find it out? Was he an inspired man? and did he pen this language by inspiration? Did God inspire him to say"these things ought not so to be,'' when He was the first great cause of them being? Is God thus guilty of double dealing? Let us have another expression from Elder Hatcher in that article: "To my mind, God either predestinated ALL things, or else He predestinated NOTHING!" (Emphasis is his.) Paul tells us that God predestinated us unto the adoption of children, but tells us nothing about God predestinating the sins and devilment and murder, theft, robbery, rape, and such crimes as are committed by wicked men and devils; but the Lone Pilgrinder and the correspondents, or some of them, do not believe God predestinated what Paul says he did, unless He also predestinated all those abominable things which Paul does not say He predestinated. But let us have another expression from this great source of wisdom: HERE is the Supreme God at the helm of the entire universe holding in HIS grasp ALL events of time in the chain of His divine providence, so definitely FIXED, determined, and APPOINTED so that neither man nor devils can break a single link in this chain of events, which were so minutely and precisely determined beforehand by this high and lofty KING! (Emphasis is his.) Here it is! God has so definitely fixed, determined and appointed all events of time so that neither man nor devils can break a single link in this chain of events. If that be so, then the eternal God, in the ancients of eternity, so definitely fixed, determined, and appointed that we should write just what we are now writing that neither men nor devils can break this link in the chain of events. Yet these Absoluters try to tear up what we write! Thus they try to destroy what they say neither man nor devils can destroy! They try to tear up and destroy God's predestination-if it is true, as they claim, that God did absolutely and unconditionally predestinate every event that transpires! Now, watch 'em vent their wrath and spleen on us. If their doctrine is true we could not do otherwise than write what we do write. It is one of the events that God has so unalterably fixed in the chain of events that neither men nor devils could destroy the little link. If that be so, why not raise the "racket" with the Almighty God for fixing it that way, if you do not like it? Some time ago a brutal negro in Little Rock, Ark., enticed a young girl into a church building there and brutally murdered her and hid her body in the tower in the building. According to these Absoluters this was one link in the chain of events that was so minutely and precisely determined, so definitely fixed, determined, and appointed by the infinitely just and holy God that neither men nor devils could prevent or change it! The negro could not change it! He could not have done otherwise than the way he did-according to these Absoluters! God fixed it that he should do that way! On page 13 of that paper the elder says,"The most wicked acts of men, or even devils, were in the predestination of God." "They cannot be otherwise, for God has sworn to them, and HE cannot lie." There you are! God swore that this brutal negro should murder the girl; the negro could not help it; he could not do otherwise! Good Lord! if this doctrine is not worse than the accusation that Jesus cast out devils by the prince of devils then words are meaningless and convey no ideas at all. God's humble poor who have been made, by the light of His Holy Spirit, to hate and abhor sin, should forsake, turn from, and spurn from them such teaching and such teachers. They should have no fellowship for such "unfruitful works of darkness." We frankly confess that we have no desire to "tie up" with such a doctrine, for we have no fellowship for it. May God help us all to forsake every false way, and to humbly seek for the truth and then to walk in the good old way, is our prayer. C. H. C.

CHANGE OF FORM

April 15, 1929

In our issue of March 15 we said: "We will, the Lord willing, have an important change to announce in the paper soon. But we have had to give up the idea of making the paper a weekly now. Perhaps, if it is the Lord's will, we can do that some day, but not now. There are not subscribers enough to justify it. But we have a change to announce very soon that we believe will please all our readers.'' Well, the change has been made, and The Primitive Baptist comes to you this time in magazine form, containing sixteen pages. For some time, you know, we have been sending the paper out on the first and fifteenth of each month. This gave our subscribers twenty-four issues of the paper each year. But from now on The Primitive Baptist will be published every other week. After this issue the paper will be dated on every other Thursday. This issue is dated April 15, 1929, and makes the two issues for this month. The next issue will be dated Thursday, May 2, and then you will get the paper every other week from then on. This will give our subscribers two more issues of the paper in a whole year than we have been getting out heretofore. However, for the year 1929 there will be just twenty-five issues in all. Another change we announce in this issue is a slight change in the subscription price. The regular price heretofore has been $2 a year, and to ministers and widows $1.75 a year. From now on the price will be only $1.75 a year, 90 cents for six months, or 50 cents for three months. The price will be the same to all alike. Outside the United States the price will be $2.50 a year, on account of the extra postage it costs us, and extra cost of separating them from the other mail. Years ago the "Abstract of Principles," or Articles of Faith, were published in each issue of the paper, showing the principles the paper stands for. These have been left out for a long time. You will find them appearing again elsewhere in this issue, and it is our intention to keep them in the paper all the time, so that any person into whose hands the paper may fall may see at once what principles of doctrine and practice the paper stands for. In the present size and make up, or form of the paper, it will be much more convenient to file away and keep and to make a book of them at the end of the year. For several years we have not printed an index at the end of the year, or at the end of the volume. The pages have been numbered from 1 to 16 through the paper each issue. If you will notice the number of the pages in this issue, and the issues already printed this year, except January 15, you will see that they are numbered from the beginning of the year. At the end of the year we expect to print an index for the year. This will make it much easier and much more convenient for you to find any article later that has been published in the paper. We believe our subscribers will all like these changes. Of course we do not know they will, but we have made them, believing it would please all. We would be glad to have an expression from each and every one as to how you are pleased with the changes. Be free to express yourself. But another thing we want to call attention to, and that is this: We are now using a better grade of paper than we have been using heretofore. The paper this issue is printed on, and which we will use now is stronger and will last better than that we have been using. Another thing: From now on our editorials will begin on the first page, if we have any. We will try to write Jennifer something for every issue of the paper, although sometimes we have felt very little like writing. Perhaps if we try to write more we may get to feeling more like writing. We do not know, but this may be a little like trying to preach. When one does not try often he gets so he does not feel much like trying. But when he tries more often he gets so he feels more like trying. We may not know anything about it, but this has been our experience. It is our desire to continue to try to conduct The Primitive Baptist in such a way as to benefit the Lord's humble poor, and to advocate and maintain the great principles of truth that have been handed down to us from our forefathers, and that were dear to their hearts, and which we love, and were given to the church by the Lord Himself. We desire to still be just simply a plain old-fashioned Old Baptist. It is the church our Lord established while He was here on earth, and it needs no annexes, no additions, and no subtractions. The practice He has laid down in His word, and the principles of doctrine therein expressly taught are enough. If they are not enough, then He did not know what would be needed in these times. What He gave was, and is, sufficient for all time. It is as much a violation of His law to practice or teach what His word does not command or teach as it is to leave off what He has expressly commanded or taught. Now we ask you to please remember us in your prayers. Pray the Lord to give us wisdom and courage and strength to publish His blessed truth, both from the pulpit and from the press. And pray for our loved ones, especially our dear companion who does all she can to help us and to encourage us to go on in the discharge of every duty the Lord requires of us. She spends many lonely and lonesome hours by day and by night when we are away, and has the whole care of our dear children. Her burdens are many and heavy, but she bears them all bravely and lovingly and cheerfully. Again we say, pray for us. C. H. C.

EVOLUTION DISPROVED

April 15, 1929

We have received from the author, Rev. William A. Williams, 1202 Atlantic Ave., Camden, N. J., a book called "Evolution Disproved." In this book the author makes fifty arguments, each of which clearly disproves the doctrine or theory of evolution. Mr. Williams shows from a number of mathematical calculations, problems in simple arithmetic, that evolution cannot be true. It is true there are a few statements in the book, but not on evolution, which we cannot accept, and on which we do not agree with the author. But that does not prevent us recommending the careful reading and studying of the same. Evolution is simply infidelity under another name, and it is being taught in our schools. It denies the work of God in creation; it denies the virgin birth of our Saviour; it denies any future state or existence of man after the death of the body. Get a copy of this book and read it and study it, and encourage your children to read and study it. It is good clear print, on good paper, and well and neatly bound in cloth. Price $1 a single copy. Send your order to us or to the author at the address given above. Just here we want to copy a few lines from the work. On page 122, under the heading, "Five Tremendous Facts," paragraph 1 says: Jesus, a peasant, is hailed today as King by people speaking 750 languages and dialects, in all climes, and of all classes. People of every color raise to Him the song of praise and crown Him "Lord of all." There is nothing like this in all history. No other has ever approached this degree of sovereignty. His kingdom pervades the world. It is a fact that challenges thought. No world conqueror has ever had such an empire. Beside this the royalty of men like Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, Napolean, and more modern aspirants is shadowy and ghostlike. His is an abiding and spiritual dominion. Beginning again on page 124, under the heading,"The Meaning of the Facts," we read: What shall we say of this Man? He accepted Peter's tribute. He allowed Jews to take up stones to stone Him for claiming to be the Son of God. He was conscious of being divine. He forgave sins, which is God's prerogative. He promised rest to the weary soul, which the Old Testament set forth as God's own gift. He said that He came to give life eternal, although God is the giver of life. He said that none could know the Father except through Him. He spoke to God of the glory which they shared together before the world was. Just in proportion as men have acknowledged His claims in their hearts have they found peace with God and conquest over sin and fear of worldly evil. As we consider all these things we are led to repeat Peter's confession, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," for God the Father's face shines upon us through Him and heaven is opened to us as we look upon Him. In the heart of this the purest of men was the clear, constant consciousness that He was divine. He always spoke and acted consistently with this consciousness. Unique in character, He made claims that would have stamped any other man as an impostor. Humility and majesty dwell together in Him. He could say, "I am meek and lowly in heart," and also "I and my Father are one." He would call men His "brethren'' and yet accept from them the words, "My Lord and my God." This wonderful character came of a race that had for ages looked for the coming of a Messiah, and whose prophetic literature was burdened with this hope. After His death His disciples who were heartbroken and cowed became inspired with a heroism that cheerfully faced martyrdom. All these facts are shining lights that point to the truth which Peter confessed. That truth is enshrined in the triumphant words of the Te Deum, "Thou art the King of glory, O Christ. Thou art the everlasting Son of the Father.'' And the Christ of history, the exalted Son of God, is a living Presence with us today. Not remote but ever near, He walks by our side in all life's experiences. Not only enthroned in heavenly glory "But warm, sweet, tender, even yet A'present help is He, And faith has still its Olivet And love its Galilee." Such is our wonderful Saviour, a Friend with human heart of sympathy who has trod our pathway and is touched with the feeling of our infirmities; a Shepherd who gave His life for the sheep in an all-atoning sacrifice; an Advocate who represents us with all-prevailing power before the throne of the Judge Eternal; a Champion who can break the power of canceled sin and set the prisoner free; a Victor who can smite death's threatening wave before us; a Lord in whom we see the beauty and glory of the face of God. We are called upon to confess Him with lip and life. To us to live is Christ. Knowing Him we have eternal life. We have all the soul needs in Jesus. There is no substitute for Him. None can share His throne in our hearts. The Kingdom is His who is the Christ-the anointed King. Our joy is in Him, where all fullness dwells. We can say with Charles Wesley,"Thou, O Christ, art all I want,'' and our daily life should be one of close, constant communion with Christ. The foregoing copied from Evolution Disproved, is good reading to us. Is it not good to you? What wonderful and precious truths contained therein! We believe and feel that Rev. Williams has an experimental knowledge of the Lord, and has been brought into divine relationship with Him.

C. H. C. ORGANS IN CHURCHES

May 2, 1929

In The Primitive Baptist of November 16, 1909, we made the following statement: If a church in our association (the Greenfield) should introduce an organ into her service, the sister churches would at once labor with her to get her to remove it. If she failed to do so, she would certainly be dropped from our union. This is what we would do. But your question has in it, "Should they do so?" We most emphatically, yet kindly, say yes. Law worship and law service has been closed out, and have no place in the gospel church. We could as consistently admit into our churches and fellowship the whole brood of Arminian law worship, service and practice, as we could admit the organ part of it. As for our part we want none of it. We do not know what the sentiment of the Greenfield Association is now, as we have been away from that part of the country since the latter part of October, 1919; ten years after the above was written we left that state, and it has now been more than nineteen years since it was written. We knew the sentiment of that association then. Our sentiment is the same now that it was then. We believe the sentiment of a large part, or nearly all, of that association is the same now. The above has been the sentiment of a large body of the Primitive Baptists all along the ages. The organ has never been an appendage in the service in the church of God. True, organs have occasionally been introduced among them in some localities, but as a people they have always rejected them. It may be that they have, all along, kicked about organ Baptists and swallowed a key fork. They have, all along, objected to the use of organs in their churches, whether they swallowed key forks or not. On September 26, 1698, the Episcopalians sent a letter to the Baptists in Philadelphia, Pa., asking their reasons why they could not unite in communion with them. The Baptists gave an answer in a letter dated March 11, 1699. The Baptists demanded that the Episcopalians give Scripture authority "that instruments of musick are to be used in God's worship, under the New Testament; that infant baptism is a duty; that pouring or sprinkling water is the right manner of baptizing; that your manner of administering the sacraments, and signing with the sign of the cross in baptism are of divine appointment; that godfathers and godmothers are of divine appointment. These are some of the things we desire you to prove and make plain to us by the holy Scriptures." See Benedict's History of the Baptists, page 492, Volume 2, edition of 1813. Another thing which those Baptists then demanded was, "That you will give us clear and infallible proof from God's holy word, * * * that our Lord Jesus Christ hath given power and authority to any man, men, convocation, or synod, to make, constitute, and set up any other laws, orders, officers, rites and ceremonies, in His church, besides those which He hath appointed in His holy word; or to alter or change those, which He hath therein appointed, according as may, from time to time, to them seem convenient; and that we are bound in conscience towards God, by the authority of His word, to yield obedience thereunto; or whether it will not rather be a sore reflection upon the sufficiency of the Holy Scriptures, and a high defamation of the kingly and prophetical offices of Jesus Christ, to suppose such a thing." It is clearly seen from the above quotation that the Baptists formerly rejected the use of organs in their churches-that they would not allow instrumental music in their assemblies. In 1859, after the division in the Baptist family on account of the introduction of the new things adopted by those who went with the modern Missionary element, David Benedict wrote his book called "Fifty Years Among the Baptists.'' Remember that Benedict went with the modern Missionaries in the division. In this book he says, concerning the introduction of the organ among the Baptists: This instrument, which from time immemorial has been associated with cathedral pomp and prelatical power, and has always been the peculiar favorite of great national churches, at length found its way into Baptist sanctuaries, and the first one ever employed by the denomination in this country, and probably in any other, might have been seen standing in the singing gallery of the old Baptist meeting house in Pawtucket, about forty years ago, where I then officiated as pastor; and in process of time, this dernier resort in church music was adopted by many of our societies which had formerly been distinguished for their primitive and conventicle plainness. The changes which have been experienced in the feelings of a large portion of our people has often surprised me. Staunch old Baptists in former times would as soon have tolerated the Pope of Rome in their pulpits as an organ in their galleries, and yet the instrument has gradually found its way among them, and their successors in church management, with nothing like the jars and difficulties which arose of old concerning the bass viol and smaller instruments of music. Benedict then goes on to tell how these instruments were gradually introduced into the churches. We quote the above to show that it was a new thing among the Baptists, and those who favored this new thing also favored the other new things that were invented by Fuller, Carey and others, which new things finally brought on the division among the Baptists, and from which sprang the people now called Missionary Baptists. Organs in churches were first used by the Catholics. Benedict tells us that the old staunch Baptists "would as soon have tolerated the Pope of Rome in their pulpits as an organ in their galleries," or churches. This was a principle of the old Baptists, of the staunch Baptists. If that was a principle of a staunch Baptist then, how about the man called a Baptist that now favors the toleration of such in his church? Is he a staunch Baptist, according to this witness? As for us, we just wish to say, in conclusion, that it is still our desire to be just simply a plain old-fashioned Old Baptist. May the Lord help us all to take the Bible as the man of our counsel, and do just what it says do, and leave everything else alone. C. H. C.

SECRET ORDERS

May 2, 1929

We have received the following request: "Write your views on Masonry and publish the same in The Primitive Baptist as soon as you can, giving your best text in condemnation of Masonry and secret orders." We do not have the time right now to write an article on this question, but feel like it would be just as well, or better, to give our readers an article on this subject from the pen of the late Elder John R. Daily which was published in The Primitive Baptist of August 23, 1910, under the heading, "The False Religious Principles of Secret Orders." Elder Daily was an able man and an able writer, and in this article he gives good and unanswerable arguments and reasons why Primitive Baptists should not affiliate with secret orders. We will just say here that there is one command in God's word which no man can obey and be a lodge member and a member of the Primitive Baptist Church at the same time. If A belongs to the lodge, his first duty as a lodge member is to his brother in the lodge. Suppose A and B are both members of the same lodge, and A and C are members of the Primitive Baptist Church. As a member of the lodge A's first duty is to his brother B; as a member of the church his first duty is to his brother C. Both of them cannot be first. For proof that his first duty is to his brother C as a church member we give you this text: "As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith."-Ga 6:10. If there were no other reason this is reason enough why no Primitive Baptist should be a lodge member. But we will here give the article by Elder Daily. Read it, and profit by it. C. H. C.

THE ARTICLE

I have been opposed to secret, oath bound fraternities ever since I became old enough to observe and know of their nature and operations. As I have studied their principles and operations I have become fully convinced that, in many respects, they are a curse rather than a blessing to society. A number of reasons can be given why no one should belong to them, but it is my purpose now to show why no Primitive Baptist ought to affiliate with them. While I am opposed to them from a social, moral and financial standpoint, it is from a religious standpoint that my greatest objections arise. It is objected, of course, that my not being a member of any secret order disqualifies me to judge of their nature. To this I will reply that I am glad indeed that I have never been enticed to those worldly institutions; as to my opportunities to become acquainted with their nature and operations, I beg leave to say that I have been able to learn all that needs to be known unless one wishes to become a member, which is amply sufficient for my present purpose and sufficient to keep me out of them all of my life. With the information I possess of secret orders I would not belong to one of them even if I did not profess the religion of Jesus. Without entering any lodge I have been able to learn much by observing their public exercises of a religious character, also from their published literature, and from expositions that have been made by seceders. Many of their secrets have "leaked out," enough to utterly disgust me with them, and, besides, it is claimed by them that the chief use of their secrets is for the purpose of recognition. If that be true, one does not have to become a member, does not have to know their "secrets" to be able to discover their fallacious nature. Secret orders are, in general, religious orders. Who can read the prayers offered in the Freemason and Odd Fellow lodges and say conscientiously that they are not religious organizations? There is no disputing it. Take, for instance, the prayer offered at the initiation of a candidate to the degree of Entered Apprentice in a Freemason Lodge, as given on pages 26 and 27 of the "Craftsman and Freemason's Guide:" "O thou supreme Author of our being and lover of our souls;-thou art everywhere present, and knowest the thoughts and intentions of our hearts; bless us we pray thee, in our endeavors to do good, and spread peace and concord and unity among our fellow men. May this, our friend, who is now to become our brother, devote his life to thy service and his talents to thy glory. May he be endowed with wisdom to direct him in all his ways, strength to support him in all his difficulties, and the beauty of morality to adorn his life. May he set thee constantly before his eyes, and seek thy approbation as his greatest treasure. May he become enlightened in the knowledge of divine things, and be induced to love thee from thy manifest love to him. And may he and we regulate our actions by the light of revealed truth, and to construct our spiritual edifice, that when done laboring as apprentices in this lower temple, we may be raised to the sublime enjoyments of the upper sanctuary-in that temple not made with hands, eternal in the heavens, whose maker and builder is God. Amen." This shows Freemasonry to be religious and to hold to the unscriptural theory that they can so construct their own "spiritual edifice'' as to "be raised to the enjoyment of the upper sanctuary." Is it possible that any Primitive Baptist can have fraternal relations with such a religious sect as that? It seems unreasonable. Take, as another specimen, the prayer at the close of a lodge meeting of Odd Fellows, as found on pages 99 and 100 of the "Odd Fellow's Textbook:" "We bless thee, O Lord, that we have been permitted to enjoy this, another lodge meeting. Pardon what thou hast seen amiss in us; and now, as we are about to depart, let thy blessings be with us, and with our brethren throughout the globe. May brotherly love prevail, and every moral and social virtue adorn our lives, while members of the Lodge below, and at last be admitted to the joys of a better world: and thine be the glory, forever and ever. Amen." "The lodge below" is suggestive of the idea of a "lodge above." The idea is held forth in many prayers they offer that there is to be a transition from the "Lodge below" to the "Lodge above." How can any Primitive Baptist endure such blasphemy, comparing the lodge, the secret oath bound lodge, in which wicked people mingle with them and call them "Brother," comparing that lodge to heaven and immortal glory? Echo answers, "How!" It is a religious order, but what kind of religion does it promulgate? The following petition, suggested for the funeral service of Freemasons, is given on page 199 of the "Freemason's Guide:'And at last, Great Parent of the Universe, when our journey shall be near its end, when the silver cord shall be loosed, and the golden bowl broken; oh, in that moment of mortal extremity, may the 'lamp of thy love' dispel the gloom of the dark valley; and may we be enabled to 'work an entrance' into the Celestial Lodge above, and in thy glorious presence, amidst the ineffable mysteries, enjoy a union with the souls of our departed friends, perfect as the happiness of heaven, and durable as the eternity of God. Amen. So mote it be." Is the institution not a religious one? Are the members not taught that they can "work an entrance into the Celestial Lodge above?" Such Deistical, Arminian teaching! How can a Primitive Baptist ever endure it? In the "Ancient Constitutions" of Freemasonry, which are said to be "obligatory as fundamental regulations, in all parts of the world, "and are declared to be "absolutely requisite in all who aspire to partake" of the sublime honors of those who are duly initiated into the mysteries and instructed in the art of "ancient Masonry," there is found the following significant statement in Chap. I, Sec. First: "Whoever, from love of knowledge, interest or curiosity, desires to be a Mason, is to know that, as his foundation and great corner stone, he is firmly to believe in the eternal God, and to pay that worship to Him which is due to Him as the great Architect of the Universe." As it requires all who desire to become Masons, not only to believe in the eternal God, but to pay that worship to Him which is due, it is undeniable that Freemasonry is a religious order. Its religion is purely Deism. I am so glad that I have never aspired "to partake of the sublime honors of those who are duly initiated into the mysteries of ancient Masonry!" Indeed I am! In the Odd Fellows'nine "Chapters of Counsel," Chap. IV, Sec. 4, the following declaration is made: "Our infinite Creator, who is the Soul of all true friendship, and source of all Good; who is abundantly worthy of our love; and who may rightfully command our obedience-is the only proper object of our worship." Here is the doctrine of Deism again. The order would not dare to associate the name, the sweet name of Jesus, with the Father. That would be contrary to its doctrine. So Odd Fellowship is a worshiping or religious institution, but save us from its doctrine. I could multiply proofs of this kind, for I have an abundance at my hand, but I conclude a sufficiency of evidence has been adduced to show that secret orders are of a religious character. I am giving attention to the orders of Freemasonry and Odd Fellowship, because these are the chief ones after which all others have principally patterned. The public ceremonies at the laying of corner stones, the religious performances at the burial of the dead, etc., show that these fraternal orders are religious. Having shown that secret societies are religious, I now propose to present a few facts to prove that the religious principles upon which they are founded are absolutely false. I say a few facts, for my limited space forbids my giving anything like all that I could give along this line. We have already seen that the doctrine of such societies is Deism, a kind of belief in a God, but not of the God in Christ or Christ in God. Though there are many religious prayers and ceremonies, the sweet name of our adorable Jesus is not once allowed to be used. In orders where all possible religious beliefs are blended, it is absolutely necessary to accommodate all with religious principles which do not conflict with their beliefs, except it be the belief of the true child of God. His faith, if it is what it ought to be, comes in conflict with every principle of doctrine upon which such societies are founded. It could not be expected that the religious doctrine of secret orders would be correct, for they are all of the world, and the world is never right in religion. On page 34, "Masonic Jurisprudence," we find this declaration of principles: "Masonry does not attempt to interfere with the peculiar religious faith of its disciples, except so far as relates to the belief in the existence of God, and what necessarily results from that belief." In a footnote on the same page is the following: "On the subject of the religious, or rather the doctrinal, requirements of Masonry, the Old Charges utter the following explicit language: 'Though in ancient times, Masons were charged in every country to be of the religion of that country or nation, whatever it was; yet it is now thought expedient only to oblige them to that religion in which all men agree, leaving their particular opinions to themselves.' " According to this all Masons are obliged to some kind of religion, and that kind is the one in which all men agree. We will see what kind it is to which all the members are obliged by the order, the one in which all men agree, as they say. Odd Fellowship, Freemasonry, and all other secret orders, are founded upon the false religious dogma of Universalism-the dogma of the Universal Fatherhood of God and the Universal Brotherhood of man. In the Odd Fellows' Textbook, page 127, this false doctrine is predicated as the corner stone, the solid basis, on which the whole superstructure rests. "Man is a constituent of one universal Brotherhood, having come from the hand of a common Parent. * * * By it all nations, tongues, and creeds, may be brought to comprehend the motive for Fraternity. FRATERNITY. This is our corner stone. Upon its solid basis rests our superstructure. It teaches us to regard the great family of mankind as our brethren; children of one heavenly Father, the great Author of our existence." Think of it! The great corner stone of Odd Fellowship is the greatest falsehood, the greatest religious error that was ever propagated. If we are children of one heavenly Father, as Universalists and Odd Fellows teach, then we are all heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus (though Odd Fellows discard Jesus from all their religious service), and Univer-salism is unquestionably true. How can a Primitive Baptist belong to a religious, secret order, the corner stone of which is such a monstrous heresy? For the life of me I cannot see how. The doctrine of Freemasonry is the same. A statement is given in one of the twenty-five Landmarks of Freemasonry, which declares this in plain terms,"But the doctrine of Masonic equality implies that, as children of one great Father, we meet in the Lodge upon the same level-that on that level we are all traveling to one predestined goal." They say they are all traveling to one predestined goal, being all children of one great Father, though many of them are profane prostitutes. Predestination is made to play an important part in this doctrine of Masonry. What God has predestinated must come to pass. Then all, wicked wretches as well as various followers of God, will reach the one predestined goal- heaven-as children of the one great Father, according to the doctrine of this secret, oath bound, heretical order. Again,"Craftsman and Freemason's Guide," page 35: "By the exercise of brotherly love we are taught to regard the whole human species as one family, the high and the low, the rich and the poor, who, as created by one Almighty Parent, and inhabitants of the same planet, are to aid, support, and protect each other." So they believe that not only members of the order are children of God, but the whole human species. That God is our Father because He created us is the chief corner stone of Universalism, as false as any falsehood could be. This sets aside any necessity of the new birth in order to see and enter into the kingdom of heaven. In the doctrine of these secret orders no such necessity is recognized. Christ Himself is not a necessity in the religious principles of secret orders. It is a common thing to hear members of secret orders say, "There is good enough religion in the lodge for me." They say if one lives up to the requirements of the lodge he will get to heaven. There may be good enough religion in the lodges for the world, for their religious heresies suit the world, but how a child of God, one who wants to know and practice the truth, can stand such religious heresies, I am wholly unable to see. On the other hand, some who want to make an excuse for belonging to them, say,"Oh, they are not religious institutions at all; they make no pretensions to religion.'' We have already seen how unfounded such a statement is. The very foundation of them is religious heresy, and their ceremonies are of a religious character of the most disgusting kind, seeing they are not only false, but that the most irreligious and profane engage in them as a vain show. Having shown that the religious doctrine of secret orders is Deism and Universalism combined, I now propose to show that it is Arminian. The doctrine of salvation as taught by the religious writings, prayers and ceremonies of secret orders is conditional, as it holds forth the idea that man can by his own efforts prepare himself for the "Lodge above," as they term heaven. Though this conflicts somewhat with the Universal platform upon which these heretical institutions are predicated, yet such is the doctrine, contradictory though it is. In the Odd Fellows' Textbook, page 154, is found this statement of religious doctrine: "Virtue alone is happiness. It gives joy which none but he who practices it can understand. Its influence is felt and acknowledged even by the bad. It will be the crown of age, the honor of manhood, the guardian of youth: it will be our guide in prosperity, and solace in affliction. It will give us here on earth the truest happiness (this is well enough so far, but notice), and prepare us for the future state to which we are hastening." Suppose I should preach in the pulpit that what we do in the way of practicing virtue prepares us for the happiness of heaven. All would unite in crying me down as an Arminian. Yet this abominable heresy is the doctrine of Odd Fellowship. This heretical teaching is given as inducement to practice virtue. There is no need of being born again, no need of a Saviour, to prepare us for the glory world; just practice virtue and you'll get there. Such is the doctrine of this oath bound order, such is its religious teaching. How about Freemasonry? Let us see. "The lamb has, in all ages, been deemed an emblem of innocency; he, therefore, who wears the lambskin of Masonry, is thereby continually reminded of that purity of life and conduct, which is essentially necessary to his admission into the Celestial Lodge above, where the Supreme Architect of the Universe presides."-Freemason's Guide, page 29. A member of the Primitive Baptist Church would surely feel strange in wearing the lambskin to be reminded thereby that his entering heaven, which he is taught to regard as "the Celestial Lodge above," is conditioned upon what he does himself, Christ and the new birth cutting no figure in the matter of his salvation at all. In this he is professing to believe two contradictory doctrines, the doctrine of the Bible and the doctrine of Freemasonry. How can he ever endure to wear the lambskin under such teaching as that, with conflicting faith revolving in his mind? Odd Fellows believe that we are brought at last to a peaceful and pleasant abode by continuous struggles of our own, notwithstanding their conflicting faith that we are all the children of God and bound to the "Celestial Lodge above." The religious doctrine of the world has never been known to be consistent even with itself, and is always wrong in general principles. Notice what is given in the last Nine Chapters of Counsel: "But we must struggle on, though beset with danger, toil, and strife, through the wilderness of this world to our destiny. Let us therefore be stout of heart, and determine, through faith and energy, to overcome the obstacles that lie in our path. Let not fear or discouragement cause us to turn back after we shall have once entered upon our journey. Let us take honesty for our guide; however rough or uncouth he may seem, or whatever abuse may be heaped upon him by those who love him not, if we cling to him and follow him, he will assuredly bring us at last to a peaceful and pleasant abode." Now, who does the Odd Fellow expect to bring him to that final peaceful and pleasant abode? "Honesty." How is "honesty" to do this? By our following him and clinging to him. It all depends upon us, then, according to the religious doctrine of Odd Fellowship, whether we reach the peaceful and pleasant abode in heaven. No depending upon Christ, for He has nothing whatever to do with the system. Again see what is asserted in the third Section of the same Chapter: "It may be, even, that in following it (the journey to heaven) poverty and want shall beset thee: but keep up thy spirit; look not at present ease, which is but for a moment, but rather at future rest, which shall be everlasting.'' In the fifth Section this strong language is given: "Brother! cheer thee! Thou hast done well; thou art far on thy toilsome way. * * * In that glorious Rest, thou shalt behold the innumerable hosts who have traveled this path before thee. Thou shalt join 'the Patriarchs of the infant world,' and mingle thy voice with theirs in the music of the angels. Thou shalt dwell in the presence of the Most High, whose smile is heaven. Throughout the eternal ages of Jehovah thou shalt be the associate of angels and just men made perfect, in a land where, far more than this, Faith and Truth are lovely and divine." This needs no comment. The "Faith and Truth" referred to I suppose to be the heretical doctrine of Uni-versalism, Deism, and Arminianism, as a mingled mess of falsehoods, which are found here in the religious teaching of this and other secret orders. In the Charge upon the installation of a Master of a Lodge of Masons is the following instructions: "In short, by a diligent observance of the Bylaws of your Lodge, the Constitutions of Masonry, and, above all, the Holy Scriptures, which are given us as a rule and guide to your faith and practice, you will be enabled to acquit yourself with honor and reputation; and lay up a crown of rejoicing, which shall continue when time shall be no more." That will do for that. How does it suit a Primitive Baptist who professes to believe that Christ will give the crown to all His elect people when He comes to gather them as His own jewels? I write this in love for the dear cause of Christ, the cause most dear to me. I know it is argued that the lodge is beneficial for the purpose of assuring ourselves that we will be cared for if we get sick, and that if we die a sum will be due our families. One man who had been excluded from the Baptist Church, and then joined a secret order, said to me that when he was once sick no one came to see him. Now he said he belonged to a lodge and could depend upon that to take care of him. He was well able to hire nurses if he needed them. Besides it was a reflection upon himself to say he was no more thought of by his neighbors and brethren and sisters. If I live in such a way that no one will care for me if I should get sick, I will surely have too much good sense to complain. Purchased love and help is not to be appreciated like that which comes from the hearts of those we love and who love us. I confess that the charity that once prevailed has largely died out. But what is the cause of it? It is due to secret societies more than to any other one thing. Now, it is the general feeling that the order will attend to the needs of the needy, and so that former sociability, hospitality and charity have died away. What a pity this is! One thing is sure, I can trust Him who has said, "Cursed is the man that trusteth in man, or maketh flesh his arm," and who said, "Blessed is the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is." If I die in the poorhouse, or lie upon a bed of affliction and suffering without human aid, I can still say, "Though He slay me, yet will I trust Him." When I am called from this world of sin I expect to leave my loved ones, if any survive me, in the hands of a better support than any human institution of this wicked world. I expect to leave them all in the hands of Him who is the Father of the fatherless and the Husband of the widow. Away with the folly of looking to heretical, secret, oath bound societies for aid!

Dear brethren, beloved of the Lord,

"Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness." "Be not unequally yoked together with unbelievers." "Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you." These things are said to us by our dear Lord, and we ought to obey Him rather than man. I am sure we ought. Oh, listen to His word and obey it! I love His dear people who have been caught in the whirlpool of these unscriptural societies, the religious doctrine of which is directly antagonistic to the truth as it is in Jesus, and contrary to the experience of every child of God. You do not need the aid of such at all. I have never needed it and never shall. All I need is Jesus, the sinner's Friend. You may have all this world, give me Jesus. Yours in hope of heaven, John R. Daily.

Mt 16:18-19

May 16, 1929

We have been requested to give our views on Mt 16:18-19, and will try to write just a few lines. The text reads: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." The word Peter is translated from a word that means a piece of rock, a particle of rock, or of the rock family. The word rock is translated from a word which means the bed rock, the foundation rock, or foundation stone. De 32:4 "He is the Rock, His work is perfect." Here again we have the foundation stone, the bed rock. 1Co 10:4 "And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ." This word Rock, in this text is from the same word as that in Mt 16:18. The church is built upon Christ as the foundation upon which it rests. "Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God; and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner stone."-Eph 2:19-20. The apostle here tells us plainly that Jesus Christ Himself is the chief corner stone-the stone, the rock, the foundation upon which the church rests. This is a sure foundation, which shall never be moved. "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." The keys are used to lock and unlock the doors of a building. Up to this time the door of the kingdom of heaven, the church, had not been opened to the Gentiles. All those whom the Saviour had sent out up to this time had been forbidden to go among the Gentiles. After His resurrection He told His apostles to "go ye into all the world."-Mr 16:15. Their field of labor was now enlarged. Peter was the one who preached the first gospel sermon to the Gentiles. "And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe."-Ac 15:7. The time the apostle referred to was when he went to the house of Cornelius and preached the first gospel sermon to the Gentiles; and that was when the door of the church was opened to the Gentiles. God had made choice among the apostles that Peter should, by his preaching, open the door of the kingdom to the Gentiles, and they should be admitted into the blessings and privileges of gospel worship and service. These gospel privileges are yet granted to the Gentiles, though they may be taken from us on account of our disobedience and rebellion, as they were taken from the Jews for the same reason. If we do not wish to be deprived of these blessings and privileges we should awake from our lethargy, and "seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness." The Jews were cut off from these blessings because of unbelief; and the apostle warns us that "if God spared not the natural branches that sinned, take heed lest He also spare not thee." May the Lord help us to awyake to a full discharge of our each and every duty. C. H. C.

CONTRADICTED HIMSELF

May 16, 1929

A clipping from some newspaper has been sent to us containing an account of a discourse delivered in Dallas, Texas, by Dr. Lewis S. Chafer at the Schofield Memorial Church, of which he was then the pastor. We do not have space for the whole clipping, but we wish to copy two paragraphs from the report. He was preaching on the security of the believer. He said: God the Father has made an unconditional new covenant which cannot be broken. This is illustrated in every promise of salvation under grace. No human merit is recognized. {Joh 5:24} God the Son has, by His sacrifice, taken away all sin. It is sin alone that might separate from God, but Christ has died. {Ro 8:34} Men are now condemned for not accepting the provided Saviour. {Joh 3:18} Thus the only condemnation is removed from the one who accepts Christ. Notice that the Doctor says that God has made an unconditional new covenant, and yet the Doctor makes it depend upon the sinner accepting Christ. If it depends upon the sinner accepting Christ in order to it being fulfilled, then it is not an unconditional covenant. An unconditional covenant is one in which the principal party of the covenant agrees, or promises, to do a certain thing, or certain things, named in the covenant, and that promise or agreement is not hinged upon anything to be done, performed, or complied with by the party to whom the promise is made, or by the parties embraced in the promise. A covenant cannot be unconditional if there are any stipulations laid down therein for the other party to comply with in order to the fulfillment of the covenant. The Doctor says that sin alone may separate from God. Is it a sin for one to refuse to accept? If it is not a sin, then it cannot separate one from God, if sin alone may do that. If it is a sin for one to refuse to accept, then Christ has taken away that sin, as the Doctor says that "God the Son has, by His sacrifice, taken away all sin." According to the Doctor nothing but sin can condemn one of the race, and Christ has taken all sin away. If He did that for all the race, then what can condemn one of the race? If refusing to accept is not sin, it cannot condemn one, according to the Doctor. But the Doctor says Christ has taken away all sin and nothing but sin can condemn, and yet one is condemned for not accepting the provided Saviour! If these modern theologians do not "jumble" things up we do not know how one could go about doing so. Wonderful, wonderful, logic the Doctor has given us! C. H. C.

IN MISSISSIPPI

May 30, 1929

At the present writing (May 11, 1929) we are filling appointments in Mississippi, as arranged for us by Elder J. C. Huddleston, of Caledonia, Miss. When Brother Huddleston made the appointments and we received word from him telling us when and where they began we had but little time to make any arrangements to be from home. We had to leave without making much arrangement. We received the word from him on Monday, April 22, that the first appointment was at New Salem, near Walnut, Miss., on Friday, April 26. We left home on Thursday at noon and arrived at Middleton, Tenn., that night at 10 o'clock. Elder J. T. Davis met us at the train, and we spent the remainder of the night with him at his home. Friday morning he went with us to Walnut, Miss., where we were met at the train and conveyed out to the church. The congregation was not large there, as they told us the appointment was not very well circulated, but we enjoyed a very pleasant meeting. Saturday and Sunday we were at Little Hope Church. A very good congregation present both days, and a pleasant meeting. Elder Geo. W. Durbin lives near the church, and we enjoyed being with him. Elder Coy Wallis is pastor of this church and was with us. He continued with us until Friday following. On Monday and Tuesday we were with the Pleasant Hill Church. On account of bad roads near the church the services were held at the home of Brother Nance. A good congregation present both days, and the meeting was an enjoyable one both days. On Wednesday we were conveyed across the country, over some very rough roads, to Antioch Church. A very small crowd present. We were informed that not a male member was present, and just three sisters. A few "outsiders" were present. On Thursday and Friday we were at New Prospect, near New Albany, Elder Wallis still with us. He is pastor at Little Hope, Antioch and Pleasant Hill. Elder Jas. Duncan, of Memphis, Tenn., is the pastor at New Prospect. Elder W. L. Smith, of Oxford, was with us here on Friday. The congregation was not large either day, but the service was sweet and enjoyable. On Saturday morning we went to Tupelo on the train, where we were met by Friend Green and conveyed to his home and then to Union Church for service that afternoon. Had service there also on Sunday. A large crowd was present on both days. On Sunday a sister, whose name we think is Carden, came forward and asked for a home in the church. She was gladly received, her baptism to be attended to at the next regular meeting of the church. This church is in the Tombigbee Association. The others are in the Regular Baptist Association. On Monday and Tuesday we were at Pleasant Hill Church. Elder D. F. Hankins lives near the church, and is their pastor. A large crowd was present both days, and we enjoyed the service. The meetings were pleasant indeed. On Wednesday morning Elder Hankins conveyed us to New Hope Church, Hatley, where we had service Wednesday and Thursday. Elder J. C. Huddleston is the pastor of this church, and they think a lot of him. A large crowd was present both days, and they were sweet meetings. On Thursday, just as the service was about to be dismissed, a Brother Speed and wife came forward asking for a home with the church. He said he felt like he could not go away again without asking for a home with them. They were gladly received, and their baptism is to be attended to at the next regular meeting time. This is a lovely band of brethren and sisters, as well as other places we have visited on this tour. We spent one night at the home of Dr. Tubb, in Smithville, with his father who was sick and not able to be at the meeting. Brother Tubb is eighty-five years old and has been a faithful member of the church for many years. We trust that he may be restored to health again and once more blessed with the sweet privilege and pleasure of assembling with the brethren and sisters at the church. On Friday we were with the church at Bigbee, Elder Huddleston going with us. Elder Carter was also present with us, and he was also at Union the Sunday before, as was also Elder Conwill. This was another pleasant meeting, and we enjoyed our short stay with those brethren and sisters. A number of members of New Hope were there. The New Hope Association is to convene with them on Friday before the second Sunday in September. We would be glad to attend that meeting, but do not now think we can very well do so. Now, today, May 11, we were with Sulphur Spring Church. Elder Huddleston is pastor of this church, and his membership is here. The service was pleasant and delightful today, though not so large a crowd as some of the brethren seemed to expect, though we thought that did very well for Saturday. Brother W. M. Ford and wife, of Taylorsville, Miss., were present, with a daughter and son-in-law. We were pleasantly surprised to meet them here. We have been at Brother Ford's home several years ago. We are now at the home of a Brother Walters, who is blind, and where Elder Huddleston is making his home. We do not think it necessary to make mention of the names of all the brethren who conveyed us from place to place, and whose homes we visited. We have enjoyed the trip so far, and have been kindly received and well treated-much better than we feel to deserve. We appreciate every kindness that has been shown us, and pray that the Lord's richest blessings may rest upon them. The appointments close May 21, and then we expect to return to our humble little home, where we know our loved ones will be looking for us and longing for our coming. We are getting anxious for the time to come to start home. We desire an interest in the prayers of the Lord's dear children. Pray the good Lord to direct us in the right way, and to enable us to speak such things as will have a tendency to draw His children more closely together in love and sweet fellowship. If we know our poor heart, we trust we may never advocate a thing that would tend to cause confusion among them. C. H. C.

CHRIST'S BIRTHDAY

May 30, 1929

We have received the following question: "Please give me your views on when Christ was born. Most people think and claim that Christmas day is His birthday. I want to know what you think about it.'' As we have stated in our columns before, we so state again, that no man on earth knows the day the Saviour was born. But it is evident that He was not born in December, or any other winter month. On the night of His birth shepherds were keeping watch over their flocks by night. The flocks were in the open field, and the shepherds were keeping watch over them. That country is a colder country than the states in the Union where sheep raising is engaged in; and those who know anything about the matter of sheep raising know that in cold weather the sheep are not turned out in the pastures to graze, but are kept under shelter. This is enough to prove that He was not born in winter. The observing of December 25 as the birthday of the Saviour is nothing more nor less than an invention and institution of Roman Catholicism. C. H. C.

ANOTHER CHANGE

June 13, 1929

Before our dear brother, Elder J. J. Turnipseed, was called away arrangements had been made between him and Elder J. H. Phillips, of Huron, Tenn., to soon begin the publication of a new paper to be called The Primitive Paths. A prospectus had been printed and mailed out, making announcement of the proposed new paper. Arrangements were made for us to do the printing of the paper for them and to mail it out from this office. Since the sad death of our dear brother, Brother Phillips does not feel like going ahead with the undertaking. He does not feel like shouldering the responsibility alone. So the publication of The Primitive Paths had to be abandoned. There was just about enough type set for the first issue, and the expectation was for it to be mailed on the sixth day of June. Those articles are all in this issue of the paper. This sad, sudden and unexpected turn of affairs reminds us very forcibly that "man proposes, but God disposes." Our times are in His hand. How often our plans are all upset and overthrown! But still all our hope and trust and confidence are in a God who is never disappointed and whose plans are never overthrown. Since this sad stroke has befallen us, we have been trying again to beg the Lord to direct us as to what course we should pursue with The Primitive Baptist. Our readers know that we have been wanting to make it a weekly for some time; but we have been afraid to risk taking the step. We were afraid to risk following the impression without more subscribers (or a larger list) first. It seems that we have been afraid to "walk by faith" on this proposition. Now, we have fully decided to step right out and follow this impression, or desire, to publish The Primitive Baptist weekly. We feel to hope that if the Lord is in the matter the paper will be sustained. We trust our readers will put forth a double effort to double the circulation. Remember that the paper will come to you twice as often as every other week, and Christmas week will be the only week we expect to miss. This change will be made the first of July. The first issue of the weekly will be dated July 4, 1929. Please bear in mind that the support of the paper comes from the subscriptions. The few advertisements we publish do not support the paper-they only help to bear a very small part of the expense. They do not even pay the salary of one of the clerks we have to keep employed in the office. We use more than we receive from that source in sending the paper to poor saints who are not able to pay for it. We feel sure that those who are able to pay for the paper are willing for us to receive this fund which is used in this way. The price of the paper will now have to be made $2 a year, to all alike. This is as low as it can possibly be made. But until July first you can renew at $1.75 a year. Your renewal must be mailed not later than June 30 to get the benefit of this price. Pay for as many years as you wish to at this price until that time. How do you like this size type? Write a card and tell us. If enough of our readers tell us they want us to do so, we will set a part of the paper in this type when we change to the weekly. Please let us hear from you. Feel free to tell us how you feel about these things. We can't all have all things as we prefer them; but we desire to try to please the greatest number of the subscribers in those matters wherein we should try to please. Remember us in your prayers. Pray the Lord to direct us in the right way and to help us to "enquire for the old paths, where is the good way," and give us courage to "walk therein." C. H. C.

TRIP IN MISSISSIPPI June 27, 1929

In our issue of May 30 we gave an account of our trip in Mississippi up to the eleventh of May. The article was written on Saturday, May 11. We were at Sulphur Spring Church, the home church of Elder J. C. Huddleston, near Caledonia, Miss., on that day and also on Sunday, May 12. A large crowd was present on Sunday, and the meeting was enjoyed. On Sunday afternoon Elder Huddleston went with us to Columbus, where we tried to preach that night in the home of a Brother Daugherty. Several people were present and we had a very pleasant little service. Monday morning Brother Huddleston conveyed us to Enon Church, near Houston, the home church of Elder E. M. Verell, deceased. The crowd was not large. While we were trying to speak to them in the name of the Master a friend came to the church and informed us that we were wanted at the telephone at a home near by. He told us there was a long distance call for us from Fordyce, Ark. When we got to the telephone we were informed by our wife that she had a message for us from Birmingham to come there at once, as Elder Turnipseed was not expected to live through the day. We left at once, being conveyed by Brother Huddleston to Aberdeen, where we met Friend Bourland from Amory, who took us in his car to that place. We went to the home of a Brother Pennington, who kindly had us try to sleep some, and who called us at the proper time. Sister Pennington had prepared us a lunch, and then Brother Pennington conveyed us to the train. We left there at 1:25 for Birmingham, where we arrived at 5:30 Tuesday morning, May 14, and found that our dear brother, Elder Turnipseed, had passed away at 4 o'clock the afternoon before. Account of the funeral has already been given. We felt sure that word had gone out that we had been called away from the appointments, and we did not know how to reach them again. So we decided it would be best to come on home and try to visit those churches some time in the future which we failed to reach. We left Birmingham on Wednesday at 12:30, and arrived in Fordyce Thursday morning at 3:44 and were met at the train by our wife and children. We were glad to get home again, and felt to thank the Lord that we found all well. We were sorry not to visit those churches we failed to reach, and hope that we may be able to visit them some day, if the Lord will. Elder Turnipseed had made a promise to be at Winfield, Ala., on the fourth Sunday in May to preach a commencement sermon for the high school there. Some Old Baptist friends had obtained this promise from him. When they learned of Brother Turnipseed's illness they wanted us to go and fill the promise. Sister Turnipseed earnestly requested us to do so. Accordingly, after we returned home and tried to consider the matter, we wired them we would be there, the Lord willing. So we went, arriving there on Saturday before the fourth Sunday, and tried to preach that night in the Landmark Missionary Baptist meeting house. On Sunday we did the best we could in trying to preach the commencement sermon for them in the auditorium of the high school building. A large crowd was present-more than could obtain seats or a place in the room. We enjoyed a very pleasant service. If we remember correctly, there were forty-three graduates. After the service we had lunch with Friend Wade, who conveyed us to Carbon Hill, where we could meet a fast train for Memphis. We arrived home Monday morning again, and found all well. Our agent here in Thornton for the Cotton Belt Railroad got permission for the fast train to stop for us Friday night and take us on and also to stop Monday night and let us off. This was kind and accommodating on their part. The Cotton Belt is a "Railroad of Courtesy." Those people in Winfield were good to us, and so they were at the places we visited on the trip in Mississippi. May the blessings of the Lord rest upon them all, is our prayer. C. H. C.

BILLY SUNDAY

June 27, 1929

The great humbug of the day, Billy Sunday, the so-called evangelist, has been preaching recently at Corpus Christi, Texas. One of his great sayings in his sermons is this: Nothing makes the devil more angry than to see great throngs coming to this tabernacle. Billy was just mistaken in the sign he saw in the countenance of his daddy. His daddy perhaps looked mad to him, but he was not mad. He was never more delighted with anything than with Billy's sham religion and so-called preaching. The devil is always delighted with humbug work done and carried on in the name of Christianity, and that is all Billy Sunday is doing. He would not know a real gospel sermon if he should see it printed in box car letters, or if he should hear it delivered by an inspired apostle of the Lord of glory. If one of them could be sent back to this world and he should preach an inspired gospel sermon in Billy Sunday's presence, Billy would not know what it was. Billy does know what he is out for-and he gets a good supply of it-and that is the "filthy lucre." He just makes merchandise of the people, and gets the money, and that is all he cares for. If you want to get some information concerning Billy Sunday, send 25 cents to The Rail Splitter, Milan, Ill., for a copy of a pamphlet they are publishing, the title of which is "Billy Sunday Unmasked," and they will send it to you as soon as they are ready to mail out, which we judge will not be long. Or you may send the 25 cents to us and we will order the book for you. C. H. C.

AN APPRECIATED LETTER

June 27, 1929

To Claudis, Florida, Fleming, Ilene and William Hartsel Cayce:

My Dear Little Friends-Your good daddy has just come and gone, and I was so glad to hear him preach and have him in my home that I told him I would send you children a nice lot of peanuts as a present. He showed me your pictures and told me that you liked peanuts. I have a lot of them and want you all to have a big time eating some of them. I have a little boy seven years old and a little girl five years old, and I am preacher, too, and sometimes leave them at home and go away. And I know they want to see daddy come back home, just like you do. And so I think of you, and want you to be good children and help mama while daddy is away. Daddy loves you all, but his dear Saviour and your Saviour won't let him stay at home with you all the time, so he has to leave you and go and preach to the Lord's people. So you children have to let daddy go and wait for his return. Jesus will be with you and your dear mama while daddy is gone, and He will bring him back safe to you. Dear Sister Cayce, Brother Claud showed us your picture with the children and it made us desire so much to see you all. Brother Claud has been doing some wonderful preaching for us. I hope that you may feel the presence of the dear Saviour while he is out preaching for the Lord's humble poor and realize in your good heart that you are a true handmaid of the Lord. You are worth so much to Brother Claud, and your sweet influence and the influence of your loving children has so enriched his life and filled his soul that his gift is magnified and his field of usefulness greatly enlarged. You are doing much good in the kingdom of your blessed Saviour, and I want you to know that some of us, at least, appreciate the sacrifices that you, the children, and Brother Cayce are making for us. Could each one of us wholly give ourselves into the hands of our God and be willing to do His bidding in all things, I am sure our precious cause would blossom as the rose. May the Lord bless you and the little children while your loved one is away preaching the unsearchable riches of Christ, is my prayer, for Jesus' sake. Pray for us when you have a mind to pray for the poorest of the poor and the weakest of the weak. In hope, G. W. Durbin. Falkner, Miss. REMARKS Language fails to express how much the above good letter is appreciated. So few of the good brethren and sisters think of writing to our loved ones who are so often left at home and who spend so many lonely and lonesome hours. May the good Lord bless you, dear brother, for your act of kindness and your good and kind words. It was all appreciated by the children as well as by us and our dear companion, who cheerfully toils on and encourages us to go in discharge of duty. Do not forget to remember us all in your prayers. C. H. C.

NOW A WEEKLY

July 4, 1929

In our issue of June 13, 1929, we made the announcement that The Primitive Baptist would be changed to a weekly beginning about the first of July. According to that announcement, we now begin as a weekly, with this issue, of July 4, 1929. We might say very well that the weekly publication began with the last issue, which was June 27-just a week ago. We also made the statement in the same issue (June 13) that we would put a part of the paper in this size type, if our subscribers preferred it. A number have written us that they prefer this type, and that they are well pleased with it. Of course there are a great many that we have not heard from. But as so many have written us that they like this type we will use it for our editorials. We do not have enough of it to use for the whole paper, and cannot afford the expense of buying enough for that now. All our type is new, and we cannot afford to throw it away. We believe our readers will all like these changes, and we greatly desire to please all in all things wherein it is right for us to try to please the brethren. In the matter of doctrine and the practice taught in God's word, we believe it is right to try to please the Lord, regardless of what any man or set of men might say or do. But we believe the Lord will always have some faithful followers who will be pleased with the truth. We trust our brethren will try to get more subscribers for the paper now, and help us all they can in extending the circulation. Remember that we are depending on the subscriptions to support the paper. As we have previously said, the small amount of advertising which we have in the paper will not even pay the salary of one of the clerks. in the office. We use more than we get for advertising to help pay for sending the paper to poor saints who enjoy reading it but are not able to pay for it. Who would object to us running the advertising and using the income in that way which we receive from the same? Would one of the objectors be willing to contribute the same amount toward sending the paper to the poor? If one would do that we would willingly leave all the advertising out. The price of the paper will now have to be made $2 a year, or $1 for six months. The price will be the same to all. If any are not able to pay the price they do not have to be deprived of the privilege of reading it on that account. If you are owing for the paper, and cannot pay the full price, or the full amount that you owe, send what you can, and write us your condition. Be frank with us; but do not refuse to tell us something. That is not treating the editor right-no matter if it is our paper or some other. If you owe a debt and are not in a position to pay it, don't treat your creditor with silent contempt. That is not the way you would want to be treated. Remember the "golden rule," and try to practice that. We already have a lot of articles set in the smaller type which we have been using, and will publish them as we get to them, and will set all our editorials in this larger type after that. We believe all our readers will like the size and form of the paper better as they become accustomed to it and get used to it. You will have a weekly paper' in a convenient size to keep and to make up in books. Keep your papers. At the end of the year an index will be published, and then you can make the whole year's papers up in a book and have an index at the end of it. It will be valuable to have in later years. Some time ago we offered to give a whole year's subscription for one copy of The Primitive Baptist of January 1, 1886. No one sent us a copy of that issue. Look over your old papers, and ask others who have been taking the paper, and see if you can find one. We will gladly give a year's subscription for the paper of that date. It is our desire to keep the paper free from controversy. It seems to us that there are some who are not satisfied, and who would like to have some quarrel with us, judging from some things we get; but we are not going to quarrel with them. If they want to "fuss" they may look for someone who is of the same mind with themselves, and then they may "fuss" to their heart's content. We desire to publish the truth, and to contend for the old paths and the ancient landmarks which our fathers have set; and to contend for nothing but the truth in the spirit of love and kindness to all. We feel sure that if the Lord is in the matter the paper will be supported and maintained. We feel willing to leave the matter in His hands and in the hands of the brethren, the lovers of truth. We need the prayers of the Lord's dear children, that the Lord would lead us in the right way, and give us courage to walk in the old paths, where is the good way. We have no use for the various institutions and inventions of men. The good Book tells us of the only kingdom our Lord established here in the world, and that is His church. He organized no aid societies, Sunday schools, leagues, unions, boards, conventions, or any other such society or institution. They are nothing better than the inventions of men. If there would ever be any need of any of those things the Lord would have instituted them, or would have told us about the need of them. With the Book we are thoroughly furnished unto all good works. Being thoroughly furnished therein and therewith, not a thing is needed which is not contained therein. It is a flagrant violation to practice what the Book does not teach, either by command, precept or example. We should let everything alone which we do not find in the Book. And we should do all that the Book commands, to the best of our ability. May the Lord help us all so to do. C. H. C.

Mt 10:6 AND Mt 28:19 July 4, 1929

Brother Albert Waid, Oneonta, Ala., asks our views on Mt 10:6; 28:19. In Mt 10:5-6,7 we find this language: "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand." Here we have it that Jesus sent the twelve out to preach, and He commanded them not to go among the Gentiles or the Samaritans. This was before His crucifixion. If gospel preaching was necessary in order that sinners receive eternal life, Jesus here forbade the necessary thing thereto being preached among the Samaritans or the Gentiles. Their work in preaching at that time was confined to the Jews-to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel." They (the twelve) were to preach among the Jews and were to proclaim the fact in their preaching that "the kingdom of heaven is at hand." The time was then present-the time had come-that law worship and service was to be done away, and gospel worship and service was being brought in. This was to be proclaimed then to the Jews. In Mt 28:16-20 we have this language: "Then the eleven disciples went away into Galilee, into a mountain where Jesus had appointed them. And when they saw Him, they worshipped Him: but some doubted. And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen." This was after the Saviour was crucified, buried and raised again. He appeared unto the eleven. Judas had already hanged himself, so there were then eleven of the apostles. Now, since the Saviour had died and was raised again, He gave the apostles a command different from the one recorded in Mt 10:6. In the first command to preach their labors were to be confined to the Jews; now they were to go among the nations-among the Gentiles; they were to teach all nations. They were not to teach the unteachable, but to teach the teachable among the Gentiles, as well as among the Jews. Their field of labor was enlarged. Their labors were no longer to be confined to the Jews-"the lost sheep of the house of Israel." In order to teach, the teacher must have a teachable subject. One cannot teach natural things to one who is not a teachable subject. For one to be a teachable subject in the natural realm, he must have natural life and a natural mind. He must have natural comprehension. The same thing is true in the spiritual realm. For one to be able to teach spiritual things, he must have a teachable subject. For one to be a teachable subject in the spiritual realm, he must have spiritual life and a spiritual mind. He must have spiritual comprehension. As they were commanded to teach, of course they were to teach natural things, or else they were to teach spiritual things. We suppose no one would say they were to teach natural things, but were to teach spiritual things. They were to preach the gospel. The gospel is something which pertains to spiritual things, the spiritual realm. Certainly no one would say they were to teach the unteachable. Hence, they were to teach the teachable among the Gentiles as well as among the Jews. This is evidence of the fact that the Lord had a people among the Gentiles who were in need of being taught spiritual things, and the Gentiles were to have the blessings and privileges of the gospel. This command was given to the eleven. Jesus said, "Go ye." The antecedent of the pronoun "ye" is the eleven. The apostles were chosen witnesses who were with the Lord and witnessed His work and personally saw Him. They were chosen, called and sent out by the Saviour Himself, the second Person in the Trinity, and no others could fill the apostolic office, and no others ever did, or ever will, fill that office, only those whom He called and put into that office. The apostles were not put into that office by the office work of the Holy Spirit, but by the Son. But it is the office work of the Holy Spirit to call and put into the ministry those who are sent out by the Lord for that work, who are not in the apostolic office-who are not apostles. "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood."-Ac 20:28. This shows that the Holy Ghost now calls men and makes them overseers of the flock-puts them into the ministry. "The harvest truly is plenteous, but the labourers are few; pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He will send forth labourers into His harvest."-Mt 9:37-38. "The harvest truly is great, but the labourers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He would send forth labourers into His harvest."-Lu 10:2. These few thoughts are offered for the consideration of all our readers. C. H. C.

CAN WE NOT WITHDRAW?

July 11, 1929

The following article written by Elder J. C. Ross was published in The Primitive Baptist of May 7, 1907. We think the article good, and thought it might be profitable for our readers now, so we decided to give space for it again, although we have many articles on hand that are good which have not yet been published. It is our desire to select and publish what we think will be for the best interest of the cause. Read the article and study it and profit by it. C. H. C.

THE ARTICLE

Has a church or an association of churches the right to withdraw fellowship from a faulty or a disorderly church? If not, then a disorderly church may be guilty of any kind of doctrine or practice, and remain in fellowship with the orderly body. If there is no precept, example nor principle given us in the Scriptures, then we have no right to withdraw under any circumstances. When I am convinced that we should fellowship Arminianism, modern mission-ism with all her brood of institutions, I will be ready to join the Missionaries. This is a serious question with me. No man nor set of men can induce me to so depart from the sacred and holy Scriptures of divine inspiration, and it is so strange and distressing that some precious brethren will suffer themselves to be deceived "by good words and fair speeches.'' I want to ask just a few plain and simple questions, in the spirit of meekness and sincerity; and I hope you will prayerfully answer in your own heart and before that One who knows the secrets of our hearts. First: Do you believe the Primitive Baptists should fellowship the doctrine that the eternal salvation of poor sinners is conditional on the part of the sinner? Second: That we should fellowship the modern board and convention system-membership in the convention depending upon the payment of a certain amount of money? Third: That one hundred thousand heathens are dying and going to hell daily for the want of money and means, as Carey expressed it when he wrote to the sisters of America to pull off their jewelry and hang them on the cross of Christ to keep souls out of hell-thus ignoring the cross of our adorable Redeemer? Fourth: Do you believe that the Primitive Baptists should receive baptism from a people that have such heresies as the above? Fifth: Do you believe that a person who is contending for such things is a friend to the dear old church? I mean contending that we should fellowship such as the above. The above are only a few of the many things that are being advocated in these days. Dear brother or sister, may God help you to prayerfully consider these things. Have you suffered yourselves to be led away from your first love? Do you love the church as you once did? If not, why not? Has she changed since you joined her? If not, and your love and zeal for her has subsided, is it not evident that you have changed and not the church? I wish now to call your attention to some historical and Scriptural evidence. It has been argued by some that the Black Rock convention led the way in this unholy course, as it is called by some. I wish first to call attention to minutes of the Philadelphia Association, p. 55, "Contenting ourselves in the general satisfaction our churches have expressed in their letters of the comfort, edification, establishment, and consolation, they acknowledge to have received from our last letter, we desire and entreat you to weigh and deeply consider that we are in the last days, the dregs and worst of times, of which we have been warned by the inspired writers, of scoffers, walking after their own lusts, {2Pe 3:3} of perilous days. {2Ti 3:1} We are to mark those which cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine we have received, and avoid them, who, by good words and fair speeches, deceive the hearts of the simple, {Ro 16:17-18} that of your own selves should men arise, speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them. {Ac 20} Therefore, it concerns all who would be spiritually dressed and beautifully adorned, to meet and be approved of the heavenly bridegroom; to be very careful how and with whom they walk; avoiding, both in principle and practice, in heart and life, in the church and in the world, in the family and in the field, whatever may cause us to contract filth or foulness on our beautiful garments; as Christ's virgins, look often in the glass of the gospel, espying and brushing away every spot of dust, keeping clean and neat for His everlasting embraces. Precious souls, suffer the word of exhortation, and be well established in gospel truths, in these shaking times. Look well that you be built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Himself being your chief cornerstone. Take heed that you build not on wood, hay, and stubble of men's inventions." I have given you this lengthy quotation to show that these brethren held in 1747 the same view of this matter that we do. They make it very plain that they believe it Scriptural to not only withdraw from persons that are immoral, but also from those who depart from the doctrine of the inspired word; and that we should mark all such and avoid them. I next call attention to p. 58 of the same book, "Queries from the church at Horse-neck, in New England: First, Whether to deny the foreknowledge of the eternal God, concerning all future evil as well as good, be not a fundamental error? Answer: We look upon such an opinion to be directly repugnant to Scripture; therefore exceeding erroneous and pernicious. 1. Because it supposes God imperfect, and so no God. {Ps 147:5; Heb 4:13} Secondly: If so, there would be no room for the Divine Being to make provision for the redemption of mankind before the fall of man, which is contrary to express Scripture testimony. {Pr 8:28,35; 2Ti 1:9} Thirdly: It is an error, which, in its nature and consequences, doth oppose and tend to overthrow the whole Christian religion. {Ac 2:23; 4:28; Tit 3:10} 2. Whether a member of the church holding such an opinion, endeavors to propagate it, and obstinately persists in it, is not worthy of the highest censure, notwithstanding he pleads matter of conscience? Answer: We judge such worthy of the highest censure; because a church is to proceed against a person who is erroneous in judgment, as well as against one vicious in practice, notwithstanding they may plead conscience in the affair." {Tit 3:10; 2Th 3:14} This quotation is so plain that it needs no comment. From this quotation we are taught that it matters not how conscientious a brother may be, this is no excuse for the church not to proceed against him. In this we have a principle handed down to us, not only by the Scriptures but by the Baptists in 1748. I next call attention to some things found in an essay in the same book which was published in the year 1749, and adopted by the association. This comes directly to the point heading this article, "Does an association of churches or a church have the right to withdraw from a defective church?" Let these brethren answer: "That an association is not a superior judicature, having such superior power over the churches concerned; but that each particular church hath a complete power and authority from Jesus Christ, to administer all gospel ordinances, provided they have a sufficiency of officers duly qualified, or that they be supplied by the officers of another sister church or churches, as baptism, and the Lord's supper, etc.; and to receive in and cast out, and also to try and ordain their own officers, and to exercise every part of gospel discipline and church government, independent of any other church or assembly whatever. And that several such independent churches, where providence gives them their situation convenient, may, and ought, for their mutual strength, counsel, and other valuable advantages, by their voluntary and free consent, to enter into an agreement and confederation, as is hinted in our printed narrative of discipline, pages 59, 60, 61. Such churches there must be agreeing in doctrine and practice, and independent in their authority and church power, before they can enter into a confederation, as aforesaid, and choose delegates or representatives, to associate together; and thus the several independent churches being the constituents, the association, council or assembly of their delegates, when assembled, is not to be deemed a superior judicature, as having a superintendency over the churches, but subservient to the churches, in what may concern all the churches in general, or any one church in particular; and, though no power can regularly arise above its fountain from where it rises, yet we are of the opinion, that an association of the delegates of associate churches have a very considerable power in their hands, respecting those churches in their confederation; for if the agreement of several distinct churches, in sound doctrine and regular practice, be the first motive, ground, and foundation or basis of their confederation, then it must naturally follow, that a defection in doctrine or practice in any church, in such confederation, or any party in any such church, is ground sufficient for an association to withdraw from such a church or party so deviating or making defection, and to exclude such from them in some formal manner, and to advertise all the churches in confederation thereof, in order that every church in confederation may withdraw from such in all acts of church communion, to the end they may be ashamed, and that all the churches may discountenance such, and bear testimony against the defection. Such withdrawing from a defective or disorderly church, or that ought to be towards a delinqent church, is such as ariseth from their voluntary confederation aforesaid, and not only from the general duty that is incumbent on all orthodox persons, and churches to do, where no such confederation is entered into, as 2Co 6:16-17. Now, from that general duty to withdraw from defective persons or churches, there can no more be done, than to desist from such acts of fellowship as subsisted before the withdrawing, which is merely negative, and in no wise anything positive. Churches, as they are pillars of truth, may, and ought to endeavor to promote truth among others also; which endeavors, if they prove fruitless, as they are but mystico modo, they may be withdrawn; the withdrawing, therefore, must be accordingly; which is only to cease from future endeavors, leaving the objects as they were or are. But if there be a confederation an incorporation, by mutual and voluntary consent, as the association of churches must and ought to be, then something positive may and ought to be done; and, though an association ought not to assume a power to excommunicate or deliver a defective or disorderly church to Satan, as some do claim, yet it is a power sufficient to exclude the delegates of a defective or disorderly church from an association, and to refuse their presence at their consultations, and to advise all of the churches in confederation to do so too. A godly man may, and ought to withdraw, not only from a heathen, but from such as have the form of godliness, if they appear to want the power of it; {2Ti 3:5} by the same parity of reason the saints, in what capacity soever they may be considered, may withdraw from defective or disorderly churches or persons; but excommunicate they cannot, there being no institution to authorize them so to do. But in the capacity of a congregational church, dealing with her own members, an association, then, of the delegates of associate churches, may exclude and withdraw from defective and unsound or disorderly churches or persons, in manner above said; and this will appear regular and justifiable by the light and law of nature, as is apparent in the conduct and practice of all regular civil and political corporations and confederations whatsoever; who all of them have certain rules to exclude delinquents from their societies, as well as for others to accede thereunto. We judge those things in Ac 15 to be imitable by an association, namely: first, their disowning of the erroneous and Judaizing teachers, saying, to whom we gave no such commandment, Ac 15:24; secondly, the sending delegated persons of their own number, with Paul and Barnabas, to support their sentence in the place where the debate sprung up, Ac 15:25; and a third thing followed in consequence thereof, namely, a delivering of the decrees to the other churches, to be observed, as well as the church of Antioch, Ac 16:4. Consistent therewith, the practice of after ages is found to be; when, because they had no council, synod, or association to convene, of course they called a council, in order to make head against any error or disorders, when in any particular church, such things grew too big for a particular church peaceably to determine, as the case about circumcision was at Antioch. In such cases all the churches were looked upon as one church, and all the bishops as universal, because of the unity of the faith and conformity of practice which ought to be in the churches of Christ; though in all other cases, the several distinct churches acted independent of each other, as Cyprian relates the practice of his time, namely: that the bishops were so united in one body, that if any one of the body broached any heresy, or began to waste and tear the flock of Christ, all the rest came immediately to its rescue. Cyprian, cited by Bingham, book 2, page 101. And the same author observes, that they disowned the faulty, and advertised all the churches of the same." I shall not comment at length on this quotation from this essay, as space will not permit at this time, but call attention to the fact that they argue that a church, or association of churches, not only have the right to declare against a faulty or disorderly church, but that it is their duty to do so. They also show that it was the practice in Cyprian's day. I quote again from the same essay, page 63: "And Mr. Crosby relates, that an association in London did disown a certain disorderly church in London, and did caution all the churches they were related to, not to countenance them in any way, nor to suffer their members to frequent their meetings; and thus an association may disown and withdraw from a defective or disorderly church, and advise the churches related to them to withdraw from, and to discountenance such as aforesaid, without exceeding the bounds of their power. And further, that an association of the delegates of confederate churches may doctrinally declare any person or party in a church, who are defective in principles or disorderly in practice, to be censurable, when the affair comes under their cognizance, and without exceeding the bounds of their power and duty, to advise the church that such belong unto, how to deal with such, according to the rule of gospel discipline; and also to strengthen such a church, and assist her, if need be, by sending able men of their own number to help the church in executing the power vested in her by the ordinance of Jesus Christ, and to stand by her, and to defend her against the insults of such offending persons or parties." Dear reader, I have given most all this essay that you may judge for yourself as to where they stood on the subject of fellowship and declarations of non-fellowship; also where the Baptists stood in Cyprian's day on the same subject; also the course of an association in London. I am sure you can discern between their position and the modern idea of fellowshiping everything. This is the very position that has been denounced by some as mob law, unholy course, and many other such expressions. Dear reader, I ask you to turn and carefully read the Scripture citations that they give, and you will see that they held the same views of them that our people do today. It matters not what this association did after this, this shows where they stood before they went into Arminianism and the modern board system. Had they been faithful to these holy principles, Arminianism could never have entered into her sacred and holy precincts and brought ruin and devastation to many churches. I know that many precious brethren have had many hard sayings to bear because they have been faithful in speaking out against some things that have of late been introduced among the Old Baptists, but I am sure that the servant who remains steadfast and unmovable, who faithfully but kindly admonishes God's people against every false way, will receive the smiles of his God, which is worth more than all else in this world, yea, more than all the applause of men. The applause of men may feed carnality, but this is of little benefit to the soul. Good brethren are sometimes led off from the church and as a result bring sorrow and discontent to their own hearts. Oh, that God would save His people from every false way, that they may walk in the good old way and find sweet rest to their weary souls. It is so discouraging to see good, precious brethren lend their influence to the enemy, and thereby weaken their influence in the church and for the church. How much better to labor to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace, that our hearts may be cemented, as it were, in bonds of sweet fellowship. How much more inviting it is to God's little children to come into the fold and find a sweet resting place. May the good Lord keep us humble and at each other's feet. Yours for the cause of Christ, J. C. Ross. Greenfield, Tenn.

REPLY TO H. L. WHITEHOUSE

July 18, 1929

In another place in this paper will be found a letter from H. L. Whitehouse, who is identified with what is known as the Landmark Missionary Baptists. He speaks of three things upon which he says we may disagree- mission work, prayer meetings, and Sunday schools. Perhaps he does not fully understand our position on these questions and practices, and may not know our reason for such position. We thought it might not be out of place to say a few words to the brother concerning these things. However, before that we wish to make a few remarks concerning his impressions and as to why he became satisfied. Concerning what he heard when he went to the pasture will say that the leading man and champion of the anti-board faction of the Missionary Baptists makes sport of such things as that. We know he does, for we have seen it more than once in his paper. Another thing we want to suggest is that we do not think it would have been right for him to have united with the Primitive Baptists because his father and mother belonged to them, nor because he was prejudiced against the Missionaries. Such motives for joining any church would be wrong motives. If what the brother heard served to remove that thought and that idea, it served a good and right purpose. Now as to mission work. Primitive Baptists do not object to gospel preaching. What we object to is the modern system which men have invented and introduced in the name of Christianity for the professed object of having the gospel preached, and that under the pretext that it is necessary for it to be preached in order that sinners reach heaven. This makes the eternal salvation of sinners in every age and country and clime dependent on the liberalities of the people in sending the gospel by those who have it to those who have it not. It makes the eternal salvation of the heathen depend on the liberalities of the people in those countries where they have the gospel. If the heathen fail to have the gospel preached to them, then they are sent to hell on account of our neglect. This is the foundation upon which the whole modern mission system rests, and it is unknown to the Bible and was unknown to the Baptist Church until the days of Andrew Fuller and William Carey. They organized the first missionary society among the Baptists in 1792. The Philadelphia Association was organized in 1707- long before the birth of the mission system. On pages 426 to 433 of the minutes of that association may be found a circular letter put forth by that body in the session held in 1806, when the association was ninety-nine years old. In this circular letter they give the principles which they say gave rise to modern missions, and on page 429 they say, "It is, however, a very remarkable circumstance, that in modern missions Papal Rome has led the way." John the Baptist did not lead the way; Jesus Christ did not lead the way; the apostles did not lead the way; no inspired man led the way-but Papal Rome led the way. Those who engage in the modern mission work, then, are not following Christ, or the inspired apostles, or the teaching of God's blessed Book; but they are following Papal Rome. This is the cool and calm and plain statement of that body who had just a short time before imbibed the false doctrine of the mission advocates and system. The division in the Baptist family on account of the introduction of the new doctrines and practices advocated by Puller and Carey began in 1832, after the Baptists had borne with the new doctrines and measures and protested against them for years. In November, 1910, a debate was held between I N. Penick and Ben M. Bogard in Crockett County, Tenn. Penick affirmed that "The Bible teaches that Baptist churches and individual Baptists have the liberty and right to use such agencies as the missionary state bodies of Tennessee and Kentucky and the Southern Baptist Convention, with committees or Boards in carrying forward mission work under our Lord's commission." Bogard denied the proposition. On page 54 of that debate Bogard said: He (Penick) said nobody raised the question until the Hardshells raised it about a hundred years ago. The reason they didn't was because there was nothing like that to object to until the Convention fellows came in, and then the Hardshell split came. I lay that split to the charge of Conventionism, and while the Hardshells went to the extreme and repudiated missionary work, the Conven-tionites were the ones to drive the wedge. On page 136 he says: My sixty-fourth objection is that the convention system produces discord and division among the churches. If it hadn't been for Conventionism and Boards, there never would have been a split. For seventeen hundred years the churches had been preaching to sinners. Hardshells went wrong because they quit preaching to sinners. When the controversy came up one went wrong in one direction and one in the other. One took unscriptural means, and one denied all means entirely. Landmark Baptists stand on middle ground, and we believe in using means as opposed to the Hard-shells, and using only Scriptural means as opposed to the Conventionites. You caused the Hardshell split and you are going to cause another split. Bogard, the leading Landmarker, lays the split between our people, whom he calls Hardshells, and the Missionaries to Conventionism-it was the Mission system. He says that the Conventionites were the ones to drive the wedge. That being true, the question naturally arises, Which party retained the ordinances in that division? If the ordinances were with the Baptists before that division, then one of the parties retained them when the division came. If the Conventionites retained the ordinances in that division, they have them yet, and the Landmarkers do not. If those who opposed the boards and conventions retained the ordinances in that division, then we have them yet, and neither the Con-ventionites nor the Landmarkers have them. Note in the last quotation above that Bogard says the Conven-tionites are going to cause another split. This was in 1910. They were all Missionaries then, and were not fully divided. The Landmarkers are younger than the Conventionites as a body of people. The original Missionary Baptist body were Conventionites. They were that when they separated from the Primitives on account of the introduction of their new measures. Hence the Conventionites are the original Missionary Baptists-though they are not the original Baptists, for the Baptists had existed without their new means and measures from the time the Lord organized His church until the days of Fuller and Carey. Next, as to prayer meetings. The Primitive Baptists do not object to the brethren meeting together and praying with and for each other, either in their homes or at the meeting houses. They have never objected to this. We know Primitive Baptist churches that have met together and engaged in prayer service for many years. At our own church here in Thornton, on our regular meeting time, we meet on Sunday morning at about ten o'clock and devote about an hour to song and prayer service before the hour for preaching to begin. If you have understood the Primitive Baptists object to prayer, or meeting together to engage in prayer with and for each other, you have not understood right. Next, as to Sunday schools. Our people do object to them. We do not object to teaching our children morality and right living as citizens, but we object to Sunday schools. They are unknown in the Scriptures. There is no Bible authority for them, either by command, precept or example. We also object to the professed object of the Sunday school. They are for the avowed object of teaching the children in such a way as to make them children of God; or to teach them so they may accept the Lord and be saved, become children of God. This is contrary to the truth. In The Primitive Baptist of May 31, 1910, we had a short article concerning Sunday schools, which was as follows: As we stated in The Primitive Baptist of May 1, 1906, the Sunday school was instituted by Robert Raikes, in Gloucester, England, in the eighteenth century. It is, therefore, an institution of man, and is not in the Scriptures. It is too young to be found there. It was first instituted for the object of teaching poor children to read and write. It was to teach literature, not religion. It has been adopted by worldly religionists, and the expressed object changed by them. It does not belong to the Bible nor to the church of Christ. In The Primitive Baptist of April 13, 1915, we copied an article from the News and Truths, of March 31, 1915, a Missionary Baptist paper published by H. B. Taylor, Murray, Ky., and commented on the same. Below we give the article and our comments: Mayor Roberts and some of his machine, of Terre Haute, Ind., are having a good deal of trouble in Uncle Sam's court for using repeaters in elections and other election frauds. If fraudulent, dishonest and criminal for a man to vote in one precinct in a city and then be rushed in an automobile to another city precinct and voted, is it any less reprehensible or any more honest for a church or Sunday school to use repeaters, who have already been counted in one Sunday school in a city, and are almost bodily pulled into another in order to be counted and to make a show? Up in Pike County, Ky., men have been tried and convicted recently for selling their votes for $1 and the rise, in a recent Kentucky election. Is a church or Sunday school any the less reprehensible, that pays Sunday school pupils cigars or free shaves to get them to attend on a given Sunday, when they want to make a big show? Does the fact that it is done in the name of religion and on Sunday make such methods any more honest or honorable than when done on a week day in a state or national election? The above appeared in the News and Truths of March 31, 1915, which paper is edited by H. B. Taylor, at Murray, Ky. Here we have a plain admission that the Sunday schools practice such frauds as that men are prosecuted for by the courts of the land, when practiced in state affairs. And this, too, by an institution which claims for its object the bringing of souls to Christ! Oh, shame, where is thy blush! What honest, well-informed person can believe that such a thing as this can have for its real object the salvation of souls? Such practice as this only educates the young and rising generation to engage in deceptive practices, and to even engage in swindling schemes for worldly gain. No wonder the jails and penitentiaries are crowded. No wonder that murder, theft, robbery, lying, cheating, and all kinds of immorality are increasing so rapidly. The Lord only knows what the end will be. And in the face of all such things as these, some Old Baptists allow their children to go to Sunday school. If you love your children, for the Lord's sake keep them away from such schools. We copy the above from those old issues of the paper that our good Missionary brother may see our objections to such things. Yes, a missionary is one who is sent. We do not deny, but earnestly believe, that the Lord's ministers are sent. So are the devil's ministers sent. But they are not sent by the same power or authority. The Lord sends His ministers, and He assigns to them their field of labor. The eminent Apostle Paul says, "But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by His grace, to reveal His Son in me, that I might preach Him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus. Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to see Peter, and abode with him fifteen days, but other of the apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother."-Ga 1:15-19. Turn and read the remainder of the chapter, and the next. Neither the Conventionites nor Landmarkers follow this way. The Convention and Board preachers apply to the Board for a place to preach, and the Board accepts or rejects. If the Board accepts the applicant, then the Board assigns him to his field of labor. The Landmarker applies to the association or committee, and the committee accepts or rejects. If the committee accepts the applicant, then the committee assigns him to his field of labor. The difference between them is simply a question of who has the authority to accept or reject the applicant and as to who shall handle the funds. "Brethren, my heart's desire and prayer to God for Israel is, that they might be saved. For I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge."-Ro 10:1-2. The people for whom Paul here says he prayed, that they might be saved, were a people who had a zeal of God. He does not say they had a zeal for God, but of God. They were, therefore, children of God. The Lord's children need to be saved from the darkness of ignorance. This may be accomplished by teaching, and is to be accomplished that way. They are saved from the darkness of death by the direct work of the Holy Spirit in the impartation of life. Then they need teaching, and the Lord calls and sends His preachers for that purpose. "For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? and how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."-Ro 10:13-17. We quote all these verses that we may have the 'connection, the verses just before and just after the expression, "How shall they preach, except they be sent?" Remember that the Lord does the sending of His preachers. "Delivering thee from the people and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee."-Ac 26:17. This shows that the saving which God's people need which is mentioned in the first part of the chapter, is accomplished through preaching. It is not the saving that brings alien sinners into divine relationship with God. One must be brought out of a state of death in sin to a state of life in Christ before he can hear, or understand, gospel preaching. "Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word."-Joh 8:43. "So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."-Ro 10:17. The word here is the speech of God. God speaks to the sinner who is dead in sins, and by the power of that speech the sinner is made alive in Christ, made alive from the dead. This gives the ability to hear His word, the ability to hear gospel preaching. Gospel preaching does not give life, but the giving of life by the power of God's speech- "the voice of the Son of God"-gives one the ability to hear the gospel. Then by gospel preaching they may be delivered from the darkness of ignorance. They may be saved from false doctrines and false ways. May the Lord bless these thoughts to the good of our readers. C. H. C.

MEETINGS IN LITTLE ROCK

August 1, 1929

We met our regular appointment at Fuller's Chapel, in North Little Rock, on the third Sunday in June and Saturday afternoon before. In the conference on Saturday afternoon the church made choice of Brother G. L. Pilkington for the office of deacon, and called for a presbytery to attend to the ordination at the next meeting. On Sunday a Sister Arnold came to the church, asking for a home with them. She related the reason of her hope in the Saviour and was received amidst much rejoicing. The ordinance of baptism was attended to that afternoon by the unworthy writer, who tries to serve the little band there as pastor. They have meeting every Sunday, and we try to be with them on each third Sunday and Saturday afternoon before, when we are not away on a tour. They have refused to release us from the pastoral care of the church, allowing us to be absent from their meetings when we are on a tour. We were with them again at the regular meeting the third Sunday in this month (July) and Saturday afternoon before. It was agreed in conference that the ordination of Brother Pilkington to the office of deacon should be attended to on Sunday morning, and that the charge should be delivered in the discourse to be preached just after the ordination. Elder A. Woodall, who has membership there, was present, and so was Brother A. H. Garner, who is an ordained deacon. His membership is in that association, but we do not now recall the name of the church. Elder P. E. Whitwell was expected, the meeting before, to be present and to take part in the ordination; but he was earnestly solicited to go to Donaldson, and obtained the consent of Brother Pilkington to go to that place. On Sunday morning when the church assembled Elder Woodall and the writer and Brother Garner formed ourselves into a presbytery and proceeded to ordain Brother Pilkington to the office of deacon. Elder Wood-all offered the ordination prayer. Then Brother Woodall made a short but very appropriate talk, and then we tried to preach to the people, and in doing that we tried to deliver the charge to Brother Pilkington and to the church. We enjoyed speaking to them, and it seemed that those present also enjoyed it. At the close of the discourse an open door of the church was proclaimed, when Brother Caudle and wife (Elder C. M. Monk's daughter), who live in Little Rock, came forward with a letter of dismission from Little Flock Church, near Abbott, Ark., in the Salem Association, and were gladly received by the church. Also Sister Emma Gardner and Sister Myrtle Baker came forward and gave a reason of their hope in the Saviour, telling of their love for the Lord and His people, and asking for a home with the church. They were received gladly and with much rejoicing. They were all so overjoyed that they broke down in singing. It was agreed that the ordinance of baptism be attended to as soon as we could go to the water. Accordingly the service was dismissed and all went to the water, and the unworthy writer administered the ordinance in burying the dear sisters in the liquid grave with their Lord and Master to arise to walk in newness of life. It was a glorious meeting, and one which we believe will long be remembered. This is a lovely little band, and we love them, and we believe they love us, though we feel to be so unworthy of their great love and sweet fellowship. May the good Lord bless and sustain and care for and preserve them from all harm, not only while we are away from them-as we expect to be now for some time on a tour and attending associations-but also after we return, if the Lord may see fit to allow us to return to them again. We trust they will remember us in prayer while we are so far away from them. Elder John R. Harris has written an article about our meeting here in Thornton, which may be found in this issue. We ask all the dear brethren to remember us in their prayers. We expect to be far away from home when this issue of the paper is mailed out to our readers. Will you pray the Lord to bless us to speak to the comfort and benefit of His children, and pray Him to bless and keep our dear ones in our absence who are left in sadness at home? C. H. C.

1Co 5:9-13 August 8, 1929

We have been requested to give our views on 1Co 5:9-13. These verses read as follows: I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from yourselves that wicked person. It seems very clear and plain to us that the apostle here positively forbids certain persons being allowed to remain in the fellowship of the church. The expression, "yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world * * * for then ye must needs go out of the world,'' shows that he has no reference to worldly matters, or things that pertain to worldly affairs. He calls attention, in this expression, to the fact that they were not forbidden to have dealings with fornicators in worldly affairs. If they were, then they would have to go out of the world. But they were forbidden to have dealings with fornicators, or a covetous person, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, in church affairs or religious matters. This fornication mentioned here does not specially refer to joining some institution other than the church, either, although we think that is forbidden. It seems to us that if one is a member of the church he is thereby married to Christ, and if he unites with some other institution which has its religious rites and ceremonies and services, he is thereby committing spiritual adultery or fornication. But this is not what the apostle is here specially referring to, as may be seen from the language contained in 1Co 5:1-5. Those verses read as follows: It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. This shows very clearly the kind of fornication or adultery he has under consideration, and which is not to be fellowshipped by the church. Persons guilty of such are not to be retained in the fellowship of the church. In connection with this we here call attention to Mt 19:9, the language of the Saviour: And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery; and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery. This shows very clearly that there is just one cause for which a man may put away his wife and marry another; and that is for the cause of fornication. Gill says that this expression includes adultery, incest, or any unlawful copulation. If one is guilty of such conduct, then the companion may righteously put such a one away. It is not wrong for them to put such a one away. If it is not wrong to put such a one away, then it is wrong not to do so. It is, therefore, right to put away one guilty of such conduct. Such conduct breaks the marriage vow, and frees the innocent party, and the innocent party should leave the guilty and put them away, and is free to marry again, and is no adulterer in doing so. This is the only thing that gives one the right to marry again. That is, one who puts away his wife for any other cause and marries again commits adultery in doing so. Then the teaching of the apostle in the text about which our opinion is asked is that the adulterer should not be allowed to remain in the church. The church should put such person from among themselves. They should withdraw fellowship from him. This is a sin unto death, for the party committing it thereby becomes dead to their companion. Covetousness, idolatry, railing, extortioning, are sins that are here classed with adultery. In fact, covetousness is idolatry. "Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry."-Col 3:5. The covetous person thinks more of money and worldly riches than he does of the service of God. The things of the world, the goods of the world, are of more value to him than the service of God. He will make the seeking after the things of the world of first importance and first consideration, instead of the kingdom of God and His righteousness. He becomes an idolater. He idolizes the goods of this world. Railing is the using of insolent and reproachful language; to utter reproach, to scoff. Such conduct is so unbecoming and so unchristian like that the guilty person should not be retained in the fellowship of the church. A drunkard is one who habitually drinks strong liquors immoderately; one whose habit it is to get drunk. We do not know how many times one must get drunk for it to be called a habit. Any way, it is very plain that drunkenness is a sin for which the church should withdraw fellowship. The guilty person should not be retained in the church. Extortion is the "act or practice of taking or obtaining anything from a person by illegal use or fear, whether by force, threats, or any other undue exercise of power; undue exaction; specifically, an oppression by color of right."-Webster. It is synonymous with oppression, rapacity, exaction, overcharge. An extortioner has no right to membership in the church, and the church is here required to withdraw fellowship from any who may be guilty. It may be of some profit to our readers for us to give here what Gill has to say concerning this chapter in a general way from his commentaries. It may help to give some light on the teaching of the apostle in this chapter. May the Lord help us to live as He commands, and help us to "keep a clean house." C. H. C.

GILL'S COMMENTS

In this chapter the apostle blames the Corinthians for conniving at a sin committed by one of their members; declares what he was determined to do, and what should be done by them in this case; and in general advises to shun conversation with wicked men; in 1Co 5:1; mention is made of the sin committed by one among themselves, and which was publicly known, and commonly talked of; and which in general was fornication, and particularly incest, a man lying with his father's wife; and which is aggravated by its being what was not named, or could not be named among any virtuous persons among the Gentiles without offense; and yet the members of this church, at least the majority of them, were unconcerned at it, and were so far from mourning over it, and taking any step to remove the person from them that had done it, that they were swelled with pride, and gloried on account of their gifts, and perhaps on account of this man, who had committed the iniquity, 1Co 5:2. This affair being related to the apostle, though at a distance; and he well knowing all things concerning it, as though he was present, resolved what should be done in this case by himself, 1Co 5:3; and that was to deliver the man to Satan, in the name, and with the power and authority of Christ, when the members of this church were gathered together, and his spirit with them; the end of which was for the destruction of the man's body, and the salvation of his soul, 1Co 5:4-5; and then the apostle returns to blame them for their glorying in men, and in external gifts, and pleading these as a reason why the man should be continued, and not removed from them; not considering the danger they were exposed to, and which he illustrates by the simile of leaven, a little of which affects the whole lump; suggesting thereby the danger they were in by continuing such a wicked person among them, 1Co 5:6; wherefore pursuing the same metaphor taken from the Jewish passover, he exhorts to remove from them the man that had sinned, as the Jews at the passover removed the leaven out of their houses; that so they might appear to be a church renewed, and purged, and clear of leaven, keeping the true and spiritual pass-over, which they were under obligations to do, since Christ, the Antitype of the passover, was sacrificed for them, 1Co 5:7; wherefore it became them to keep the feast of the Lord's supper; and indeed, to have the whole course of their conversation so ordered, as to avoid sin and sinners, and to behave in truth and uprightness, 1Co 5:8; when the apostle goes on to put them in mind of what he had formerly written unto them, as suitable to the present case, which was, that they should not keep company with wicked men, particularly with fornicators, such as this man, though in a more heinous manner, 1Co 5:9; and explains what was his meaning; not that they were to have no manner of conversation with persons of such a character, and of such-like evil characters, in things of a civil nature, for then there would be no living in the world, 1Co 5:10. But his sense was, that they should keep no company with persons guilty of the sins mentioned, who bore the name of Christian brethren, and were members of the same church-state with them, from whose communion they ought to be removed; and indeed, so much familiarity with them should not be indulged, as even to eat with them, 1Co 5:11. The reason of this difference, which he made between wicked men, who were not members of the church, and those that were, is because he had nothing to do, nor they neither, with them that were without the church, as it was their business only to take cognizance of them that were within, 1Co 5:12; but neither of them had anything to do, to judge and censure those that did not belong to the church, but should leave them to God, the righteous Judge; and then closes all, 1Co 5:13, with what he had chiefly in view throughout the whole chapter, and that is, that they would remove from their communion the wicked person who had been guilty of the sin first mentioned.

Eph 5:5,23,33 August 15, 1929

We have been requested to give our views on Eph 5:5,23,33. Eph 5:5 reads, "For this ye know, that no whoremonger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God." We believe that what we said in our last issue in connection with 1Co 5:9-13 will apply to the language of this text just as well. The apostle here teaches that such persons as mentioned have no inheritance in the kingdom of Christ. That is, there is no place in the church for them, and there is nothing there for them. They should be withdrawn from. They have no right in the church. Eph 5:23 says, "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and He is the saviour of the body." He is the Saviour of His church, His people. The redeemed are frequently designated as the church-that is, the term church sometimes is used in reference to the whole family of the redeemed. It is so used in this chapter, especially in Eph 5:25. Christ is the head of the church in the same sense that the man is head of the wife, or the man is the head of the wife in the same sense as Christ is the head of the church. We are aware that this is not in harmony with modern teaching and practice. It seems to us that frequently the order is reversed in these latter days, and it seems that often the woman is the head of the man; and sometimes it seems that some have an idea, judging from their practice, that Christ is not the head of the church; for they disregard His laws and His teachings. He is the Head and Lawgiver of His kingdom. Verse 33 says, "Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband." This teaches how the man should love his wife. Jesus loved His people so well that He gave Himself for them, even when they were enemies. He gave Himself for the church, that He might redeem it; see Eph 5:25. A man who loves his wife as he should would be willing to die for her in order that her life might be spared. He should love his wife as he loves himself, for they are one. Then the wife should reverence her husband. She should have regard for his wishes and for his happiness. She should be ready to help him in his undertakings-and she will be, if she is a true wife. So will the true and devoted church of Christ be ready and willing and glad to reverence the Lord, and to do that which is pleasing to Him. They will be glad to know and to do His will. They will be ready to every good work. They will be glad to assemble in His name, and to praise Him for His mercies. They will take delight in His service. C. H. C.

DAN RIVER ASSOCIATION

August 22, 1929

We left our humble home in Thornton on Thursday, July 25, for a trip in North Carolina and Virginia. We arrived in Salisbury, N. C., on Saturday morning, July 27, at 5 o'clock, and were met at the train by Brother A. L. Owen and conveyed to his home near town, where a good breakfast was prepared. Then we were conveyed by him and his wife to High Point, N. C, where the Dan River Association convened that morning and continued over Sunday and Monday. The brethren and sisters began to assemble early, and it was delightful to see them coming together and greeting each other with a pleasant smile and hearty handshake. It was so plain to be seen that love and fellowship abounded, and that sweet peace reigned in the midst. Their very countenances showed this. When they had assembled and engaged in song service for awhile, they said that we should preach the introductory sermon for them. Reluctantly we undertook the task, though we felt so much wearied from the long and tiresome journey, having been on the road for two nights, and since Thursday at noon, on account of the fact that we had missed connection in Atlanta, and thus delayed several hours in reaching Salisbury. We used Heb 6:1-3 as a foundation for our remarks. The brethren all heartily endorsed our feeble effort in trying to speak to them concerning the principles of the doctrine of Christ and of how we should go on and continue to press forward in His sweet and delightful service. The following elders were present during the meeting: R. H. Pittman, editor of the Advocate and Messenger, R. O. Raulston, C. H. Ferrel, P. W. Williard, W. F. Pruitt, C. H. White, Oscar Mullis, F. F. Eggleton, Bird Pruitt, J. R. Wilson, Joel T. Lewis, W. H. Oakes, and the writer, and Licentiate James Jones. They had preaching during the day and at night, and it was all harmonious, from first to last. Not a discordant note was sounded; not a single jar; it was all a unit. The Lord graciously blessed the servants to speak with freedom and liberty, and the brethren and sisters rejoiced at the sound of the truth, for the truth was preached all the way through. The glorious gospel was preached in its fullness and simplicity. When the gospel is preached that way in love, it does not divide the Lord's little children, but brings them together in love and sweet fellowship; and that was the effect manifested during this meeting. It was a great meeting, and one long to be remembered. These people have had a hard fight with the Absoluters, who have tried to establish tyrannical and associational rule over the Lord's dear children in this country; but the Lord is blessing them now with His divine presence and approval since they are clear of that black heresy that God absolutely predestinated the sin and wickedness and the black crimes that are committed in the world, and His sweet presence is manifested and felt in their meetings, and their meetings are now heavenly places here in this world. May His blessings continue with them, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

GOOD MEETINGS

August 22, 1929

On Tuesday, July 30, we were at Union Grove, in the Original Bear Creek Association, in North Carolina, and had meeting at 11 o'clock in the day and at night. A large crowd was present at both services, and both were sweet services. Rain came up late in the afternoon, but that did not hinder many from going to the meeting. Elders J. R. Wilson and F. F. Eggleton were with us there. On Wednesday, July 31, we were at Watson Church. Elders J. R. Wilson, F. F. Eggleton, P. J. Washburn and Oscar Mullis were with us there. It was a sweet meeting. Sister Alice Baucum came before the church and related a sweet experience of grace and asked for a home. She was gladly received by the church. Her baptism is to be attended to Saturday morning by Elder J. R. Wilson. In the afternoon we had service at the home of Sister Etta Helms, who is afflicted and not able to go to the meeting house. The same ministers were with us there. At this service Brother David Helms and Sister Lizzie Helms, son and daughter of the afflicted sister, asked for a home in the church. They were gladly received. There was much rejoicing at this service, and it was good to be there. May the Lord be praised for His goodness to the children of men.

We feel to believe that the Lord has graciously been with us so far on this trip, and we humbly trust that our trip in this country may do the Lord's little children no harm. We trust that we may have the prayers of the dear brethren and sisters, that the Lord may bless our labors among His dear children, and that He may be with and bless our dear loved ones at home in our absence from them. We received such a sweet letter from our little nine year old boy, Claudis, Jr., in which he said: "Daddy, I hope God will give you liberty to preach good, and the people will be glad to hear you, and will treat you good, give you a good bed to sleep on, and give you good things to eat and to drink. I hope God will bless you and us." This made our poor heart glad. Surely the Lord is good. Bless His holy name forever. C. H. C.

MORE GOOD MEETINGS

August 29, 1929

Since writing our last little article about some of the meetings we have been in while in North Carolina, we have filled other appointments as arranged for us in North Carolina and Virginia. The last appointment in Elder J. R. Wilson's section was at the Old Mill Church, near Danville, on Saturday and second Sunday in August. We have enjoyed good meetings all the way, and have had good congregations at most every place. The day we were at Sugar Tree (if we have the name of the place correct) there had been rain during the night and raining some that morning. The church is located off the highway or good roads, and the roads to the church were muddy and slick, so that people could hardly get there. On this account the congregation there was small. At the meeting at High Hill one sister was restored to the fellowship of the church. She went away from the church a number of years ago, but came back on the day we were there and confessed her error. She was gladly and joyfully restored to the fellowship and privileges of the church. At the meeting at Lawyer Springs, which was on Saturday afternoon and first Sunday in August, a Sister Stegall came to the church and asked for a home with them. She was joyfully received and is to be baptized at a later date by Elder Wilson, the pastor. There was a large crowd at this meeting. On Sunday afternoon the church went into the communion service and engaged in washing each other's feet. It was a great meeting. Several brethren in the ministry were present. At the meeting at the Old Mill a Sister Puckett came to the church, asking for a home with them. She was gladly and joyfully received. They had meeting on Saturday and an all day meeting on Sunday-the second Sunday in August. A large crowd was present, and an orderly one, too. They had five sermons on Sunday. In the morning the stand was occupied by Elders Oakes, Lewis and Eggleton, and in the afternoon by the writer, followed by Elder J. R. Wilson. It was a great meeting. Several brethren were there from another section, from a distance, some of them being sent there to behold the order of these people and to see what doctrine they contend for. All of them that we heard speak expressed themselves as being satisfied with the principles contended for by those brethren. At every place we went we were kindly received and the brethren were all good and kind to us-so much better than we feel to deserve. May the Lord's richest blessings rest upon them, is our humble prayer. We trust they may find it in their hearts to remember us in their prayers to the Lord. Many of them we do not expect to see again in this world of trouble, but we hope, by the grace of God, to meet them in that blessed home beyond, where sorrows, troubles and separations never come. C. H. C.

Ro 6:3-4 August 29, 1929

Dear Elder Cayce: I am very glad to know we are to receive The Primitive Baptist weekly. I would be glad to have your views on Ro 6:3-4. Is this water baptism? Can anyone be baptized into Christ's death by water baptism? Come to see us sometime. Please remember us. With best wishes, I remain, your friend, J. E. Tate. Rutherford, Tenn.

OUR ANSWER

Ro 6:1-4 reads as follows: "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." In the first verse the apostle asks a question, "Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?" Then he answers the question, "God forbid." Then he asks, "How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" This question answers itself. It is simply a stronger way of saying that those who are dead to sin cannot live any longer therein. Then he argues and proves this from what they know by experience, "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death?" To baptize is to plunge, dip, immerse, bury. To be plunged into Christ, or immersed into Christ, is not to be immersed or plunged into the water. To be baptized into Christ is to be baptized into the benefits of His death-or into His death and the benefits of the same. This is not done by the preacher, or in the water. "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit."-1Co 12:13. This is a very plain, clear, and positive statement that the baptism into Christ, or into that body, is by one Spirit. The Spirit is the administrator. It is the work of the Spirit. It is not the work of the preacher. In the next verse, verse 4, the apostle says, "Therefore;" this being true; because of this; because this is true-now, "therefore we are buried with Him by baptism into death." Verse 3 says baptized into Christ, and verse 4 says "we are buried with Him by baptism." To be baptized with Christ and to be baptized into Him are two different things-they cannot possibly be the same thing. But we are buried with Him by baptism, therefore, for the reason, that we have been baptized into Him. It is absurd to say that one must be baptized with Christ in order to get into Him. If one is baptized with Christ he must of necessity be in possession of Christ before the baptism. He must be in Christ before the baptism in order to be baptized with Him. Those who have been put into Christ and into the benefits of His death should be buried with Him by baptism into death. Such a person has been killed to the love of sin, has been killed to sin, is dead to sin, and for this reason should be buried with Him by baptism into death. "That like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life." The person thus baptized, or thus buried with Christ by baptism, is raised to walk in newness of life. There is a new joy and delight and pleasure which he cannot attain to in any other way. Friend Tate should take up his cross and be buried with his blessed Saviour in baptism and rise to walk in newness of life. May the Lord bless these thoughts to your good. C. H. C.

TOUR ENDED IN EAST

September 19, 1929

In our issue of August 29 we told about some of the meetings we had attended in North Carolina and Virginia, the last being at Old Mill Church, near Danville, Va., on the second Sunday in August. On Monday, August 12, we left Danville for Manassas, Va., and filled an appointment at that place that night. Had a very pleasant little meeting there. Spent some time in the good home of Brother W. S. Athey, who treated us very kindly. On Tuesday we went to Washington City, and filled an appointment there that night. This is the old home church of Elder C. H. Waters, deceased. On Wednesday night we filled an appointment at Bethel Church, near the city. On Thursday night we attended an appointment in the city for Elder L. V Hite, of Morral, Ohio, and heard him preach a good discourse, much to the comfort of his hearers. Elder C. W. Miller, Rosslyn, Va., near Washington, was with us at our appointments at Bethel and in the city. On Thursday Elder A. A. Garrett, of Arlington, Ga., came to the city, and we were sure glad to see him. He and Elders R. H. Pitt-man, C. W. Miller and A. J. Garland were at the meeting Thursday night. We spent the time in the home of Brother Henry L. Lee while in the city. On Wednesday Elder Miller got a young brother whose name we cannot now recall to take him with us over the city to visit some of the points of interest. On Thursday we went with Sister Lee to the station to meet Elder Garrett. Then Sister Lee took us with Elder Garrett to visit points of interest. Among the places we visited while in the city were the Capitol building, the Old Soldiers' Home, Library of Congress, Washington Monument, Lincoln Memorial, Memorial Bridge being built, National Cemetery, Arlington Amphitheater, Unknown Soldier's Grave, Robert E. Lee's old home, Mount Vernon, and the White House. In the Library we saw the Bible on which Lincoln took the oath of office as president on March 4, 1861, and the family Bible which he gave to his wife. At Mt. Vernon we saw the tomb of George and Martha Washington. While there and while at the grave of the Unknown Soldier we had a feeling of solemnity. We could but have a feeling of reverence as we stood by the open vault and looked upon the marble caskets holding the remains of the Father of our country and his wife, Martha Washington. Then when standing by the tomb of the Unknown Soldier, we could but have a feeling of sadness. The identity of this man was lost, when he had made the supreme sacrifice, laid down his life for his country. His relatives know not where he is buried, and the officials of the Government do not know who he was. In some way his identity was lost. Our blessed Saviour laid down His life, but His identity was not lost, and not one will be lost for whom He laid down His life. Though the relatives of this soldier do not know where he is buried, and though the Government for whom he laid down his life, lost his identity, and does not know who he was, yet how great and precious is the truth that our Lord knows. The Lord knows where all His loved ones are buried, and He knows who they are. A soldier is kept on guard duty over this grave all the time, and that tomb is held sacred. Peace be to the ashes of the dead hero, as well as to all the others. On Friday morning we went to Seneca Church, in Maryland, to attend the session of the Ketocton Association, which was the one hundred and sixty-third annual session. The elders present were T. S. Dalton, Baltimore, Md.; A. L. Harrison, Front Royal, Va.; C. L. Funk, Needmore, Pa.; J. T. Power, Martinsburg, W. Va.; R. H. Pittman, Luray, Va.; A. J. Garland, Washington, D. C; W. J. Green, Gray, Ga.; A. A. Garrett, Arlington, Ga.; C. W. Miller, Rosslyn, Va.; L. V Hite, Morral, Ohio; J. E. L. Alderton, Washington, D. C.; T. W. Alderton, Fredericksburg, Va.; J. B. Jenkins, Luray, Va.; J. A. Frazier, Marshall, Va.; E. J. Devane, Plant City, Fla., and the writer. Elder Dalton preached the introductory discourse, using the latter part of the forty-eighth Psalm. He preached an able discourse, and we were glad to hear this dear old servant of God once more. He is now about eighty-four years old, we believe, but is still strong in the faith. May the good Lord spare him yet many years, is our prayer. The meeting was good and the preaching a unit. Not a discordant note was sounded in the whole meeting. After the association we filled appointments in Front Royal, Va., on Monday night; Tuesday at Mill Creek, near Luray; Tuesday night at Mt. Carmel, in Luray, and Wednesday at Hawksbill, near Luray. A brother had joined at Hawksbill at a previous meeting, to be baptized on that Wednesday, which was attended to by Elder Pittman, who is the pastor. At the service that day another brother offered himself for membership and was gladly received. He went home to get a change of clothing, and his wife with him. She also brought a change of clothing for herself and offered herself for membership at the water. She was gladly received and was baptized with her husband and the other brother. We have forgotten the names of these parties. All these meetings were pleasant, and the brethren were all good to us-much better than we feel we deserve. Wednesday afternoon Elder Pittman conveyed us to New Market, where we got on a bus and went to Staunton that afternoon. At Staunton we got on a train at 7:27 p. m. for Mt. Sterling, Ky., arriving there at 7:02 Thursday morning. We were met at the train by Sister Florence Chaney and her father. He is not a member, but we think he should be. Then we attended the North District Association, which was held on Friday, Saturday and Sunday at Liberty Church, near Winchester, Ky. Deacon A. H. Rupert was moderator of this association for a long time. He passed away since the associational meeting in 1928. We had a great desire to meet him once more, but will be deprived of that privilege in this life. We hope to meet him in a better association over yonder. Brother W. R. Rupert was chosen moderator. The elders in attendance were J. W. Anderson, Irvine, Ky.; W. L. Kash, Jackson, Ky.; E. W. Harlan, Connersville, Ind.; R. H. Wilcox, An-netta, Ky., and the writer. Elder Anderson is pastor of the church there, and was appointed to preach the introductory sermon, which he did very acceptably. This was another good meeting, and the preaching was all a unit. Many of them insisted that we attend the next session, which is to be held with Goshen Church. If it seems that the way is open we may try to comply with their request. On Sunday afternoon we left Winchester for home, and arrived home on Monday afternoon, August 26, at 6:20, and found all well. Our wife and all five of the children met us at the station, and we were glad beyond expression to see them once more. Again we say that the brethren were good to us- much better than we feel we deserve. We never made a trip in life that we felt to enjoy more, and on which we were more heartily received and our poor efforts more heartily endorsed; and we humbly trust that no harm will ever result from the visit and from our efforts to speak in the name of the Master. It is our humble desire to preach peace by Jesus Christ; to try to tell what the good Lord has done for His children, and what He is doing for them, and what He has promised to do for them, and how they should live here in the world to honor and glorify His name and to be mutual helpers of each other here. May the Lord's richest blessings rest upon all whom we met and who were so kind and good to us, is our humble prayer; and we trust you will all remember us in your prayers. Pray the Lord to direct us in the right way, and to give us courage and strength to walk therein. And pray the Lord to direct and preserve and keep our dear companion, who is left in loneliness and sadness so much of the time, and who has all the home cares while we are away, and yet who never complains or murmurs, but encourages us to go in discharge of every duty. And pray for our dear children, who are left so much of the time without a father's care and protection. C. H. C.

Mt 20:16 AND Mt 22:14 September 19, 1929

Dear Brother: I have some Scripture on my mind I would like for you to give me your views on, if you have a mind to do so. The Scripture is Mt 20:16; 22:14. Wife and I enjoy reading your paper very much indeed. Wishing the good Lord to bless you and yours with His most choice blessing, is our prayer. Please pray for us when you have a mind to do so. Your friends in hope of a better world to come, Mr. and Mrs. R. L. Nowell. Headland, Ala.

REMARKS

Mt 20:16 reads, "So the last shall be first, and the first shall be last: for many be called, but few chosen." Mt 22:14 reads, "For many are called, but few are chosen." We suppose the expression, "Many be called, but few chosen,'' is what the brother wants our views on. To our mind the language simply teaches that there are many who are called out of nature's night and darkness into the marvelous light and liberty of the children of God-many are called unto or into eternal life; but few are chosen as special witnesses of God's blessed truth. The Lord has some few chosen witnesses for His blessed truth whom he will not suffer to be deceived by the false and judaizing teachers of the world. "If it were possible they would deceive the very elect" -but it is not possible. God has a very elect, the few chosen witnesses for His truth, that He will not suffer to be deceived. This is our view of the matter. May the Lord bless you. C. H. C.

ASSOCIATIONS ATTENDED

October 3, 1929

We left home on Friday, August 30, in company with Brother W. J. Peterson, to attend the meeting of the Ozark Association to be held with the church at Louis-burg, Mo. We had some car trouble, so did not get to Louisburg until Saturday morning. They had preaching Friday night, but the associational meeting began on Saturday morning. The introductory sermon was delivered by Elder D. F. Coones, and he preached a good discourse. The following named ministers were in attendance during the meeting: Elder C. C. Agee, Springfield, Mo.; D. F, Coones, Lebanon, Mo.; D. W. Witt and J. C. Haskins, Combs, Ark.; L. H. Clevenger, Excelsior Springs, Mo.; J. V Martin, M. T. Cockrel, J. A. Al-berty, Sarcoxie, Mo.; J. G. Taylor, Garfield, Ark.; Walter Cash, St. Joseph, Mo.; W. B. Howard, Freewater, Ore.; Jasper O'Dell, Springfield, Mo.; J. A. Ford, Louis-burg, Mo.; M. M. Shumate, Kansas City, Mo.; D. B. Nowells, Winona, Mo.; O. Irwin, Greencastle, Ind., and C. H. Cayce, Thornton, Ark., and Licentiates Arthur Alexander, Marshfield, Mo., and Thos. Crist, Rogers, Ark. They had service each morning, afternoon and night. The preaching was all harmonious, and the Lord graciously blessed the meeting. There were three or four additions to the church by experience and two were restored. It was a good meeting, if we are any judge. May the Lord's richest blessings rest upon them. We hope to visit them again some day. We had a little more car trouble returning home, so did not reach home until Tuesday afternoon, September 3. That night we were taken sick, and we were not able to get out of the house again until Saturday afternoon, and not able to get about much for several days. We had expected to attend the Salem Association at Blue Mountain, Ark., but the sickness kept us from it. Our wife wrote them, or the clerk, Brother Joe Loyd, at Blue Mountain, that we were sick and could not be present. Brother Loyd read the letter to the association, and they instructed him to write to us. This made us feel our littleness and insignificance so much, to be so kindly remembered by them. May the good Lord bless them. The association was held on Friday, Saturday and second Sunday in September, and we learn they had a good meeting. The South Arkansas Association was held with the church at Harmony, in Donaldson, Ark., on Friday, Saturday and third Sunday in September, the 13th, 14th and 15th. The visiting ministers in attendance were Elders P. E. Whitwell, A. Woodall, W. H. Lee, B. Isaacs, L. G. Montgomery, R. L. Piles, W. W. Fowler, J. B. Halbrook and W. T. Alderman. The home ministers in attendance were Elders J. W. Guest, A. D. Cen-cibaugh, E. W. Hargett, John R. Harris and C. H. Cayce. Elder Guest preached a good discourse in the introductory. The Lord graciously blessed the ministers to speak with liberty to the comfort of His humble poor. There were four additions to the church by experience, and the ordinance of baptism was appointed to be attended to on Sunday afternoon by Elder Guest. At the water two more presented themselves for membership and were gladly received. It was a glorious meeting all the way through. On Saturday afternoon, after the regular service was through, there were two colored brethren present- Elders M. W. Thrower and R. M. Lovett. So many expressed themselves as having a desire to hear them preach that they were requested to do so. They went to the stand to comply with the request, and the Lord blessed them to preach wonderfully. They could and did proclaim the riches of God's grace in the salvation of poor sinners with power and in demonstration of the Spirit. May the Lord bless them and keep them in the right and good old way. We left home again on Thursday, September 19, to attend the Predestinarian Association, which was held with Forked Deer Church, in Finger, Tenn., on Friday, Saturday and Sunday, September 20, 21, 22. We arrived there Friday morning. The introductory sermon was ably preached by Elder D. Hopper. The ministers in attendance were Elders D. Hopper, Jackson, Tenn.; S. E. Reid, Henderson, Tenn.; J. A. Burcham, Bath Springs, Tenn.; D. M. Neisler, Lexington, Tenn.; A. W. DeBerry, Corinth, Miss.; John Grist, Dyer, Tenn.; Commodore Brann, Dresden, Tenn.; J. H. Phillips, Huron, Tenn.; B. D. Bryant, Tiptonville, Tenn.; Harvey Smith, Rutherford, Tenn.; J. L. Fuller, Wildersville, Tenn.; L. D. Hamilton, Humboldt, Tenn.; N. V Parker, Walnut, Miss., and C. H. Cayce, Thornton, Ark. It was a good meeting and seemed to be enjoyed by all present. Brother Jim Brantley took us home with him (Lexington, Tenn.) Sunday afternoon, where we had supper and then got a train at 6:27 for Memphis. We arrived home Monday morning at 4 o'clock, and found all well, the whole family being at the depot to meet us. We felt thankful to the good Lord for His mercies and blessings. May the good Lord bless the good people who were so kind to us at all these meetings. We trust they may remember us in their prayers. C. H. C.

Mt 22:30,32 October 10, 1929

Brother J. T. Payne, Ariton, Ala., asks our views concerning the two verses as above. Mt 22:30 reads: For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven. What gave rise to this expression may be seen by reading the verses preceding, beginning with Mt 22:23. The Sadducees denied the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, and went to the Saviour with a question which they thought would overthrow that doctrine. They presented a case wherein one woman had had seven brothers for husbands, and after they had all died then the woman died. They asked whose wife she would be in the resurrection. They did not understand or know that in the resurrection earthly ties and relationships are done away. In Mt 22:29 the Saviour said: Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God. Then follows Mt 22:30, as quoted above, "In the resurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage.'' Fleshly ties and relationships are done away. The Saviour here clearly teaches the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. Mt 22:31-32 read. But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. It is true that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob had passed out of this earthly mode of existence, yet in spirit they were resting in the presence of God in the better world, with the promise of the resurrection of their bodies from the grave, or from the dead. Mark relates the same circumstance, and we find this language in Mr 12:26: And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spoke unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? Luke also gives his account of the same matter. In Lu 20:34-38 we have this language: And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of this world marry and are given in marriage: but they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are given in marriage: neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the angels; and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection. Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the bush, when he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For He is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for all live unto Him. To our mind this all teaches the truth of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead, or the doctrine of the resurrection from the dead, and that in the resurrection fleshly ties and relationships will be done away. If there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ was not raised. If Christ was not raised, then He was an impostor. If He was an impostor, then the Bible is not true. If the Bible is not true, then there is no God, and we do not know where we came from or where we are going. We are at sea without chart or compass. But Jesus was raised a living man. Therefore, the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead is established, and what Moses taught concerning the same is proven true. Then Jesus was not an impostor, and the Bible is true. The Bible being true, then God is, and is the God the Bible describes. All this being true, then God's children will all be raised in the likeness and in the image of the glorified Redeemer, and heaven is their home, and all that it contains will be theirs to enjoy-and that to all eternity, for they cannot die any more. May this be the happy lot of our readers, according to the will of God, is our humble prayer. Sometimes we feel a desire to leave this world of persecution and distress and to cross over the dark river and enter into the joys beyond. We do not know-how it will be when we reach the end of the way, but we feel that we are willing to risk our case in the hands of a merciful and loving Saviour. C. H. C.

TOO MUCH OF THE WORLD

October 31, 1929

The following is copied from an article by James A. Allen in the Gospel Advocate, of Nashville, Tenn., of Oct. 17, 1929. Of course what he has said has reference to his own people, but it appears to us that the following is true with reference to the true church to a great extent, or in a great measure. It is deplorable to see the great degree of worldliness among the professed followers of the Lord in this present age. It is distressing and deplorable. We can but wonder what the result will be. May the good Lord help and pity us. C. H. C. There is too much of the world in the churches. The members seek the approval and commendation of the enemies of the truth, instead of forgetting everything else in a single desire to do and preach God's will, as it is revealed in the Bible. Business men, who are making filthy lucre out of the world, want to squash everything in the church that antagonizes the world; and, with the exception of the faithful few, the great majority of the church are so much like the world that outsiders cannot tell the difference. Their religion is little more than a mere form and consists wholly in "going to church" for a few minutes on Sunday morning. As far as other services of the church, or the general work of the church, is concerned, they do not exist. They do not read a line in the Bible for months at a time nor do they regularly and daily engage in those prayers and thanksgivings to God, without which no man can have the strength to resist the world and to do his duty as a Christian. They lay by scarcely anything upon the first day of the week, much less a tenth, or more, as every true disciple finds an inestimable happiness in doing. They do not teach the word of God to their children nor bring their children up in the nuture and admonition of the Lord. Their sons and daughters take degrees in colleges, but they are worth little or nothing to the cause of the Lord. The family altar is never raised in their homes nor do their children know the meaning of family prayers. But, in saying this, am I a "knocker?" Is it the truth? And can reformation be brought about without telling the truth? Is it not a fact that there is so much world in the church that some of its greatest efforts almost bray of "social service," instead of having the old Jerusalem ring of old-time gospel preaching? Truth must be told, come what may. The church can never successfully do the work that God has given it to do as long as its members have a divided allegiance. As long as its members are so worldly-minded as to think they must keep up with the world, and that they must conform to the standards of the world, so long will they be a liability, not an asset, to the cause of the lowly Jesus and to the church, which He purchased with His own blood.

BIBLE CONFERENCE

October 31, 1929

In the Banner Herald of Sept. 15, 1929, appears the program of the Progressive "Primitive Baptist Bible Conference," which is to be held at Tifton Church October 29, 30, 31, 1929. On the program for Wednesday morning we find that they are to have a discussion, or article, on "The Covenant of Grace and the Relation which the Atonement, Regeneration and the Resurrection Sustain to it," by Elder J. B. Hardy, Hohenwald, Tennessee. Other names on the program at other times are, besides the address of welcome and response: Elders Wm. H. Grouse, T. E. Sikes, S. C. Davis, W. B. Screws, J. Walter Hendrix, W. F. Mims, W. B. Godard, W. W. Childs, D. O. Lewis, J. W. Crane, J. J. Johnston, J. M. Thomas, V F. Agan, S. H. Whatley, Geo. D. Godard, R. H. Jennings and Dr. T. J. McArthur. C. H. C.

A GOOD MEETING

October 31, 1929

In the Banner Herald, edited by Elder Wm. H. Crouse, the organ of the Progressives, for October 1, 1929, and in which appears the names of Elders Geo. D. Godard, J. W. Fairchild, J. W. Crane, and W. C. Kick-lighter as associate editors, we have read the following account of a meeting held at Providence Church, near Stringer, Miss. C. H. C. THE ARTICLE We had a splendid meeting at Providence Church, near Stringer, Miss., the week before and including the first Sunday in August. Elder J. B. Hardy did the preaching and every sermon was with love and power. The congregations were large and attentive. They just feasted on the glorious gospel as Elder Hardy so clearly presented it. Ten united with the church-seven by baptism, two by letter and one by relation. The entire country seemed interested, and the interest continues. At our September meeting three joined and were baptized Sunday morning. Also two by letter- one had been received but did not have his letter till this meeting. Elder J. A. Ford was with us and did the preaching Sunday to the comfort of those who are hungering and thirsting after righteousness. After preaching we took the Lord's supper and washed one another's feet. Meeting closed with a song and handshake of love and fellowship. It was good to be there because God's presence was there. J. W. Fairchild.

CALL AN OLD MAN

October 31, 1929

Brother Cayce, do you think that the Lord would call a man to preach in his old days? and me being very unlearned in the Scriptures, and have a poor education, and very poor in this world's goods and a large family to care for? When you pray for yourself and all of God's dear children, please pray for me and mine. May God's richest blessings rest upon you and yours, is my prayer, for Jesus' sake. I am, I hope, your brother in hope of rest after this life is over, F. M. Akers. Dana, Ky.

REMARKS

We only feel a desire to call attention to one or two passages of Holy Writ in commenting on what this dear brother has said. 1Co 1:26-29 "For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in His presence." Jas 2:5 "Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which He hath promised to them that love Him?" Ac 4:13 "Now when they saw the boldness of Peter and John, and perceived that they were unlearned and ignorant men, they marvelled; and they took knowledge of them, that they had been with Jesus." We do not know how old the apostles were, nor how old any of the seventy were, when the Lord put them into the ministry. He is as able to call an old man to the work of the ministry as a young man. If one feels an impression of mind in this work we think the best thing for him to do is to try, the best he can, to discharge what he feels to be his duty, and try to labor in the field he feels the Lord has assigned him. May the Lord bless you. C. H. C.

ABSOLUTE POWERS OF POPE REVEALED LEGISLATION AND ADMINISTRATION OF VATICAN CITY LAWS REST WITH PONTIFF November 7, 1929

In the Arkansas Gazette, Little Rock, Ark., of Sunday, September 8, 1929, under the above heading the following article, by the Associated Press, appeared on page 10. The claim that Catholics and others made not so long ago that the Pope and the Catholic Church only claim to have rule or control over spiritual matters is now proven to be a false claim. The territory of the Vatican City is turned over to the Pope, and he is the supreme ruler and king in all matters, both state and spiritual. He is the absolute and undisputed master in that territory. The Pope has the absolute power to grant "pardon, amnesty, indults and condonements." The pardoning power is in the Pope alone. All the powers confirmed to the Pope more than 300 years ago in the Canon Law Code of 1607 are reserved. "The power to make particular regulations to cover specific codes may be entrusted by the Pope to the governor of the Vatican state;" "but the governor is responsible to the Pope and no one else, and receives his orders directly from the Pontiff." In judicail matters there are three different courts to exercise power; but the Pope has the privilege of appointing the judges, and he also has the right to remove judges at will. "The Supreme Pontiff, sovereign of the State of Vatican City, has the fullness of the legislative, executive and judicial powers." The Pope designates himself alone as the fountain head of power and the source of law within the new political entity. If all this does not prove, beyond question and without a doubt, that Rome is a menace to our free government, we do not know what they would have to do to prove it. It is high time our people were awake to the dangers that are lurking near, and be on guard and awake to their duty. These things prove clearly that a true Catholic is a subject of a foreign government and power, the supreme head of which is the Pope. What right does a man have to retain allegiance to France, Germany, Spain, Italy, or any other foreign power, and at the same time have the rights and privileges of citizens of the United States? In order to have the rights and privileges of citizens of the United States one must renounce allegiance to the French or German governments, if he is a Frenchman or German. They have as much right to claim citizenship under our government as the subject of any other foreign power. There are many good people in the Catholic Church, but we are afraid of the rulers over them and of their claims. Read the following article carefully, and then do not forget what it says. C. H. C.

THE ARTICLE

Vatican City, Sept. 7.-The absolute power of the Pope in church affairs is further emphasized by the Fundamental Laws of twenty-one articles promulgated for Vatican City following the ratification of the Lateran Treaties with Italy. By the Fundamental Laws the legislation and administration of Vatican City, together with all judicial powers therein, are made to depend directly and only upon the Pontiff. Pius XI designates himself alone as the fountain head of power and the source of law within the new political entity. Thus the laws with reference to Vatican City bear out the teaching of Canon Law, which holds that the Pope is the Supreme Head of the Church, subject to no control from outside. The College of Cardinals comes into play only in Consistories which approves new cardinals, in the Conclave which elects a new Pope, in councils wherein the Pope proclaims a new doctrine, and in Committees and Congregations appointed for specific duties. Canon Law says that the Pope is infallible when, in conjunction with the College of Cardinals, he proclaims a dogma of faith or morals. The Fundamental Laws start off by saying: "The Supreme Pontiff, Sovereign of the State of Vatican City, has the fullness of the legislative, executive and judicial powers." Should the throne of St. Peter be vacant, the College of Cardinals has power to make laws only during that vacancy; and even then those laws will not continue valid unless confirmed by the succeeding Pontiff. All those powers confirmed to the Pope more than 300 years ago in the Canon Law Code of 1607 are carefully reserved. The powers delegated to other dignitaries are circumscribed and made to hang on the pleasure of the Holy Father. For instance, the power to make particular regulations to cover specific codes may be entrusted by the Pope to the governor of the Vatican state- Commendatore Serafini. But the governor is responsible to the Pope and no one else, and receives his orders directly from the Pontiff. The judicial power is more specifically delegated to other bodies, but even here the Pope retains the upper hand. In civil cases, the judicial power within the Vatican City will be exercised by three courts-a tribunal of first instance, the Roman Rota sitting as a court of appeal, and the Supreme Tribunal as a court of last resort. The privilege of appointing judges of these courts rests solely with the Pontiff. He has also the right to remove judges at will. The pardoning power resides also in the Pope alone. The Fundamental Laws declare that there remain reserved to the Pontiff "the faculty of granting pardon, amnesty, indults and condonements." The Fundamental Laws are another step in the centuries old contest of power between the Papacy and the Cardinals. This contest was aired in several Councils of the Church, wherein the Cardinals sought to circumscribe the supreme power of the Pope, and make it depend upon them. In some cases Kings and Emperors, irritated by the vigorous stand of the Pope, sided with the Cardinals. But today the Pope is undisputed master.

1Ti 5:9-11 November 7, 1929

We have been requested to give our views on the Scripture recorded in 1Ti 5:9-11. You can get your Bible and read it. We do not feel that it is necessary to say more than just a few words concerning the language recorded in the citation given. The apostle is there giving direction as to the poor widow who should be taken under the care of the church and provided for by the church. The qualifications are there laid down. She should be three score years old, having been the wife of one man, well reported of for good works, etc. This is all we can get out of the language-that it simply gives the qualifications of the widow who is to be cared for by the church. C. H. C.

Heb 6:1-6 November 14,1929

Brother L. F. Guy, of Bienville, La., has requested our views of Heb 6:1-6. The verses read as follows: Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. And this will we do, if God permit. For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame. By the term, or the word, "leaving'' in verse 1 the apostle does not mean to"forsake,"but not to continue along that particular line all the time. The principles of the doctrine are not to be lost sight of, but there is something else to consider in addition to that. We should go on in the service of God, and contend for the true and right service of the Lord, and not be along the line of the defense of the doctrine all the time. In order that God be honored and His name glorified by us here in the world it is necessary that we go on in His service, doing the things He has commanded, as well as to remember and contend for the principles of His doctrine. The fundamental principles of the doctrine of God are as a foundation; they serve as a foundation. All true and acceptable service to God must rest upon those fundamental principles of doctrine. But we are not to continue working at the laying of the foundation all the time. Lay the foundation, and then go to work in building on that foundation. The only foundation worth building upon is the doctrine of God our Saviour-and we are not to forget any of the fundamental principles of that doctrine. The blood of Christ applied to the conscience by the Spirit of God is that which purges the conscience from dead works to serve the living God. See Heb 9:13-14. This is the work of God, and is not to be lost sight of. It is an independent work-that is, it is done independently of the work of the sinner or any human being. This is a part of the foundation, but we are not to talk of that all the time. It should be impressed, and advocated, a part of the time, but not all the time. It is one of the things necessary to be done in order that we be able to go on. The same is true in all the fundamental principles of the doctrine of God our Saviour. It is not necessary here to refer to, or to take up, all the fundamental principles of that doctrine. Suffice to say that five fundamental points of that doctrine, more especially, are, election-God's sovereign choice of sinners of Adam's race to be heirs of glory; predestination (He predestinated His chosen ones to be conformed to the image of His Son); effectual calling (the Holy Spirit effectually calls those chosen ones out of nature's night and darkness and translates them into the marvelous light and liberty of the children of God); final preservation of the saints (they are preserved in Jesus Christ); and, finally, the resurrection of the dead; the bodies of the saints to be changed and made spiritual and to be glorified and made like Jesus, and the bodies of the unjust to be raised to condemnation. {Joh 5:25,28-29} These principles of the doctrine of Christ, or of the doctrine of God, are the foundation upon which true service must be built and upon which the same must rest. Let us not continue to work on this foundation all the time-that is, do not continue all the time in laying the foundation; but let us lay this foundation, and then go on upon that foundation unto perfection. Does he mean to go on unto a state of sinless perfection? No; but to a state of Christian perfection. Sinless perfection is one thing and Christian perfection is another thing. The Scriptures are given"that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." {2Ti 3:16} By building on this foundation- going on in doing the things the Scriptures teach, and leaving undone everything the Scriptures do not teach, we may attain to that state of perfection in the service of God which He requires."Let us go on unto perfection. '' It seems to us that the apostle uses this expression as an encouragement to the Lord's little children to strive to this end. Evidently this is not a state of sinless perfection, because He says in Ga 5:17 "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would." What would you do? Sure you would live above and without and free from sin, but you cannot do that. There is a warfare continually in the child of God as long as he lives in this world of sorrow and trouble, and he cannot attain to a state of sinless perfection in this life. But though this be true, we should "go on unto perfection"-a state of Christian perfection, or state of perfection in service. Let us strive to that end. Let us not be weary in well doing. These things to do in order to that end are the things the Lord has commanded, the things the Scriptures teach, and to leave undone and to let alone all the inventions and commandments of men. "And this will we do, if God permit." Here is a promise of the Lord's help. Let us go on in His service, relying upon Him, trusting Him. Let us not wait to see if men will approve or whether they will condemn. The Lord is a very present help in time of need. The certainty and the infallibility of the work of God is an encouragement here presented for God's little children. "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened * * * * if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame." Jesus died for them to redeem them from all iniquity and to bring them to God, that they might live with Him in eternal glory. If one of them should fall away from that divine relationship with Him, then the work of Christ would prove a failure in that case, and He would be put to an open shame. It would become necessary for Him to leave His home in glory and come into this world and die again. He is alive forevermore, and will never die again. His work is perfect. {De 32:4} Therefore these persons shall never fall away and be finally lost. This should encourage the Lord's little children to press on in His service and to honor and glorify His blessed name while they live in the world. Let us go on in His blessed and sweet and delightful service. We have here given just a few thoughts in connection with the language recorded in the passage referred to. May the Lord bless the same to the good of our readers. Much more could be said, but we must stop for this time. Pray the Lord to help us to press on in the "good old way." C. H. C.

Jer 23:1-2 November 21, 1929

Elder C. H. Cayce: Dear Brother-Please give your views through the paper on Jer 23:1-2. Should pastors treat members so cold that they feel it is better to stay at home than it is to go to church? Hope you will give your views on the above Scripture. May God bless you with every needed blessing while you make your stay in this unfriendly world, to enable you to stand for the great cause you are so nobly standing for. I feel from reading after you that you are one of our blessed Father's under shepherds. May our heavenly Father uphold you, is my prayer. When you have remembered all others, please remember poor little me, the weakest of the weak; but when I am weak, He is strong. I am so glad that I, a poor little one, am permitted sometimes to rejoice in His love. Your poor little sister, I hope, Miss Louise Killey. Alvord, Texas.

OUR REPLY

The text referred to above reads as follows: Woe be unto the pastors that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the Lord. Therefore thus saith the Lord God of Israel against the pastors that feed my people; Ye have scattered my flock, and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the Lord.-Jer 23:1-2. We hardly know how to even begin to write an article on the above text. The very language itself shows very clearly that there is such a thing as the pastors destroying and scattering the sheep of the Lord's pasture. Because they do this the Lord pronounces a woe upon them. It is a serious and deplorable thing for the pastors thus to do. It has often been said that the preachers are responsible for all, or nearly all, the trouble that arises in the church of God. No doubt this is partly true. Sometimes a preacher advances an idea which another preacher does not endorse, so he takes issue and tries to overthrow the other brother's idea. Then the other brother tries to defend his position, and thus the war begins. Hence they are responsible for the war being begun. If the churches would stop them right then and there, and not let them preach any more until they agree to stop their warfare, then the destruction of the churches and the scattering of the Lord's children would be prevented. Do not stop one and let the other one continue on, but stop them both, and thus show no partiality. Usually such wars begin over trifles, and differences, or seeming differences, are magnified, and they get farther apart instead of getting together. This is a deplorable thing and a bad state of affairs, and the Lord has pronounced a woe upon the pastors or preachers who thus do. Sometimes a preacher may get jealous of his brother in the ministry. For instance, a preacher may come along, who is new in the vicinity. "A new broom sweeps clean," you know. He may present the same truths which have been set forth and advocated there all the time, but he does so in a different way from that which the people have been accustomed to, and they enjoy the preaching. Perhaps they will (some of them) tell the brother how they enjoyed his preaching. This is all right for them to do that. But some of them may say something like this: "If we had such preaching as this our church would grow and prosper." This may be wrong. Perhaps the pastor hears that statement and it may cause him to have a bad feeling toward his brother in the ministry. True, it should not cause him to have such a feeling, but it may do so. If he has a bad feeling toward anyone on account of such as this, it should be toward the one making such a statement, or saying such things. But he should not have a bad feeling toward even that one on account of a thing of this kind. True, it would make him feel discouraged, and that he was not appreciated-and he could not help such a feeling as that. But he should not have ill will toward his brother in the ministry on account of it. And the congregation of brethren and sisters may come up and tell the visiting preacher how much they enjoyed his preaching, and not think to speak to the pastor, and he may be made to feel that he is neglected, and this may arouse in him a dislike for the visiting preacher. It is wrong, however. He may even harbor a little feeling of spite toward his brother in the ministry, and may have a little feeling in his heart that "I wish they would praise me a little, too." Unless he watches himself very closely, and overcomes it, there will be jealousy in his heart, and then matters are in a good condition for a disturbance to begin. Woe unto that man who lets jealousy rule in his heart. Sometimes a preacher may decide that the best way to have room for his own gift is to get another preacher out of the way; and so he may begin to watch for an opportunity to destroy the brother he thinks is in his way. The truth of the matter is that when the Lord's servants labor in the field the Lord assigns to them, and where they should labor, there is not another of the Lord's ministers in his way. There is room for all the gifts from the Lord. "A man's gift maketh room for him, and bringeth him before great men."-Pr 18:16. We should all remember this, and not try to make room for ourselves by destroying our brother. When we try to make room for ourselves by destroying another, it brings destruction and scatters the Lord's little ones, and the Lord has pronounced a woe upon us. How careful the Lord's ministers should be to set right examples before the people. He should never say, "Don't do as I do, but do as I tell you to do." Paul never left on record such a statement for our learning. He said, "Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."-1Co 11:1. "For yourselves know how ye ought to follow us: for we behaved not ourselves disorderly among you."-2Th 3:7. The preacher who does not take heed to himself to set right examples before the brethren and before the world may, and doubtless will, cause coldness and distress among the Lord's children. The sheep will be scattered. Then woe to that preacher. He loses his influence, and his preaching will not have the influence for right living that it will have if he sets the right examples. Now, a word about the pastor treating a member with coldness. Sometimes a member may think that the pastor has done such a thing when he had no such idea or intention. We should not expect too much of the pastor. One might be feeling cast down and not go to the pastor, and the pastor might feel that the member has treated him with coldness. We should not be too ready to think thus about each other. Remember that "charity thinketh no evil." Let us all try to excuse rather than accuse each other. There are so many things which might be said along these lines that we may have left unsaid the very things which should have been said, but we must stop here. May the good Lord help us all to live in such a way that peace and sweet fellowship may abound among the Lord's dear children. If we would all live as we should, the church would be made an inviting place for the Lord's little ones, and we would see them coming home to the church and asking for a shelter from the world and a place with us in the sweet and delightful service of our heavenly Master. May the good Lord pity us and help us so to live, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

ILL HEALTH PREVENTS GOING

November 28, 1929

We have been requested to attend a meeting of investigation near Smithville, N. C, but we cannot go on account of a failure in our health. Our family physician has said we must not take any more long trips now. We do not know whether we can be restored to health or not, but it is our desire to do all we can to that end. Our physician discovered our condition on October 30, in examining us. Since that time we have been trying to follow his instructions, and have been under his treatment. For the first week our condition seemed to grow worse, then seemed to improve. We are to go to him again in a few days for another examination. We desire that no one think hard of us for not making any long trips now, and we sincerely ask an interest in the prayers of all the Lord's humble poor. Pray that we may be restored to health, if it can be the Lord's will; and pray that we may be reconciled to our lot and to His will, and that He may bless our dear loved ones. C. H. C.

HEALTH BROKEN

December 19,1929

A few weeks ago we stated that we could not go to North Carolina in answer to a call from some brethren there on account of a failure in our health. A number of good brethren have written good and encouraging letters to us, and expressed much sympathy, and the hope that we might be improving. Well, we cannot say that we are any better. Some days we feel fairly well, and then perhaps the next day we feel very badly. Our physician forbids us making any long trips. He says we should not travel all day- go only what may be called a short distance. He has required that we do no more than half what we have been doing heretofore. He also tells us we must not worry, and that we must take things easy. He does not give us much encouragement as to recovery. If we can do as he tells us we may live for some years yet. Otherwise, we realize our stay here is short, and that we are liable to drop off the stage of action at any time. Now we have been frank to tell you our condition, as we understand it, and from what our physician has told us, as well as from what other physicians have told us concerning the trouble we have. We feel that we want to get well, if it can be the good Lord's will, so that we may go on in His service, as we have tried to do for the past forty years. If this is not His will, we desire to be reconciled to His will, whatever that may be. Please pray for us and our dear family. C. H. C.

CLOSE OF VOLUME FORTY-FOUR

December 19, 1929

This issue of The Primitive Baptist is the close of the forty-fourth volume. For forty-four years this paper has been published without change of ownership. The only change in that respect is that the paper was established by our father, Elder S. F. Cayce, the first of January, 1886, who continued as editor until his death in August, 1905, since which time we have been trying to fill the place as editor. Just before father's death he had a long talk with us, in which he told us he felt that his labors were about done, and that he wanted us to take up the editing of the paper and to carry it on after his death. This we have tried to do with what ability we possessed. At that time the circulation of the paper was about 5,000. The circulation is larger now than it was then, but not as large as it has been at some of the times since. Our experience is the same as that of our brethren who are engaged in editing Primitive Baptist papers, we are sure-and that is that it is a whole lot harder now to keep the circulation of a paper from going down than it used to be. We are sure other brethren have realized this, as well as we have. How well we have succeeded in keeping the paper up to a right standard in publishing and maintaining the truth, and setting forth the true principles of the doctrine that has characterized the true church in all ages is for the brethren and our readers to judge. We are free to confess that we have made mistakes; but we have tried to do our best to publish a paper for the advancement of the Primitive Baptist cause and the advancement of truth. In all these years it has been our desire and our aim to follow the right and to do what was right, and to publish such things as would be for the good of the cause, regardless of what the result might be from a financial standpoint. Sometimes we have been told that unless we would publish certain things, or do certain things, that subscribers would quit taking the paper. We have said that we would try to follow the course which we felt was right, if every subscriber we had should quit on account of it. The primary consideration has not been a matter of financial returns, or whether we would have subscribers for the paper, but to do the right thing, regardless of the result from a financial standpoint. Now, at this time, we are not sorry we have pursued this course. We now feel a peaceful conscience that we have done this, though we are sure that we might have gained financially, at times, by pursuing a different course. We trust that our readers are better pleased now than some of them were when we first changed to a weekly. You will remember that we did not promise to get out a paper during Christmas week, and that is the only week in the year that we expect to miss hereafter. If we live through next year we expect to send the paper out every week during the year, except Christmas week, and that will be fifty-one issues for the whole year. There have not been that many issues this year, because the paper was published only twice a month until June 27. This issue makes thirty-eight for this year. We have given a total of 584 pages of reading matter, and some of the pages extra large. The same amount of reading matter supplied to you in book form would cost you not less than five dollars, perhaps more. Though many have complained that the price is too high, yet we know by long years of experience and from our knowledge of the cost of books and other printed matter, that we have given more reading matter of the kind than could have been had any other place for the price. We believe we would be safe in saying that no other religious publication in the United States gives more reading matter for the money than we do in The Primitive Baptist. It is true that trashy story papers charge a very low price for their papers, but they spend all they get for subscriptions in order to get more names on their list. They want, and must have, a large list-hundreds of thousands-in order to get the large volume of advertising at a high price-and that is the way they make their money. Religious papers do not get the high price for the advertising-what little they do-because they do not have the large list the story papers have. So they have to depend on the subscription receipts to pay the cost of publication. Now, we bid you all farewell for the year 1929. The next issue of the paper will be dated January 2, 1930. May the Lord's richest blessings rest upon every one of our readers, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

1930

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME XLV

January 2, 1930

With this issue we begin the forty-fifth volume of The Primitive Baptist. Forty-four years the paper has been published, without any intermission. There have been some rough places and some trials and conflicts along the way, but the Lord has been good to us. We still confess that mistakes have been made. But we desire to forget "the things that are behind, and press forward toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." We desire to not only keep up the standard the paper has attained to, but we desire to make every improvement possible. We do not mean to convey the idea in this statement that we desire to improve on the doctrine which has been maintained in this paper since the first issue, January 1, 1886. The same old principles of doctrine and practice which have characterized the true church in all ages past are still good enough for us. There can be no improvement on true principles, or the principles of truth. Principles are eternal and never change. Recently we received a suggestion from a sister, which we will here state for our readers, and we would be glad to hear from them as to what they think about it. We receive a great deal more matter for the paper than we have room for. We have on file now a large number of good letters sent us for the paper which we do not have room for. Many of them are good, and we would like to publish them; but, as stated, we do not have room. Of course it is also true that we receive a number of letters that we do not think prudent, or best for the cause, for them to be published. We also receive a great many private letters, sent from one person to another, which are sent to us with a request to publish, that are of interest to the parties directly concerned, but not of general interest. Of course the paper is for the general interest of the readers, and frequently we have to lay such letters aside. Now, this brings us to the sister's suggestion, which is this: Have what she calls an honor roll, or give it some other name, in which we publish a list of writers whose articles could not be used. The idea of the one making the suggestion was that the writer and all the readers could know we received an article from the person named on the list, and that thereby some might get in communication with parties they would be glad to get in touch with. Now, write us what you think about this. If a sufficient number would be glad to have a list occasionally we think we could try to give it to you. Another suggestion, made by a brother, was that we publish obituaries of none only ministers. We are frank to say that we do not really believe the brother's suggestion would be the best. It is true that obituaries of some may be published that are not of interest to all our readers, and especially is it true that they are sometimes made too long, but we would not say to leave them out of the paper entirely. Some of our subscribers love to read the obituaries, and get comfort therefrom. We are glad to publish the obituaries for the benefit and consolation of those who are bereaved, and they all have our sincere sympathy. But we would appreciate it if they would make them as short as they well can, and not try to write poetry in them. We think it is seldom necessary to even use poetry in an obituary, much less try to write poetry. Poetry is really more than writing so as to have a rhyme. We confess we do not know much about poetry, but we do know that a lot of matter called poetry is not really poetry at all, as it is written without regard to what is called poetical feet. Now, it is not necessary to try to explain about poetical feet, for it would take too much space, and we do not know enough about it to explain it all, anyway. What we mean above about rhyme is that simply a rhyme is not poetry. Now, we want to make a suggestion ourselves about obituaries, which is this: We do not think it best to publish obituaries of persons who have been dead such a long time. Sometimes we have received obituaries of persons who had been dead several years. We have sometimes given space for them when we really thought it best not to do so. It awakens old sorrows, and brings new pangs to the hearts of some, or else it freshens the old pangs, and causes the old sorrows to revive. It makes the old wounds to become fresh. In some rare instances and under certain circumstances it is all right to make some mention of some who passed away in the years gone by, and some may be made to receive comfort by so doing. But publishing an obituary of one who died some years ago seldom brings such comfort. Let us try to be considerate along this line, as well as along all other lines. We expect, if not providentially prevented, to send out fifty-one issues of the paper during the year 1930. This will give our subscribers 816 pages of reading matter during the next year at a cost of only $2. Do you think you could get a book of 816 pages, the size pages of The Primitive Baptist, for near that price? A book of that many pages, of that size, would cost a great deal more than that. In the present form you can easily preserve your papers and sew them together, and have a good book at the end of the year. Keep all your papers. They will be valuable some day. We are trying to get arrangements made for binders to furnish our subscribers at a very low price, so they can make the papers into books that will be easily preserved, and be very valuable in future years. If we can make the arrangements mentioned, announcement will be made in the paper. We are glad for the brethren and sisters to write for the paper. We trust they will continue to do that, as they may feel impressed of the Lord. If we cannot publish all we get, it will give us a larger supply to select from. We need a variety in the paper, just as we need a variety in preaching. If a man preaches along one line all the time, his congregation would not get the proper variety of nourishment. They would not get "a balanced ration.'' The result would be that they would be weak along some lines. So we need to give "a balanced ration" in the paper. Since our health is not good, and we cannot go from home on preaching tours now, as we have been doing for all these years, perhaps we can write more for the paper ourselves. We now make the promise that we will try. It is true that several issues during the latter part of 1929 we had no article in the paper. When our health failed we were very far behind with our work of answering letters, and other work. Our wife turned in and helped us out, but we were not physically able to do more, and were trying to catch up with the work first. Thanks for her help, our work along that line is nearer up than it has been for a long time. She will still help us along as she can. Then if our health will admit we hope to do more writing for the paper this year than we did last, and we did more last year than we did the year before, or for several years before. Another thing, now. Unless our health improves we cannot get out among the brethren, as we have been doing. This being true, we will need the help of our brethren to keep up the circulation of the paper. Will you do all you can to get the brethren and sisters and friends to take the paper? Will you help us in this way? Or, will you neglect it, and forget us in our poor health? We have confidence in you to believe you will help us all you can to get subscribers for the paper. We desire to publish such things in the paper as will benefit, comfort and instruct the Lord's dear children, and that will promote the cause of the Master. Newfangled ways and notions will not do that. Efforts to reform and revolutionize the old church will not promote peace and fellowship among the brethren. We do not need any progressive measures. To progress is to leave the old landmarks. But we should be aggressive in the service of our God. Aggression is one thing and progression is another. The matter of progression was fought out in the ranks years ago. We cannot now afford to go back on the stand our people took then. To do so would be to confess that we all did wrong in standing for the old and original principles then. "Woe unto them that go down to Egypt for help." The church of Christ is a separate institution from the world, and is not of the world. We cannot raise the world up to the church by adopting and practicing things in the church that are invented by the world. To endeavor to do so would only bring the church down to the world instead of raising the world up to the church. Let us faithfully and humbly stand upon the same old principles which have characterized the true church in all the ages past. May the Lord help us all to do that, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

2Ti 2:15 January 9, 1930

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that need-eth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.-2Ti 2:15.

We desire to write just a few lines on this text. It contains more than we can write about in one little article, but we desire to call attention to just a few thoughts contained in the same.

Paul was here writing to a young preacher, and giving instruction to him as to how he should live, as well as how he should preach. We are sure that the instruction here given to this preacher would be good for all the Lord's preachers in this present day, as well as in all time to come.

He first says, here, to "study." It is necessary for the preacher, as well as others, to study the Bible in order to know what it teaches. He is to "study to shew thyself approved"-not unto men, but "unto God." Unless he lives as he should, he is not approved unto God; that is, God does not approve of his conduct. This is sufficient to show the necessity of the preacher living an honorable and upright life. His character should be above reproach. His life should be such that people have confidence in him as a man. He "must be of good report of them that are without." He must study to show himself approved unto God, "a workman that needeth not to be ashamed." We have known some who should be ashamed, if they are not, for the way they have lived.

The preacher is to be an overseer. An overseer is one who is to show others how to do. Then the preacher should show others of the Lord's people how to do-not simply tell them, but show them by living right himself. Thus he sets the right example. And the preacher is to be an ensample to the flock. That is, he is to set the right example before them. He should study to do this, and to thus be approved unto God, and not to be ashamed.

Next, the apostle says, "rightly dividing the word of truth." Notice that he uses the word rightly. This shows that there may be such a thing as wrongly dividing the word of truth. This does not mean to divide truth from error. But to rightly divide the word of truth will expose error. It is a universal fact that this is so. The word divide here means especially to apply -to make the right application. In order to show the necessity of rightly dividing the word of truth, suppose we here call attention to two different passages of Holy Writ. The first we call attention to is 2Ti 1:9, which reads, "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." The next passage we call attention to is 1Ti 4:16 "Take heed unto thyself and unto the doctrine: continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee."

In the first text the apostle emphatically declares that our being saved is not according to our works. In this all our works, whether good or bad, are excluded from the work of salvation. In the other text the same apostle says that "in doing this thou shalt both save thyself and them that hear thee." Doing is working. To do a thing one must work at it. Here the apostle plainly declares that there is a saving which comes as a result of "doing this"-doing what is here commanded. There is no man on earth who can harmonize these two passages without rightly dividing the word of truth-making the right application of each text. This also plainly shows that there is more than one kind of saving spoken of, or else the two passages cannot be harmonized-or, rather, that harmony cannot be shown any other way.

In the first text the apostle is telling how one is saved from his sins, brought into divine relationship with God, brought out of nature's darkness and translated into the marvelous light and liberty of the children of God, and also how it is not done. It is not according to our works that one is thus saved and called with an holy calling. It is alone God's doing, and is altogether by His grace.

In the second text he was telling one who was already a child of God and a minister of the gospel how he should live, and how he should do and act. And in doing this he would save himself and those that hear him. He would not save himself from eternal ruin by doing this, for that is not according to our works.

This shows the necessity of "rightly dividing the word of truth." It shows the necessity of making the right application of the word of truth in every particular. Bear in mind that there is more than one kind of saving spoken of in the Bible. Then when we find the word saved, we should apply it where it belongs. There is more than one kind of justification spoken of in the Bible, and where we find justification spoken of, we should apply it where it belongs. There is more than one kind of faith spoken of in the Bible, and where we find faith spoken of, apply it where it belongs. There is more than one kind of temptation spoken of in the Bible, and where we find temptation spoken of, let us apply it where it belongs. In making the right application of the Scriptures we rightly divide the word of truth. May the Lord help us all to do this. C. H. C.

MANY, MANY THANKS

January 16, 1930

We will try to express our thanks to the readers of The Primitive Baptist for their kind words of sympathy and encouragement to Elder Cayce since his health has not been so good. He appreciates each letter, each word of encouragement, so much. Makes him feel like pressing on awhile longer. It does him so much good to know that the readers of The Primitive Baptist are begging the dear Lord in his behalf. We feel that the prayers of the righteous availeth much, so please continue to remember him in your petitions. We also wish to thank each one who so kindly remembered us during the holidays with cards and other remembrances. It makes our poor hearts rejoice to be so remembered. Elder Cayce's condition seems better. The blood pressure is easier controlled now than it was at the first. On last Wednesday night he took the bed with flu. He is now (January 6) in bed, but improving slowly. Time forbids answering the hundreds of letters of sympathy and encouragement. So please, each one, consider this a personal note to you. And when you have a mind to, write to him again. Flowers now are more appreciated than when silent in death. May this New Year bring happiness and joy and prosperity to each reader, is my prayer. While remembering Elder Cayce and all others, please remember me. I feel to need the prayers of God's children. Yours in hope, Mrs. C. H. Cayce.

PRICE NOT HIGH January 16, 1930

When the size of the paper was changed to the present form we received some complaint in regard to the reduction in size. Brother W. W. Hollingsworth commented some on that line. This caused us to send Brother Hollingsworth two copies of six other Old Baptist papers, besides The Primitive Baptist, recognized as our sort of Baptists, with the request that he, at leisure time, count all the words in each paper, and to count only reading matter, no advertisements, in The Primitive Baptist; and then to please write us how The Primitive Baptist compares in price with other Baptist papers. And after such a count to please tell us if he thought The Primitive Baptist too high. An article appearing elsewhere in this paper shows how well and thoroughly he has gone into the matter. Having no desire to wound the feelings of any brother editor, or to injure any paper, we do not give the names of any of the papers in Brother Hollingsworth's article. All the desire we have in the matter is to show how utterly without foundation is any complaint that the price of The Primitive Baptist is too high. For it is far cheaper than any other published in the United States or elsewhere. Reading matter at a cost of 21 mills per 1,000 words would give 3,478 words for one cent. Anyone knows this is not a high price for reading matter. So if you do not wish to take The Primitive Baptist, do not tell us it is because the price is too high. But tell us the truth about it, if you are able to take a paper at all, and tell us you do not want it or that you are too stingy to pay for a religious paper. On the other hand, if you are not really able to pay for a paper, do not write us the paper is too high, but tell us your true condition, and you will not have (on account of your poverty) to do without the comfort and enjoyment the paper would give you. If you cannot pay the regular price of the paper, as low as it is, then pay what you can. If you cannot pay anything at all, please be frank and tell us your condition in a private letter, and we will try to see that you will have the comfort and pleasure of reading the paper. We do not want any of the Lord's little ones to be deprived of reading the paper on account of poverty. Please read this article again, and read and re-read Brother Hollingsworth's article. Then tell us if you do not really think that The Primitive Baptist is not the cheapest Old Baptist paper published. This is not said through any disrespect to others or with any disparagement of others; for no doubt they are giving as much reading matter as they can afford, considering the size of their circulation and the cost of production under ordinary conditions. Are you willing now to lend a helping hand, and to do all you can in extending the circulation of The Primitive Baptist, and to show them with these facts that the price of the paper is very low? Now, Brother Hollingsworth, we know this accounting has taken quite a bit of time and thought. We certainly appreciate your valuable article. Elder Cayce is sick in bed with the flu. He suggested some of the foregoing things to write. We will appreciate any help the subscribers may render by sending in new subscribers. If anyone gets a copy of this paper who once took the paper, and not getting it now, don't let your name stay off the list any longer. Send us your subscription at once, and help us to keep the paper going weekly at this extremely low price. Yours in hope, Mrs. C. H. Cayce.

TO THE SUBSCRIBERS OF THE PRIMITIVE BAPTIST

January 16, 1930

The following article by our precious Brother Hollingsworth, who has since been called to his eternal home of rest, is the article referred to in the foregoing article written by our dear companion. We feel that the readers of this book should have the benefit of the following article; hence we are giving space for it. Consider well what Brother Hollingsworth has done in making the calculations he did, and what he said in regard to the price we get for the reading matter we publish. C. H. C.

THE ARTICLE

About the time Elder Cayce changed The Primitive Baptist from its original makeup, to its present magazine size, there was quite a bit of unfavorable criticism and occasionally dissatisfaction expressed. These expressions led to the thought of making a comparison with other papers of a like nature. The writer got seven of our papers, which appear to represent an average. He carefully counted the words in one copy of each publication, omitting all advertising matter. For the benefit of the subscribers of The Primitive Baptist, and more especially for those who are inclined to be critical, we give below the result of our findings; showing the number of words in a single copy of each publication, the number of issues per year, the subscription price, the number of words each subscriber gets each year, and the price its editor gets for each thousand words; the same being its cost to the subscriber. The primitive baptist Published weekly; subscription $2.00 per year; each copy contains approximately 18,612 words; fifty-two copies gives each subscriber 707,824 words in one year at a cost of each thousand words of about 2J mills. Paper No. 1. Published monthly; subscription $2.00 per year; each copy contains approximately 12,146 words; twelve copies would give each subscriber 291,504 words at a cost per 1,000 words of about 61/2 mills. Paper No. 2. Published semi-monthly; subscription $2.00 per year; each copy contains approximately 11,200 words at a cost per 1,000 words of about 71/2 mills. Paper No. 3. Published monthly; subscription $1.50 per year; each copy contains approximately 16,064 words; twelve copies would give each subscriber per year 192,768 words at a cost per 1,000 words of about 7| mills. Paper No. 4. Published semi-monthly; subscription $2.00 per year; each copy contains approximately 10,757 words; twenty-four copies would give each subscriber per year 258,168 words at a cost per 1,000 words of about 73/4 mills. Paper No. 5. Published monthly; subscription $1.25 per year; each copy contains approximately 12,468 words; twelve copies would give each subscriber per year 149,616 words at a cost per 1,000 words of about 8J mills. Paper No. 6. Published monthly; subscription $1.75 per year; each copy contains approximately 14,770 words; twelve copies would give each subscriber per year 173,240 words at a cost per 1,000 words of about, or a little over, 10 mills. The reader will notice that The Primitive Baptist gives 1,000 words of reading matter for less than three mills. The next lowest gives 1,000 words for 6| mills; then they go up to 71/2, 73/4, 81/4 and on up to a little above ten mills per 1,000 words. Therefore, it will be noticed that in spite of the reduction in the size of The Primitive Baptist, you are getting from it two to four times the reading matter for the money, in one year, you get from other papers named. Taking time and pains to count the words in these papers and the average number of letters in a word, causes me to ask the reader to think about a person setting up 1,000 words, handling 4,000 pieces of type, furnishing paper, machinery, office clerks and postage for one cent. But, still more astonishing, Elder Cayce has all this done for less than one-third of one cent, or for one cent he sets up over three thousand words and handles over twelve thousand pieces of type, and still some people complain about the price of the paper. My heart goes out in good will to the editors of each of these papers; in fact, I bid every Old School Baptist paper, published by orderly Baptists, "good speed." I wish I could enlist a more liberal support for them; they deserve it and they ought to have it; they are all circulating these papers at a sacrifice; still, many do not know it; others are indifferent and even unconcerned. The old year has almost slipped away from us; we have a very little of it left in which to do the many things we had in mind to do and many we really desire to do. Some we promised ourselves in good faith that we would do, but put off for a more seasonable or opportune time; but the time has not come, so it's gone undone and in many cases it's gone forevermore; many good thoughts have been unexpressed, many kind words not spoken, many good deeds undone, that if had been expressed or done, possibly would have lightened someone's load and revived one's cast down feeling. May the Lord help us and bless us with moral courage and strength to do our duty, and may we use that courage and liberty He has blessed us with in the discharge of our duty and not in shirking it. Let us strive to use more of the efficiency we have been blessed with and use it for good, do a better part by our home, our friends, our community, our church, our preachers and our papers. Written on my birthday, December 30, 1929. W. W. HOLLINGSWORTH. Bessemer, Ala.

APPRECIATED LETTER

January 16, 1930

Dear Brother Claud: I have for some time had a great desire to write and let all know how I, a poor worm of the dust, enjoy the many sweet articles which appear in the best paper, it seems to me, that is now published in defense of our doctrine. I suppose one main cause is I have known you, dear Brother Claud, so long. I first met you at old Shiloh Church, in Marshall County, Miss., in August, 1895. But when 1 wanted to say a word I would think of the sweet articles in each issue that were so far superior to anything I could write, until the present issue, the 14th of November, came, and when I read dear old Brother Jimmie's sweet piece, I just had to cry for real joy. God bless you, dear old brother, and may God spare you to write again, for I just know in your sixty years of continual service you could tell us much that would comfort and build us up. Oh, how happy I am that I, too, can use your very words in saying, "I, too, want to register my name as being for peace and unity among God's little children." And, kind old brother, there was a time in my life, after I came to Texas and experienced two sad divisions in the dear old church, that I was so fully in the flesh I took great pride in calling in question the order of such men as Elders Cayce, Duncan, Wallace, Newman, Collings, and many others I could name. I repeatedly said they were all wrong, and, dear Brother Claud, you came and preached in our city and I was so fully in the flesh I made no effort to go and hear you. Oh, my very dear brother, can you forgive me? I am not worthy, but I want to live at your feet. Now, I would feel it a great pleasure to go all the way to Thornton to hear you preach that glorious gospel, salvation through the suffering of Jesus Christ. Dear kindred in Christ, I can remember so well the 14th of May, 1883, when my blessed Saviour (I hope) caused me to feel that He had satisfied the broken law in my room and stead. Now, I can look back to that day and sing, What peaceful hours I then enjoyed, How sweet their memory still; But they have left an aching void The world can never fill. Oh, precious brethren, go on, go on, and preach peace by Jesus Christ. Oh, thank God forever for causing me to attend the first council meeting at Dallas, Texas, merely to see what could be done or what they had to offer, and when those dear brethren came forward so freely and lovingly, confessing in full all they had done that they felt was wrong, I, a poor worm, was completely melted down and was more than willing to say, "If you can bear with me, I can freely and willingly forgive you all." It has been more than three years and we have been drawn much nearer and God has so wonderfully blessed us. We have had great and grand meetings and many coming to the dear old church. I want to say for my own individual self, I esteem Elders Newman and Collings as I do Elders Herriage and Fowler or any that have been with us all the time. Thank God, thank God! I am just expressing my own feelings. Oh, brethren, let me live with you. Let me have a place at your feet, and oh, that my days might be spent in His praise, who has so wonderfully blessed me with a sweet home in His own dear church forty-six years and has given me so many sweet, good brethren, sisters, and friends. Now, to my dear brethren and sisters of Hopewell Association, in Mississippi, should any of you read this, I think of you all often and was made sorry to hear of the death of Brother Reeder-and others. Pray for me. I would be glad to meet you all again, if it be God's will. Now, brother, write on and preach peace by Jesus Christ, and God bless you. Pray for me. Come to see us, Brother Cayce. Your brother, W. F. Jones. R. 1, Box 323, Ft. Worth, Tex. REMARKS Dear and Precious Brother-We do not hold a single thing in this wide world against you. We remember very well being at old Shiloh, Marshall County, Miss., at the time you mention. It was at a meeting of the Tallahatchie Association. It was a great meeting. We have often thought of it. It has been a green spot in our memory. We were just a boy then, both in years and in the ministry. Love and sweet fellowship abounded among the brethren. There were no factions in our ranks then. All seemed to be satisfied with the goodness of God's house, and all were happy. We have loved you, dear brother, all these years, and we still love you dearly. Wish we could see you now. If we are not permitted to meet again in this world of sorrow and trouble we have a sweet hope of meeting you and all God's dear children in a better home beyond the rolling floods. May the Lord's richest blessings rest upon you. Please pray for us and our dear family. C. H. C.

Mt 3; 5-9 January 30, 1930

Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins. But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation, of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance: and think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.-Mt 3:5-9. This chapter begins by saying, "In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea, and saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."-Mt 3:1-2. This shows that the writer was telling about the work John was doing; and, although the writer says, "Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of him in Jordan,'' yet there were some that he did not baptize. The Pharisees and Sadducees came and demanded baptism at his hands; but he did not baptize them. It must be true, then, that the expression, "Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan," must be taken in a restricted sense and not in a universal sense-just as many like expressions to be found in the Book. There were some from Jerusalem, and some from all Judea, and some from all the region round about Jordan who were baptized of him in Jordan. The Pharisees and Sadducees gave no evidence of repentance, or a change in life, or reformation of life. They gave no evidence of regeneration. If people are regenerated through the instrumentality of preaching; if people are persuaded by and through preaching to accept the Lord and to become children of God, we have often wondered why John did not go to work on those Pharisees and Sadducees and try to persuade them to become children of God, and thereby escape from the wrath to come. Evidently the Pharisees and Sadducees were in need of salvation-were in need of regeneration. If salvation (regeneration) is procured in baptism, we have often wondered why John did not baptize them. If one is regenerated or born again in baptism, and John refused to baptize those people, then John refused to allow them to obtain regeneration-he refused to do that for them which would make them to be children of God. The doctrine that eternal life, or regeneration, comes through baptism, would put the regeneration of sinners and the peopling of the heavenly world in the hands of puny men, which is a thing God has not done. Some might say that John had warned those people in his preaching to flee from the wrath to come; but he had not done so. He asks them the question, "Who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?" This is as much as to say that he had not done so. If he had done so-if he had been preaching that way-then they could have consistently and truthfully replied, "You have done so." They could not thus reply; and therefore John had not been warning people, in his preaching, to flee from the wrath to come. Before John would administer baptism to a person he required "fruits meet for repentance." This means that he required fruits answerable to amendment of life. He required evidence of regeneration. True repentance is an evidence of regeneration. "Godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death."-2Co 7:10. Sorrow proceeds from the heart. A godly sorrow cannot proceed from an ungodly heart. It necessarily follows, then, that godly sorrow proceeds from a heart that has already been made good, and repentance is an evidence of regeneration, and does not procure it, or is not a condition to be complied with in order to it. Let us take these two Scriptural propositions: First. Those who are led by the Spirit of God are children of God ("For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God."-Ro 8:14). Second. Those who repent are led to do so by the Spirit of God ("Or despisest thou the riches of His goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance?"-Ro 2:4). Third. Therefore, those who repent are children of God. This conclusion necessarily follows as a result from the two Scriptural quotations. As those who repent are children of God, it follows that repentance is an evidence of regeneration, and cannot be a condition to be performed in order thereto. The Old Baptists are evidently right on this point. On this question their teaching is Scriptural-and every theory contrary thereto is wrong. Many of God's dear children have been taught a wrong doctrine on this question. Those who were baptized by John confessed their sins. They confessed that they were poor sinners. If one realizes truthfully that he is a poor sinner, and that if he is saved it is wholly by the grace and mercy of God, it is an evidence of the work of grace in the heart. "This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief."-1Ti 1:15. Paul never acknowledged this, nor felt it, while he was in an unregenerate state. When and after the Lord arrested him while he was on his way to Damascus to persecute the saints, then he realized this truth and confessed it; but he never realized or confessed it before. Regeneration brings a godly sorrow for sin; and a hatred of sin and a deep desire to be free from it is an evidence of the work of grace in the heart. This being true, then John baptized those who gave evidence that they were children of God. Primitive Baptists are that way yet. It was right for those who felt and confessed that they were poor sinners to be baptized of John in Jordan. Their hope of heaven was not in their own good deeds or in their own righteousness. Their hope was alone in the mercy and grace of God. If it was right for such people to do as they did then, it is right for such people to do that way now. Hence, if you have been made to feel and to know that you are a poor sinner, and your only hope of heaven is in the blood of a crucified and risen Redeemer and the mercy and grace of God, you should do as those people did-you should be baptized by a Primitive Baptist preacher. You should deny yourself, take up your cross and follow your blessed Saviour. He was baptized by John, this Primitive Baptist preacher. You cannot follow Him as you should, unless you do as He did. May the Lord bless these thoughts to the good of our readers, and may He help us to live in a way that will glorify His name, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

CHOSEN AND PREDESTINATED

February 6, 1930

We are well aware of the fact that the doctrine of God's choice and predestination is often called in question and denied by many, especially by the religious world. Although this is true, yet there is nothing more plainly taught in the Bible; and when properly understood there is no truth taught therein that is more consoling and encouraging to the Lord's humble poor. We will try to write a few thoughts concerning this precious truth for the benefit of our readers. We wish, first, to emphasize the fact that God's choice and predestination does not harm or injure anyone, and never has done so. If A is a millionaire, and makes choice of B and predestinates to make him heir to his estate, he does not thereby injure C. A's choice and predestination does not do C any harm, although C is not embraced in the choice and predestination of A. If A was under any obligation to B, then it was not a matter of mercy or grace that he was made heir to A's estate, but a matter of debt or obligation. Some people have charged that the Old Baptists believe that God made some people to save them and others to damn them. This charge is untrue. That is not Old Baptist doctrine or teaching, neither is it Bible teaching. God did not make people to save them or to damn them. Let the Bible answer the question as to what He made them for. "And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth."-Ac 17:26. This tells us plainly that God made all nations of men for to dwell on the face of the earth. That is what He made them for. Let us accept it for just what it says, and take it at its full value. If any are lost it is not because God made them to be lost, but it is on account of sin-the transgression of God's law. Man did transgress God's law. It is not necessary to cite the Scriptures to prove this, as all professed Bible believers will accept that truth, so far as we know. Paul tells us that "we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin."-Ro 3:9. This shows that all are under sin, both Jews and Gentiles, and Paul says he proved this before. To deny it is no better than infidelity, for it is to deny the plain statement of God's word. Then, as all are under sin, it follows that all are in a lost state or condition, and will remain so, without the intervention of a higher power. Now, seeing that all are, without the intervention of mercy, or a higher power, forever lost, and the Bible plainly teaching that some are saved, let us look into the matter and find whether the Lord has made choice of them or not. First, we ask what the word choice means? And what does the word chosen mean? Choice is the act of choosing; the voluntary act of selecting from two or more things that which is preferred; the determination of the mind in preferring one thing to another; election; selection. Chosen means selected from a number; picked out; in theology, elect. Chosen people, the Israeli ties; see 1Ch 16:13 "O ye seed of Israel His servant, ye children of Jacob, His chosen ones;" Ps 33:12 "Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord; and the people whom He hath chosen for His own inheritance." See also Ac 13:17. Chosen, as a noun, is one who is the object of choice or divine favor; an elect person. To know whether any persons are the objects of choice or divine favor, and are elect persons, and whether they were predestinated unto a better state, let us read Eph 1:3-5 "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ: according as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before Him in love: having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to Himself, according to the good pleasure of His will," etc. The word us in this text is a personal pronoun, and as a pronoun must have an antecedent, it follows that persons (understood) is the antecedent of this pronoun. Hence, it must necessarily be true that persons (us) were the objects of God's choice. He chose persons- persons were chosen by Him. No man on earth can deny this without denying the plain statement of the Word of God. Not only is it true that God made choice of persons, but He also predestinated those same persons unto the adoption of children; He predestinated that they should be adopted into His heavenly family. To predestinate is to appoint or ordain beforehand by divine purpose or decree; to preelect. These people were appointed beforehand to be adopted into the family of God. God predestinated that this should be done. He predestinated that they should be saved. He appointed them beforehand unto salvation. If you are ever saved, or brought into the family of God, or made a child of God, it is because God appointed beforehand, by His divine purpose, that you should be saved; that you should be brought into and made a member of His heavenly family. "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of Him who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will."- Eph 1:11. If one obtains an inheritance in Christ it is because he was predestinated unto that end by the Lord Himself, and according to His own purpose; and He works all things necessary to the accomplishment of that end. Nothing in order to the accomplishment of that end is left to rest upon any condition to be performed by others-it is not contingent upon the works of men. "And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He did predestinate, them He also called: and whom He called, them He also justified: and whom He justified, them He also glorified."- Ro 8:28-30. Here we are plainly told that some persons were predestinated to be conformed to the image of His Son. God the Father predestinated this. Who can object to being predestinated to be conformed to the image of Christ? If you are ever conformed to the image of Christ it is because the Father predestinated that you should be conformed to His image. Can one object to that? "Blessed is the man whom thou choosest, and causest to approach unto thee, that he may dwell in thy courts: we shall be satisfied with the goodness of thy house, even of thy holy temple."-Ps 65:4. Who approaches unto the Lord? According to David's language here, it is the man the Lord chooses and causes to approach unto Him. No person has ever yet approached unto the Lord, only that person whom the Lord has chosen and caused to approach unto Him. For one to object to the doctrine of God's choice is for him to object to the very principle upon which a poor sinner may approach unto the Lord. Can you afford to object to a poor sinner approaching unto the Lord? If you cannot afford to object to that, then you cannot afford to object to the principle upon which he may approach unto Him. If you have ever been brought to realize your need of God's mercy and grace in your salvation, and caused to approach unto Him in humble prayer and supplication, begging Him for mercy, it was because God had made choice of you and caused you to approach unto Him; and that is the reason why you will be given to finally dwell in His courts. You will finally be brought into His glorious and holy presence in the heavenly world, and there be perfectly and fully satisfied. You will then be finally and fully glorified, and will dwell in His glorious presence forever. May this be your happy lot, if according to His heavenly will, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

HELP OBTAINED February 6, 1930

A short time after our health failed last fall we received a letter from Elder T. L. Webb asking us if we had a place for him in our office. We wrote him and asked that he make a little trip over here, and told him we could talk the matter over. He agreed to come, and we made some appointments for him. When he came to fill the appointments we spent several days with him. We readily came to an agreement. He returned to Tennessee and made arrangements to move in a short time. We felt that it was a providential matter, and feel that way yet. Brother Webb has been working in the office now since before Christmas-a little more than a month. From the time we began making arrangements with him to come and work with us we felt that we wanted his name on our editorial staff. By his consent we are now putting his name there. On the first page of the paper will be found the editorial staff of the paper at present. On account of the failure in our health we feel that we need some help in the office in the editorial work. Brother Webb has kindly consented for his name to go on the staff, and he will help us in this work; but at the present time most of his work is in the mechanical department. While most of his work is in that line at present, yet he will be much help to us in editorial work. We are glad to have Brother Webb located here, and we are glad to have him in the office with us, and we are glad to have his name on our editorial staff. May the good Lord bless his labors among us, and may He bless our association together for the good of His blessed cause and His dear children, is our prayer. C. H. C.

INFANT SALVATION February 6, 1930

A SERMON BY ELDER C. H. CAYCE, PREACHED AT BETHEL PRIMITIVE BAPTIST CHURCH, NASHVILLE, TENN., SUNDAY, JULY 1, 1923

As we have been asked several questions recently on the subject of infant salvation, we have decided to publish in our columns the following discourse which we delivered in Nashville, Tenn., which was taken down by a stenographer and published in the Gospel Trumpet of August, 1923, a paper which was then being published by Elder W. L. Murray. C. H. C. The article Brethren, Sisters and Kind Friends: I am thankful, I trust, for the privilege and the opportunity of being with you at this place this evening to engage with you in the service of our blessed Master, and to try to speak to you for awhile concerning the teaching of His blessed Book. If the Lord will, I desire to try to speak to you more especially on the subject of infant salvation. I have been casting about in my mind for the past few hours as to what I should try to talk about, and I finally decided that I will try to use that for a subject. I wish to read from the tenth chapter of Mark, beginning with the thirteenth verse down to and including the sixteenth verse: "And they brought young children to Him, that He should touch them; and His disciples rebuked those that brought them. But when Jesus saw it, He was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. And He took them up in His arms, put His hands upon them, and blessed them." In connection with that I wish to read from the eighteenth chapter of Luke, beginning with the fifteenth verse, down to and including the seventeenth: "And they brought unto Him also infants, that He would touch them; but when the disciples saw it, they rebuked them. But Jesus called them unto Him and said, Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein.'' The reason why I read from Luke's writing is because in the King James translation we have the word"infants,"and that word is translated from a word that is applied to the child in its earliest age, even in the very beginning of its existence, sometimes even applied to it before its natural birth into the world. And that word applies to one in its earliest childhood only. The word that is used by Mark which is translated "young children" is sometimes used with reference to those who are in their younger age through their infancy, up to young manhood or young womanhood, so that the word which he uses might be misunderstood by us if we do not compare that with what Luke has said in giving his rendering of the account. And as Luke uses a word that is applied only to, and is never used except with reference to, those in their very earliest life, even in their infancy, then we may understand what kind of persons the Saviour had under consideration in the lesson that is given us here. As an especial starting point, I use Mr 10:15 "Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein."In connection with it, Lu 18:17: "Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise enter therein."In this teaching, or in this expression recorded by Luke, the Saviour said,"they shall in no wise enter therein."These two expressions mean the same thing-that the adult must receive the kingdom of God in the same way that the little child receives it. He must enter therein in the very same way that the infant enters therein; and that unless he does enter in that way, unless he receives it in that way, he does not receive it or enter into it at all. The very same way that the adult is saved is the way the little child is saved. And the same way that a little child is saved is the way that the old man is saved. So far as age is concerned, it matters not concerning this point, whether young or old-they are saved the same way. I wish to call your attention to the very wording of the text,"Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child he shall not enter therein."The Saviour did not say,"Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as this little child,"pointing out some special or particular child, but he used the indefinite article, a-a little child. It matters not if it be this little child, or if it be that little child, or any other little child, no matter whose little child, nor where the little child may be. The Saviour is not pointing out some special or particular child, and teaching that you must receive the kingdom of God as this particular child receives it. Just here let me say that our people have been accused from time immemorial of preaching that there are infants in hell not a span long. I wish here to say that the principle, or the system of salvation, or plan of salvation, as taught and believed by the people with whom I stand identified is the only system of salvation on earth that will reach the case of the babe. That may be putting the statement in rather strong terms, you may say; but I wish to examine this evening, in the light of God's blessed truth, and in the light of reason, the system of salvation by grace as well as any other system that may be presented, or that may be taught by men, and see wherein they fail or wherein they stand the test. Suppose we ask how the little child is saved. I am going to say for the people with whom I stand identified that we are sure that every one that has or ever will pass off the stage of action in a state of infancy is saved in heaven. And that old story that has been told on the Old Baptists that they preach infant damnation has become gray-headed, absolutely, and about as near as I have been able to find the man that advocated it, upon a statement of those who would bring the charge is that grandmother said that her Aunt Mary said that her Uncle Tommie said that his grandfather said that his Aunt Susan said that her Aunt Polly said that her grandmother said that her grandfather heard a man preach that, who is dead and gone long ago. It is absolutely untrue; and I have a proposition right here to make, that if any man will prove to me that any Old Baptist has ever yet preached one single infant to hell, I will preach him out again; and if I can't accomplish the task, I will find a man that can, for I am sure that if one man has the power to preach one to hell, some other man has as much power as he had and can preach him out again. Every one that ever has or ever will die in a state of infancy is saved in heaven. Someone will say,"Well, don't you Old Baptists believe in the doctrine of election?"Yes, we do."Well, do you not believe in the doctrine of eternal and particular election?"Yes, sir, we do."Do you not believe that God made choice of the people He saves, and that this choice was made before time began?"Certainly we do."Well, then, how in the world can you believe that all who die in infancy are saved, and at the same time believe that kind of doctrine?"Well, that is easy. Suppose I show you right quickly how we can do that. Suppose you bring a basket of apples in here, and one-half of them are red and one-half are yellow, and you say to me,"Cayce, take your choice of apples; choose as many of them as you wish."And I take all the red apples and one-half of the yellow apples. What have I done? I have made choice of apples. I chose apples. How many did I take? I took all the red ones and just as many of the yellow ones as I wanted. And so God Almighty, in his sovereign choice of sinners of Adam's race, took all the babies and just as many of the old folks as He wanted. Can you beat it? Now that is easy to explain, how we can believe the doctrine of election and at the same time believe that all babies are saved. You may say God made choice of the infant and saves the infant because of his infantile purity, or that the infant is saved because of his infantile purity. Suppose we examine the idea of infantile purity. I would ask, until what age may he be saved because of his infantile purity? Why, you might answer,"That all depends upon the tuition he receives; it depends upon his education; it depends upon his learning. If he is kept in ignorance, abject, total ignorance, he will not reach the line of accountability until he attains, perhaps, the age of sixteen years; but if he is educated well, if we send him to Sunday school and to the literary schools, and take him to church and give him the proper training and proper education, he may reach the line of accountability at the age of twelve years or younger, depending upon how well taught and how well trained he is."All right, let us try that. Now I am going to say that if I believed in that doctrine, or that theory, I would certainly be opposed to education. I most assuredly would be opposed to education from every standpoint if I believed in that idea. I do not believe in that idea, and therefore I am not opposed to education. I am in favor of education. Education is all right in its place-it is beneficial to us if rightly used. I have heard it said, however, that an educated fool is the biggest fool in the world; but education rightly used, and in its right place, is a good thing, and I wish I was in possession of more learning than I am in possession of, so far as that point is concerned; but if I believed in the other theory, I would be opposed to education. Now, let's see. Suppose that here are two little boys that are the same age-this little white boy and this little negro. They are the same age, born into this world the very same day, and at the same hour of the day. You know that occurs sometimes. And this little white boy is sent to school, and we give him all the training and all the education that it is possible to give him and at the age of twelve years he crosses the line of accountability. But we keep this little negro in ignorance, abject ignorance. We do not let him go to the day school nor to the Sunday school, and he never goes to church; he is reared out in the backwoods; he does not see a Bible, and he cannot read it if he did see it-kept in absolute ignorance, so that he does not reach the line of accountability at the age of twelve years. At the age of thirteen years this little white boy dies, after having crossed the line of accountability at the age of twelve years, and he has not accepted Jesus as his Saviour; he has not fallen in with the overtures of mercy; he has not complied with the terms and conditions of the gospel. What becomes of that little white boy? You are bound to say that he is lost. There is absolutely no escaping it, according to that position, as he has crossed the line of accountability at the age of twelve years, on account of his tuition, on account of his training. So his education has caused him to be lost. But the little negro lives to the age of fifteen years, having been kept in absolute ignorance, abject ignorance, total ignorance, has never heard any preaching, he has never been to Sunday school or to the day school, and has not learned how to read. So he can't read the Bible, and would not know what it was if he should see it. At the age of fifteen, he dies, not having reached the line of accountability, on account of his having been kept in ignorance. What becomes of the little negro? The little negro is saved. Why is the little negro saved? Because of his ignorance. Why is the little white boy lost? Because of his education. There is not a man in all this wide world, there is not a theologian in the universe, I care not who he is, nor what his learning may be, who can get around that necessary conclusion. According to that theory it cannot be overthrown. That conclusion necessarily and inevitably stands, world without end. If I believed that doctrine I would be opposed to education. I would say, let us keep all of them in ignorance; let us keep all of them away from schools; it would be better to burn the Bibles; it would be better to destroy the preachers; it would be better to have no schools of any kind, and keep every person on earth in total, abject ignorance, if that doctrine be true, and let them be saved on their ignorance. But that doctrine is not the truth. But another point I want to examine right here on that supposed line of accountability. This little fellow here comes to the line, and when he gets just half way across the line, suppose he dies? I ask you what becomes of him? Is he saved? No. Why? Because he has not fallen in with the overtures of mercy and complied with the terms and conditions of the gospel. That is the reason why he cannot be saved, after crossing the line, unless he does that and he has got half way across. Well, is he lost? No, he is not lost, for he is only half way across the line. What becomes of him? Is he saved or is he lost? Does God get one-half and Satan get the other half?"Well,"you may say,"you have no right to suppose he dies when he is half way across the line."I have just as much right to suppose he dies when he is half way across the line as any other man has to suppose there is such a thing as such a line. There is not a semblance of an expression in God's Word, from the first verse of the first chapter of Genesis to the last verse of the twenty-second chapter of Revelation concerning such a line-not a scintilla of proof of any such a thing in the Bible-not a syllable that intimates such a thing. The little child is in possession of the very same life that the adult possesses. There has never been a human being born into this world since the first man violated God's holy and righteous law, but what was born into this world with a life that was poisoned and contaminated with sin, except Jesus. We are all in possession of the same nature, whether young or old, rich or poor, high or low, noble or ignoble, whatever station or condition in life they may be in, they possess the very same nature. There has been a whole lot said of recent years about this so-called scientific theory of evolution, that man sprang from the lower animals, which makes me think of an occurrence once in discussion with a gentleman in the state of Missouri some years ago. I made the statement that we are all Adam multiplied, and the gentleman did not wait until his time to make his speech, but spoke right out and said,"I am not.'Well,"I said,"that is all right. I like to agree with a man when I can, and since you deny that you are Adam multiplied, I will agree with you."I said,"When I look at the way you act I think possibly you are kin to the monkey tribe, but when I look at you and see how you look, I don't know but what you are kin to the animal that Balaam rode. So tell us which of those animals you are related to-but as for me and us folks, we are Adam multiplied. That is all we are.'' "Of one blood made He all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth." They are Adam multiplied. Just one people. No matter anything about their race, nationality, their age, their condition, or station in life, they all sprang from the same source and from the same man. Perhaps we had better examine that evolution business a little. Suppose I have a little acorn here. I ask you, Where did that acorn come from? You say, From an oak tree, of course. All right. Where did that oak tree come from? It came from another acorn. What kind of acorn was that? Just like this one. Where did that acorn come from? Another oak tree. What kind of oak tree was that? Just like the oak tree this acorn came from. Where did that oak tree come from? From another acorn. Where did that acorn come from? Another oak. And so we follow the line back, back, back, until we come to the first acorn, and I ask you, Where did that first acorn come from? Why, you say, it came came from the first oak, of course. Then I ask you, Where did the first oak come from? There is but one answer that can be given. Men, with all their scientific research, and with all their wisdom and their inventive genius and so-called science, can give but one answer to that question, and that is, "God made it." And that oak was just like the oak that this acorn sprang from. So your doctrine of evolution is exploded in the little acorn. There is no such thing as life without antecedent life. Spontaneous life is absolutely unknown. There is no such thing as the lower order of life lifting and raising itself up to the higher order. It is unknown in all the realm of science, in all the realm of nature. The higher order of life reaches down, according to its own will, to the lower order, lifting it up and raising it up and changing it into the higher order, by its own sovereign will, and its own work. Life has always come by a direct, immediate implantation or touch of life; it cannot be given any other way. And as this is true, it matters not whether a man is old, or whether it be the infant in the mother's arms, life is given, and must be given, by a direct and immediate implantation of life. It cannot be any other way. Suppose we go to the fountainhead of the Mississippi River and poison the fountainhead of that stream. When the water shall have flown down the stream to the city of St. Louis, it is the same poisoned water that it was at the fountainhead. When it has flown down the stream to the city of Memphis, Tenn., it is the same poisoned water that it was at the fountainhead. When it has flown down the stream to the city of Vicks-burg, Miss., it is the same poisoned water that it was back there at the fountainhead. And when it has flown down to the mouth of the stream and empties into the Gulf it is the same poisoned water that it was back there at the fountainhead. I ask you, how may that water be purified and made fit for use? How may that be accomplished? Suppose we go to the bank of the stream and hold a big meeting there, and we have our evangelists there, and we have our singers there, and we raise a big shout around the stream, begging the water and pleading with it that it become willing to be carried through a purifying process that the poison may be all taken out of it, so that it may be made fit for use, and you should be standing there on the bank of the stream, and all at once the water should cease flowing down stream and begin flowing up stream, become willing to comply with the conditions in order that it might be purified and made fit for use-I will ask you, friends, what would you do if you were there? I freely confess that if I were there, and I was not scared too bad, I would run. I know that it is contrary to every principle of reason, to every principle of science, contrary to every principle of logic, contrary to the teaching of God's Word, and is contrary to common sense for water to cease to flow down stream and flow up hill. How may that water be purified, then, and made fit for use? There is only one way, and that is, a higher power must come to it, and take it out of the stream and carry it through a purifying process that takes the poison out of it, and make it fit for use. That is the only way under heaven it can be done. So the life that we live today, as we are Adam multiplied, is a life that was poisoned and contaminated with sin at its source, and when that life had flown down the stream of time unto Abraham's day it was the same poisoned life that it was back in Adam's day; and when it had flown down the stream of time to Paul's day, it was the same poisoned life that it was at first, and having flown down the stream to our day, it is the same poisoned life that it was at the fountainhead; and at the final windup of all time, it will still be the same poisoned life that it was at the fountainhead. How can one be made fit for the Master's use, and be prepared to live with God in eternal glory? How can that be done? Just one way, and that is, the higher power, the Spirit of Almighty God, must come to where the sinner is, lift him up out of the stream and carry him through a purifying process that takes away the poison and stain of sin, and finally present him before the throne of God in eternal glory, as free from sin, as spotless and pure and white as though there had never been a sin committed. That is the only way it can be done. "Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein." Does a little child receive the kingdom of God because of his infantile purity, seeing he possesses a life that is poisoned and contaminated with sin? Does a little child receive the kingdom of God because of his infantile purity? If so, and Jesus told the truth when He said, "Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein," then the old man must receive the kingdom of God because of his infantile purity; and if he does not receive it on that ground, the Saviour having told the truth, if the child receives it that way, then the adult does not enter therein-except he receives it upon his infantile purity, if the little child does. If the little child enters that way, I ask you, then, can you reach the case of the adult by infantile purity? You know you cannot. You may say the adult cannot be saved because of his infantile purity; he must accept Jesus as his Saviour; he must fall in with the overtures of mercy, and comply with the conditions of the gospel, else he cannot be saved. All right. I ask you, If the adult is saved that way, can the little child be saved that way? Make your terms and conditions ever so simple, ever so easy to be understood and complied with, the little child, the babe in the mother's arms, cannot understand these conditions; he cannot comprehend them, and he cannot perform them or comply with them; and as you cannot reach the case of the little child with your conditions, and the adult is saved as the little child is saved, then you cannot reach the case of the adult with your conditions. The little child cannot be saved upon conditions, and he is saved the same way the adult is saved; then the adult is not saved on conditions. The adult is not saved on his infantile purity, and the adult is saved just as the little child is saved. Then the little child is not saved upon its infantile purity. If no one could be saved in heaven except on that principle, heaven would be a blank, and the other place would be full. I am glad that the Saviour gives us to understand that the very same power that is able to reach the case of the infant in the mother's arms is able to reach the old man and old woman; and the power and Spirit of God Almighty has embraced in His love, every object of His pity and tender compassion, of every age and every class. "Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein." I remember once in the Western portion of this state, some years ago, that I tried to preach on this same subject, and a preacher was present-it is unnecessary to tell you what he belonged to-and at the conclusion of the discourse he arose in the back part of the house and said, "Well, sir, if you have no objection, I would like to ask you a question." "Well," I said, "so far as I am concerned, I have no objection; but it is with this church and the pastor who sits behind me. If it is all right with them it is all right with me." The pastor said, "You have permission; ask your question." He said, "You say that you believe that all who die in a state of infancy are saved. I believe that too. But I don't think you can prove it by the Bible. I would like for you to give me book, chapter and verse that says so." I said, "Are you through?'' He said,"Yes, sir.'' "Well,'' I said,"please take your seat. Now,"I said,"it seems to me that in one particular we are in the same boat. I believe that all who die in a state of infancy are saved, and you say you believe that, too. So it appears to me that we are in the same boat. But it seems, as you say I cannot prove it by the Bible, that you are uneasy, and are afraid the boat will turn over. Now, if I was uneasy about it, I would keep right quiet; but I am not uneasy. As I am not afraid, I am at perfect liberty to lean from side to side in the boat, and am at liberty to stand upon my feet, and walk about in the boat, because I am not afraid, at all, that the boat will turn over. I am not uneasy about it. Not only am I at liberty to walk about in the boat, but to place my toes right out on the edge of the boat, and then look over the edge of that boat down into the depths of God's love, mercy and grace, and see how it is that His love and mercy and grace reaches the case of the babe as well as that of the old man, and never feel uneasy about it. The very same principle that reaches the case of the old man will reach the case of the little babe, and if I was uneasy about it, like you, I would keep right still, and not say a word. I am not uneasy about it."Right here, if you will pardon this, I seldom ever tell anything like an antedote, but right here is something that I heard that so well illustrates the point. Some people have a plan or system of salvation that will reach the case of the old man and the old woman, so they think, but the system or plan will not reach the case of the babe; so, then they must get up the plan of infantile purity to reach the case of the babe-must have two ways to get in. That reminds me of the anecdote. I heard one time of an old maid who wanted a house built, and she employed a workman to erect the house. She was very particular and wanted everything just precisely to her notion, and when he had the house completed he called her to come and examine and see if she would accept it; and after going through the whole thing she said,"It is all right except one thing I didn't tell you about.'Well,"he said,"what was that?'Why,"she says,"I forgot to tell you that I have some old cats, and I want a hole cut right here in this door for the old cats to come into the kitchen through the hole, without having to open the door to let them in."So the workman cut the hole down there at the bottom of the door to let the big cats in."Now,'' he said, "lady, is everything all right?" "Yes," she said, "except for one thing more that I forgot." "What was that?" "Well," she said, "I have some kittens, too. I want a hole cut on this side of the door for the little kittens to come in at." "Well,"the workman said, "can't the little kitten go in at the same hole that the big cat goes in?" Some folks think the baby can't get into the kingdom of God, or obtain salvation, or be saved, the very same way that the old people are saved. It seems to me that a system of salvation that is broad enough and sufficient to reach the case of the old man will reach the case of the babe, too, without having to hatch up some other plan for them. It looks that way to me. That is the way it appears to me. "Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein." A little child-it matters not what little child it is-a little child-the indefinite article a. Let this pencil represent one little child; let this pen represent all other little children except that one little child represented by the pencil. Now let's hear the Saviour's language: "Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child"-it matters not if it is the one represented by the pencil, or any of those represented by the pen that represents all the others-"he shall not enter therein." Suppose a little child misses the kingdom, and you receive the kingdom of God as a little child, then as certain as God lives you miss it, too. Just as certain as one of the adult family of Adam's race ever enters the portals of eternal glory, just that certain a little child does not miss the kingdom. Every one that ever has or ever will die in a state of infancy enters the portals of eternal glory and basks in the sunlight of God's eternal presence forever and forever-more. And that little child of yours that has crossed the river of death, and has, in spirit, been ushered into the divine presence of God Almighty, will sing the same song of redeeming grace that you sing. Why is the little child saved? Because of its infantile purity? No. He has a life in nature that is poisoned and contaminated with sin. He is Adam multiplied. He cannot be saved that way, for the adult cannot be saved that way. Can the little child be saved by complying with terms and conditions? No; he cannot be saved that way. And, since the adult must be saved the same way the little child is saved, then the adult cannot be saved that way. How, then, is the little child saved? "Jesus took them up in His arms, laid His hands upon them and blessed them." The Lord Jesus never did anything in vain. The very fact that He took them up in His arms and laid His hands upon them and blessed them shows that they needed the blessing. He never did anything that was not needful to be done. He never did a thing that was unnecessary to do. So they needed the blessing in order that they receive the kingdom of God. The little child, then, receives the kingdom of God. Why? Because of the blessing that Jesus bestows. That is the reason why. I ask why the adult receives the kingdom of God? Because of the blessing Jesus bestows. It matters not how young they are, it matters not how old they are, they receive the kingdom of God for the very same reason; and that is because of the blessing that Jesus bestows by His own power. He was able to manifest His power in the case of John the Baptist before his natural birth into the world. He was given to leap for joy by the overshadowing of the Holy Ghost, even before His natural birth into the world. And in this manner God Almighty, by the power of His Holy Spirit, is able to reach the case of the baby and of the aged, the old man. There is none that get too hard for the Lord. Sometimes I hear them say there is one in the community who is such a hard case we cannot do anything with him. Sometimes we hear them say, we will have to leave him in the hands of the Lord. The Lord is able to reach him, take care of him and save him; it matters not what his condition may be, his nationality, his color, or station; it matters not if he be a king on the throne, or the poor beggar that comes to your back door and asks for a morsel of bread. It matters not if it is the little babe that falls asleep in its mother's arms. The Lord is able to save them, to reach them, and raise them up to a higher order of life, to give them the spiritual and divine life, and take them to live with God in eternal glory. How many are saved, then, that die in infancy? All of them. How many of them are saved in adult life? Just as many as God Almighty wanted. You can't get a better platform than that, I don't care what sort you get. Just as many as the Lord wanted. Now, then, I shall conclude. May the rich, reigning grace of God be yours to enjoy all along the pathway of life, and may you study and be given to rejoice in these blessed truths that God is able to reach the poor sinner of every age, and of every clime, young or old, and take them to Himself. Years ago, in my childhood, I stood behind mother's chair, looking over her shoulder, and saw a precious little sister fall in mother's arms in death. In spirit this evening I am sure that sister is in the presence of God. I hope, blessed hope, that some day I shall be permitted to join her on the sunny shores of sweet deliverance, in singing praise unto the adorable Redeemer for my salvation. A few more days of toil, a few more days of trouble, a few more heartaches, a few more distresses, and you shall meet your loved ones on the other shore. Mothers, you who have had your little children taken from you by the cold and relentless hand of death, let me say that, by the power of Jesus Christ, and in the greatness of His love and mercy, that child of yours this evening is in the presence of God, in spirit, basking in the sunlight of His glory, and has missed the sorrows, the trials, the conflicts, the heartaches, and distresses that you have had to endure, and it will not be long until you will see that child again. David lost his child. The servants wondered why David would arise and take refreshment when he saw the child was dead, and they asked him concerning that, and he said, "While the child lived, I did not know but God would be gracious and spare the child." He says, "Now it cannot come to me, but I shall go to it." David had that blessed hope of a better home beyond this life, and he was sure of the fact that the little child had been taken home to glory. If one child may be lost, David's child might have been lost, as any other; but David was assured by revelation and inspiration from God that the little child is taken home to glory by the power and grace and love and mercy of God, and so he said, "It cannot come to me, but I shall go to it." So it will not be long, mothers, until you will join that child on the sunny shores of sweet deliverance in singing the song of redeeming grace. C. H. C.

ELDER FAIRCHILD

Febuary 13, 1930

In the Banner Herald, Elder Crouse's paper, the Progressive organ of Georgia, for February 1, we see the following item: Cordele Church will hold her week's meeting beginning Monday before and continuing through fourth Sunday in June. Elder J. W. Pairchild will assist the pastor, Elder Lewis. We understand Elder Fairchild is moving to Georgia soon. He is heartily welcomed by our brethren. We see, also, that Elder Fairchild's name is still on the editorial staff of that paper. True, he had an article in the paper some time ago resigning his position on the editorial staff, but his name remains on. His resignation was not given because of thinking the Progressives were wrong in any of their contentions, but because he was thereby handicapped among our people. But the above notice is sufficient to show where Elder Fairchild stands. In the same paper of December 15, 1929, is an article by Elder Fairchild on the question of divorce and re-marriage. He argues in this that if a couple are married and find that they do not really love each other, and are not congenial, it is all right for them to separate and that they have a Scriptural right to marry again. We would be glad to copy the whole article and reply to it at length, but our space will not admit of it. Such a position is right along the line of the modern infidels in advocating the idea of "companionate marriage." The idea is that they have a right to live together awhile on probation, or on trial. That is what it amounts to. Besides that, if a man and woman unite under the law and live together for a time, and then decide that they do not love each other, then, according to Elder Fairchild, they were not united by the Lord, and therefore were never Scripturally married. If they have children, then the children are illegitimate-they are bastards. We have been asked by a number of persons if we endorse the article by Elder Fairchild. We answer most positively that we do not. It would lead to immorality, more divorces, and the country is filled with bastards- if the idea be true. May the Lord deliver us from such teaching. Elder Fairchild says that the way Old Baptists have settled this question must be wrong because it does not stay settled. The way that Old Baptists have always stood on this question, as a rule, is that no man has a right to put his wife away and marry another only for the cause of fornication or adultery. This has been their position all along the line. The reason why the question continues to cause trouble occasionally along the line is that some man will occasionally do as Elder Fairchild has done in that article-try to raise the question again and deny the plain statement of the Lord of glory and set aside His teaching, and introduce some idea that is contrary to and foreign to what Old Baptists have always taught, and contrary to the teaching of the Master. We regret to have to write this way about these things, but we feel that the cause demands it, and we would be untrue to the cause if we did not speak out thus plainly. May the good Lord deliver us from such teaching. C. H. C.

Ac 9:7 AND Ac 22:9 February 13, 1930

Some people think that these two passages of Scripture are contradictory-that one contradicts the other. But they do not contradict. They harmonize all right. Ac 9:7 reads: "And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man." Ac 22:9 reads: "And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of Him that spake to me." In this last text it plainly says they heard not the voice of Him that spake to Saul; but in Ac 9:7 it says they heard a voice. It does not say what voice they heard, but it was not the voice of Him that spake to Saul, for he plainly tells us so in Ac 22:9. Then, as they heard a voice, whose voice was it that they heard? Evidently it was Saul's voice they heard when he said, "Who art thou, Lord?" and when he said, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?" They saw no man-they did not see who it was that Saul was talking to, though they heard him speaking to some unseen person whose voice they did not hear. The Lord's voice is a still small voice, {see 1Ki 19:11-12} a voice not heard with the natural ear. C. H. C.

ANOTHER EDITOR

February 13, 1930

Elder J. S. Newman, of Stockdale, Texas, has agreed to let us put his name on our editorial staff, at our request. Brother Newman will write for the paper, and will also take subscriptions at any place where he may go. Any of our subscribers may hand their subscription to him, when it is convenient to do so, and this will save them the trouble of sending to us. We all know that Brother Newman is a good writer, and we trust the Lord will bless his labors to the good of His cause and to the comfort and instruction of His little children. We are glad to have Brother Newman associated with us. C. H. C.

BAPTIST STANDARD

February 20, 1930

Somebody sent us the first sheet (pages 1 and 2) from the Baptist Standard of. December 19, 1929, published in Dallas, Texas. We do not know who sent it to us. On page 1 we see the statement in an article by W. R. White that "the Hardshells are the Primitive Baptists. Jonah and Peter belonged at one time to their ministry." Here is a plain admission that the people these folks call "Hardshells" are the original Baptists- that they are the Primitives. If they are the Primitives then they are the original Baptists. Since this is admitted, then why will they try to claim that they are the original Baptists? Can they be honest in making such a claim in the face of such an admission? On page 2 we find that these Missionaries (Fullerites) are in a bad row. We find there the statement that "the theological seminaries are graduating men much faster than churches are being organized," and that "there are not churches enough in the class desirable as pastorates to employ those who want churches of that kind." The writer further says that "there is hardly a day that some well educated, worthy man does not come into this office, or go to the headquarters office, to inquire about an available church. It is becoming alarming." What do you suppose is wrong? Wonder if the Lord did not know what He was doing? Wonder if He has called so many into the work of the ministry when there is no place for them, and no room for them? Solomon says that "a man's gift will make room for him." It seems that there is not room for these men that their seminaries are graduating. We wonder if one trouble is not that men are entering the ministry without the divine call, just to get an education without cost to them, or to go into the ministry for a livelihood-just as one would go into the worldly professions. It seems that the seminaries are making preachers so fast that they have the market glutted. Such preachers are not worth much, anyway. There is always room for the preachers the Lord makes-as long as they do the Lord's biddings. On the front page we see that the Baptist Standard promotes ten different itemized things, one of which is the B. Y. P. U. Concerning this B. Y. P. U. the late Elder J. N. Hall said, in the Baptist Gleaner of March 28, 1894, "Fie, fie, you imp of hell. Why should you blaspheme the name of God without rebuke, and arrogate to yourself divinity, when you bear on your forehead the imprint of the pit. Get thee behind me Satan." He further says, "It looks like a genuine vomit from perdition." He also says, "In the name of common sense, how can such staunch, true, tried Baptists become infatuated with this liberal bloat from the pit, when it is so terribly naked, and its true nature so easy to be seen. Dash the thing to earth, brethren, and stamp its blasphemous form back to the pit from whence it came." One more statement from Elder Hall is this: "Another feature of this arrogant abortion is its defiance of divine laws." Just one more statement from his pen: "The B. Y. P. U. of A., together with the whole tribe of societies that is linked to it, is a contrivance of the devil, a slight of hand of crafty liberalists, seeking to paralyze the truth of God, and hinder His cause in the earth." Well, there you are! This Texas paper promotes an imp of hell-so Elder J. N. Hall called the thing-a vomit from perdition; a bloat from the pit; an arrogant abortion; a contrivance of the devil! That's the kind of stuff they promote-according to Elder J. N. Hall. Yes, evidently they are trying to paralyze the truth of God and hinder His cause in the earth. What a pity that they have so many of God's children blinded and deluded. But that is their desire. That is what the devil wants done, anyhow-to have God's children blinded and deluded. All their societies and aids.and helps are absolutely unknown to the word of God. Every one of them is absolutely without divine authority. Those who hold to such things have no more right to be called the church of God than a hog has to be called an angel. Many of God's people are blinded and are among them, but they are not in the church the Lord established while here in the world.

We would be glad for them to get their eyes open to the truth, and to see them coming home to the true church of God, which still goes on without using those things invented in the lower regions. We should be satisfied with what the Lord has put here for His children, and let all other things alone. The Bible is given to furnish God's children with all that they should practice religiously, and it is very much wrong to practice what the Bible does not command. C. H. C.

Re 11:3,7-8 February 27, 1930

We have been asked to give our views on Re 11:3,8. We would be glad to publish Gill's comments on these passages, but do not have the space. We will write just a few lines, giving some of our thoughts in a very brief way. Re 11:3 reads as follows: And I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy a thousand two hundred and threescore days, clothed in sackcloth. This thousand two hundred and three score days is twelve hundred and sixty years, and answers to the time the church was in the wilderness. The two witnesses are the church and the ministry-the true ministry of Christ. During these twelve hundred and sixty years they testified to the truth, but were sorely persecuted. They prophesied in sackcloth and ashes; and though they were persecuted by the world, yet the Lord blessed them. At the end of the twelve hundred and sixty years the Reformation came, when Luther came out of Rome and established the Lutheran Church and Calvin established the Presbyterian Church. Then came religious liberty, and the true witnesses were allowed freedom to proclaim the riches of God's grace in a public way without fear of molestation. Now we come to Re 11:7-8: And when they shall have finished their testimony, the beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit shall make war against them, and shall overcome them, and kill them. And their dead bodies shall lie in the street of the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified. Here is a prophecy that we would do well to take heed to. This beast is generally conceded to be Rome. The beast is to make war against the two witnesses and will overcome them and kill them, and their dead bodies will lie in the streets. Verse nine tells us that "they of the people and kindreds and tongues and nations shall see their dead bodies three days and an half, and shall not suffer their dead bodies to be put in graves." This severe trial and persecution will last for three years and six months, and it will be the most severe persecution that the world has ever known. It is true that in past ages the true and humble followers of the Master have been put to death and punished in every conceivable way that it seems Satan could invent, and the persecutions have been severe; but this will be the worst. But thanks be to the Lord, it will be of short duration in comparison with the length of time some of our ancestors had to suffer. For some years we have felt sure that we could see the dark clouds gathering, and we still believe we can see those clouds. Rome has been gradually working to gain her lost power, and the pope has been granted territory over which he is ruler in temporal matters as well as church matters. They have been working for years to make America Catholic. They are avowed enemies of our free school system, the bulwark of our freedom. They have always opposed the full and entire separation of church and state. For you to know these things to be true it is only necessary for you to read authentic church history and read what Catholics say in their own papers and publications now. They tried to elect Al Smith president, and all indications are that he will be a candidate next time. With a Catholic president this war on the two witnesses could be made before the Protestant people could have time or warning to help themselves. All papers opposing Catholicism could be put out of business in a few weeks time, and that without remedy. Do we want the trial of such persecution as is here told us about in this chapter? If not, then we should "be up and doing." Let us awake to the dangers confronting us, and awake to the discharge of our every duty. Let us go to God in prayer, that such calamity may not befall us, and then let us do our full duty. In the discharge of our every duty the Lord will bless us. We are not running a political paper, but we feel it to be our indispensable duty to warn all our readers of the impending crisis. May the Lord help us all to awake to the true situation and to do our whole duty. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO ELDER

J. R. WILSON February 27, 1930

Dear brother, we are so sorry to hear of your health being bad, and beg the Lord that you may be well again. We are glad to say that our health is better. We seem to be improving, and we hope to be well again soon. We hope to see you this summer, and want you to visit our churches. Our people will welcome you among them. We appreciate your kind words more than we can tell, though we feel so unworthy of it all. The Lord's dear children have been good to us-far better than we feel to deserve. True, we have had to endure trials and persecutions; but many have stood by us in our trials, and we trust we appreciate it all. May the good Lord bless every one of them, is our humble prayer. We would be glad to be at your association, but at present we do not see how we can well be there. May the Lord shower down His richest blessings upon you and those dear to you, is our humble prayer. Please continue to pray for us. We are so poor and needy, and we need the prayers of all the Lord's faithful and true children. C. H. C.

OUR MEETING

March 6, 1930

Recently Brother Webb, or someone else, made the statement that there were six additions to our little church here in Thornton at our February meeting. We never thought, then, of the necessity of saying anything further about it. But since then we have thought perhaps some of our readers would like to know who they were and how they joined; so we will give you that information. They were Elder T. L. Webb and wife, Brother Whit Fowlkes and wife, and Brother E. B. Meeks and mother, Sister Mollie Meeks. They all joined by letter. We were all glad to have them cast their lot with us. The little band are all in peace, and the Lord is blessing us with some sweet and delightful meetings. Today is March 1, our regular conference meeting day. We have just been to meeting. Elders Webb and Harris (Elder John R. Harris) were both blessed to preach so sweetly and comfortingly to the Lord's dear children who were present. May the Lord be praised for such noble gifts, and may He help us to appreciate them as gifts from Him. C. H. C.

LONDON CONFESSION

March 27, 1930

For some little time we have thought we would write a few lines concerning the London Confession of Faith, as the Absoluters seem to be so free to quote a part of it in proof of the doctrine they advocate-that God did, from all eternity, absolutely and unconditionally decree, predestinate and unalterably fix everything that comes to pass, good, bad and indifferent. They always seem ready to quote section 1 of chapter 3, or a part of it, to try to prove that they are in line with those ancient Baptists and that those who do not accept their contention have departed from the faith. Let us here quote chapter 3, section 1: God hath decreed in Himself from all eternity, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely and unchangeably, all things whatsoever come to pass; yet so as thereby is God neither the author of sin nor hath fellowship with any therein, nor is violence offered to the will of the creature, nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established, in which appears His wisdom in disposing all things, and power and faithfulness in accomplishing His decree. Please note that in this statement the London Confession says, "Nor yet is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established," etc. The word "contingency" means contingent or conditional. It is bound to be true, then, since they used that expression right there in that very chapter and section, that they believed God predestinated or decreed some things on condition, or that it was contingent on something else. Do the Absoluters believe any of God's predestination was contingent, or that He predestinated to do a single thing on condition of anything else? No, indeed. They not only do not believe that, but they brand those who do believe it as being Arminians and as departing from the faith. Can we prove by the Bible that God has predestinated or decreed to do anything on condition? or that one thing He has predestinated is contingent on something else? Let us read Ps 89:30-32: If His children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; if they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Here we are told that God says He will visit their transgression with the rod and their iniquity with stripes. He has determined to do this. But did He so determine to thus chastise them unconditionally? He does not say so; but He says "if they forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; if they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; then will I visit their transgression with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes." He has determined to visit their transgression with the rod and their iniquity with stripes. He has not determined to thus chastise them, whether or no; but the chastising of them is contingent upon their disobedience-the forsaking of His law, walking not in His judgments, breaking His statutes, and keeping not His commandments. Thus it is clearly taught in God's inspired word that He has determined to do this on the contingency stated in the text itself. Let us read Joh 14:21: He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him. Gospel commandments are to God's regenerated children only, and are not to the unregenerate. Surely the Absoluters will not dispute this. They certainly will not deny, either, that some may have the love of God in their hearts and yet not obey the gospel. But those who love God and obey Him manifest that love by their obedience. They love Him in a manifest way. The Saviour here promised that He will love those who keep His commandments. This could not mean that He will love them in that way that He loved all His elect, for He loved them with an everlasting love; and that everlasting love of God is the very foundation of their final salvation and deliverance from all sin and its awful consequences, and is manifested to all the elect alike. This love, then, must be a love in a manifest sense. In order that they enjoy this manifest love of the Father and the Saviour it is necessary that they keep His commandments. Their enjoyment of this manifest love of God is contingent upon their keeping His commandments. God has so decreed it, and the Saviour clearly so teaches in this text, as well as in other places. Let us see what we find in

Isa 1:19-20 is a text used by many in trying to prove that a child of God may be finally lost and go to eternal torment. If the text does prove that, it proves too much for them; and a text that proves too much is as bad as a text that proves nothing. Those who advocate the doctrine of the possibility of final apostasy tell us that if a child of God does fall away he can be renewed and get back into a saved state by repentance. Now, let us read that text and see just what it says and what it does teach. For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentence; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame.-Heb 6:4-6. The text says, "For it is impossible * * * if they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance.'' Thus we see that if the text proves that one may thus fall away, it also proves that it is impossible to renew such a one again; and it thereby proves too much for them. But does the text teach that a child of God may be finally lost? No; but it teaches the very opposite. "If they shall fall away" it is impossible "to renew them again unto repentance." Why? Because "they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put Him to an open shame." That is, if they fall away, the Son of God would have to be crucified for them again; and He would thereby be put to an open shame. He died once for the purpose of saving them in glory, and if they fall away and fail to reach heaven, He would be put to an open shame and His work branded as a failure, and He would have to come back and die for them again. Will the blessed and holy Son of God be put to an open shame? Most emphatically, No. Then they shall not fall away; it is impossible, because He cannot be put to an open shame. Will He ever die again? He said, "I am He that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive forevermore."-Re 1:18. As He is alive forevermore He will never die again, and therefore they shall not fall away and be finally lost. Again, the blessed Saviour said, "Because I live, ye shall live also."-Joh 14:19. The reason why they shall live is that He lives. His living is the cause, and they live as the effect. In order that the effect cease, the cause must first cease; but this cause will never cease, because He is alive forevermore. It follows, therefore, that they shall live forevermore. They will live as long as Jesus lives. If Jesus never dies again, then they shall never die. Jesus said to Martha, "Whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?" This is the blessed and sure promise of the Lord of glory for His little ones. What a precious promise! How sweet that promise is to the poor pilgrim here. We feel like we have hardly got started with the subject, but our physical strength is giving way from the labors of the day, and we will have to stop for this time. Perhaps we can write some more on this subject next week. Remember us in your prayers. C. H. C.

FALLING FROM GRACE ARTICLE NO. 2

April 24, 1930

Last week we promised to try to write some more on this subject this week. In order to try to keep that promise we now try to write a few lines. The idea that a child of God may so apostatize or fall away as to be finally lost would necessarily involve the idea that such a one must cease to be a child of God and become a child of Satan, or that such a child of God goes to eternal torment, or to eternal perdition, which is absurd in the very extreme. No act of a child can possibly cause that child to cease to be a child of its parents and to become the child of another. If one is a child of God, that one has been born of God; born from above; born of the heavenly parentage. God's children may be rebellious and disobedient, which they often are, but that does not sever the relationship. If disobedience and rebellion on the part of the child could possibly sever the relationship existing between parent and child, they could not do so in the case of God's children, because God has sworn that they shall endure (live) forever. Let us read Ps 89:26-36: He shall cry unto me, Thou art my father, my God, and the rock of my salvation. Also I will make him my first born, higher than the kings of the earth. My mercy will I keep for him for evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him. His seed also will I make to endure forever, and his throne as the days of heaven. If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; if they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments; then will I visit their transgressions with the rod, and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure forever, and his throne as the sun before me. In this text David is impersonating or representing Christ, the holy Son of God. God says He has sworn by His holiness that He will not lie unto David, or unto His Son; that His seed shall endure (live) forever. If a child of God, then, forsakes God's law, walks not in His judgments; if they break His statutes, and keep not His commandments-will they go to eternal torment on that account? They certainly will not, for God has sworn to His Son that they shall live forever, though they do thus rebel, and yet He will visit their transgressions with the rod and their iniquity with stripes. He has promised that He would chastise them for their disobedience; but He has sworn by His holiness that they shall endure, or live, forever. "In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began."-Tit 1:2. Here we are told that God cannot lie. As He cannot lie, certainly He could not swear a lie. As He could neither lie nor swear a lie; and as He has promised His Son that His children shall live forever, and then confirmed that promise with an oath, swearing by His holiness, then it is impossible that one of them ever be finally lost. They will certainly live with Him in eternal glory. If one of the Lord's children should ever sink down to eternal night, or go to eternal perdition, it would necessarily follow that God made a promise to His Son which failed of fulfillment, and that He swore falsely. No one can possibly believe God swore truthfully and at the same time believe that a child of God goes to eternal torment. Both cannot be believed at the same time, for the two things are diametrically opposed to each other. If one believes that a child of God may go to an eternal torment, he certainly does not believe the Bible. He may think he does, but he does not; for the Bible tells us that God has sworn that they shall live forever. Could a true and loving mother be satisfied and see her child suffering in torment here in this world? All know very well that she could not. A mother's love for her child is too strong and too tender and great for her to be satisfied and at the same time see her child suffer tortures and torment here. But God's love is greater and stronger than a mother's love. It is far beyond and far greater than any earthly tie. God's love is everlasting and as unchanging and enduring as Himself. God is love. Then how could the blessed Redeemer be satisfied and see one of His children, for whom He suffered, bled and died, suffering the tortures of an endless torment? Such a thought is but a thought that besmirches the very character of that holy and lovely and heavenly Being. "He shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied."-Isa 53:11. Isaiah was here prophesying of the work of the Son of God, and tells us that He shall "see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied." As He could not be satisfied and see one of the objects of His eternal love suffering the torments of an endless hell, then they shall never sink down to that place of torment. "The Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all."- Isa 53:6. The iniquity of all those people who were His was laid on the Son of God. As all their iniquity was laid on Him, and He put away their sins by the sacrifice of Himself, then sin or iniquity cannot cause one of them to go to eternal torment. The Father certainly will not demand payment of a debt of them which has been paid for them by His holy and spotless Son.

What blessed assurances are to be found in the precious old Book for the Lord's dear children who are strangers and pilgrims here. There are troubles and trials and conflicts for them here in this low ground of sin and sorrow; but everlasting joy is in store for them when the troubles and distresses of this life are all over. These blessed assurances comfort and strengthen and encourage us here amidst all our trials and afflictions. We will try to write some more on this subject later on-perhaps next week. C. H. C.

DEACONS ORDAINED

April 24, 1930

Zion's Rest Church, near Jonesboro, La., requested Cane Creek Church, Thornton, Ark., to send or grant her ordained help to go there for the purpose of helping to ordain two brethren (Irvin Canady and Jesse Swanner) to the office of deacon. Our church (Cane Creek) granted the request. Elder Harris had an appointment elsewhere, so that he could not go, but we went along with Elder Webb. Elder Webb's wife and Sister Cloud went with us to be at the meeting, which was last Saturday and Sunday-the third Sunday in April and Saturday before. We were a little late getting there, the distance being 150 miles, and Elder C. M. Monk, the pastor, was preaching when we arrived. Then Elder Webb preached a sweet and comforting discourse, after which the church sat in conference and agreed to attend to the ordination after recess for lunch. They had dinner spread and all were well fed with the temporal things, after which the congregation assembled again in the house. Then the writer and Elders Webb and Monk and Deacons J. L. McBride and J. M. Wiggins formed themselves into a presbytery and proceeded to set the brethren apart to the office of deacon by prayer and laying on of hands. We had meeting again that night and Sunday. Surely the Lord manifested His sweet presence, and it was an enjoyable meeting. May the good Lord continue His blessings upon them, is our prayer. C. H. C.

FALLING FROM GRACE ARTICLE NO. 3

May 1, 1930

Last week we promised to try to write some more on the subject of falling from grace, perhaps this week. So we will try to write a few more lines on that question. For the beginning of this article on the subject we will read Isa 54:9-10. For this is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee. For the mountains shall depart, and the hills be removed; but my kindness shall not depart from thee, neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath mercy on thee. In this language we have, two covenants brought to our attention. The first one is the covenant God made with Noah and all flesh that He would never again destroy the earth by water, and the other is the covenant of His peace; and one is as the other. The covenant of His peace is as the covenant with Noah; for this is as that. If it is possible for a child of God to so apostatize as to be finally lost, then his final salvation in heaven would depend upon his faithfulness and right living here in the world. If his final salvation in heaven depends upon that, then the covenant of God's peace mentioned in this text would be a conditional covenant, and would depend upon their good deeds or faithfulness for its fulfillment. If the covenant of His peace is thus conditional, then His covenant with Noah that He would never again destroy the earth by water was conditional; for the covenant of His peace is as that covenant with Noah. Was the covenant with Noah a conditional one? Let us read it and see. And God spoke unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying, And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you; and with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth. And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth. And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations: I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud: and I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh. And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth.-Ge 9:8-17. This is the covenant which God made with Noah and all flesh that the earth should never again be destroyed by water-that there should never be another flood. Does that covenant depend upon the obedience or faithfulness of any human being on earth for its fulfillment? Most assuredly not. If it had depended upon the righteousness or obedience of mankind for its fulfillment, we know there would have been another flood long before this time. But upon what, then, does it depend for its fulfillment? It depends alone upon the faithfulness of God and His power to fulfill every promise He has made. The Lord put the bow in the cloud as a token of that covenant. Did He place it there so the people could see it and remember the covenant? No; but He said, "I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.'' As long and as often as we see the bow in the cloud we know that God remembers that covenant, and that there will not be another flood. There will never be another flood, whether we remember the covenant or not. The fulfillment of that covenant does not depend upon us remembering it. God remembers the covenant which He made, and the apostle says that "God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord." -1Co 1:9. Since God is faithful, He will fulfill the promise He made in the covenant with Noah and all flesh, and there will never be another flood.

Now, the covenant of His peace is like that, for He says, "This is as the waters of Noah unto me: for as I have sworn that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth; so have I sworn that I would not be wroth with thee nor rebuke thee.'' The Lord swore to the one just as He did to the other. The one is like the other. And this refers to the covenant of His peace, and He says "neither shall it be removed." This covenant depends, then, upon the faithfulness and power of God for its fulfillment, and does not depend upon the faithfulness and righteousness of men and women for that. As the covenant of His peace is like the covenant with Noah, and the covenant with Noah was an unconditional one, then the covenant of His peace is also unconditional. As it is unconditional, and does not depend upon the obedience of the creature for fulfillment, then not one embraced in that covenant will ever sink down to eternal night. God has sworn in that covenant that "I will not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee." In that covenant He has also sworn that "my kindness shall not depart from thee." What glorious and blessed assurance to the poor trembling pilgrim that eternal peace and unsullied bliss and glory is his to enjoy beyond the sorrows and dark scenes of this life. May these blessed truths comfort your hearts in all your sad trials and distresses. We may write some more yet on this subject-perhaps next week. C. H. C.

FALLING FROM GRACE ARTICLE NO. 4

May 8, 1930

Last week we said we might write some more on this question, perhaps this week. So we will try to write a few more lines concerning the final preservation of the saints. Last week we wrote about the covenant of God's peace, as mentioned in Isa 54:9-10, in connection with God's covenant with Noah and all flesh, which is referred to in this text. In Isa 54:7-8 we have this language: "For a small moment have I forsaken thee; but with great mercies will I gather thee. In a little wrath I hid my face from thee for a moment; but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer." Following this language is the language used in the beginning of our article last week, "For this is as the waters of Noah unto me," etc. Taking all these verses together it is very clear that the language in verses 7 and 8 and the sweet and sure promises contained therein are to the same persons embraced in Isa 54:9-10, the same persons embraced in the covenant of His peace. Those persons are the Lord's little children, who are on their pilgrimage here below. "For a small moment have I forsaken thee." When the poor little child of God here in this world of trouble feels and realizes that he is forsaken of the Lord, all is dark and gloomy then. They forsake the Lord's way sometimes, turn from His sweet service, forget His mercies and kindnesses; then "for a small moment" the Lord forsakes them; "in a little wrath" He hides His face from them for a moment. But it seems like a long time. When the Lord's face is hid, turned from the little child of grace, all is dark and gloomy then. It is a night season with him, and it is not a night of rest, either. There is no peace or rest enjoyed; but he is restless and disturbed, and it seems to him that day will never dawn again. He then begins to inquire, in deep sorrow and trouble, as David did, "Will the Lord cast off forever? and will He be favourable no more? Is His mercy clean gone forever? doth His promise fail for-evermore? Hath God forgotten to be gracious? Hath He in anger shut up His tender mercies?"-Ps 77:7-9. In such dark seasons as this, which the Lord's dear children pass through in their journey here below, it seems to them that they are cast off forever; it seems that they can no more enjoy the Lord's divine favor; it appears to them that His mercy is clean gone forever. They feel then that the Lord's gracious and sure and glorious promise does not embrace them. They feel that theirs is an "outside case;" that they are not embraced in the promise of God; that so far as they are concerned the whole matter is a failure. They feel that God will be gracious to them no more; that in His anger with them on account of their great sinfulness He has shut up His tender mercies. What despair! What distress is theirs during these dark hours! How dark is the night, and how long the night seems to be! But the night finally passes and the glorious day dawns again. "The darkest hour is just before day." That darkest hour finally passes, and the glorious and heavenly sunshine of the Lord's blessed manifest presence appears again in all the heavenly glory and sweetness of His sure promise, "but with great mercies will I gather thee;" "but with everlasting kindness will I have mercy on thee, saith the Lord thy Redeemer." What joy then fills the soul! What peace! What content! What reconciliation! What trust in our Redeemer! Though the way is so rough and rugged here in this sinful world, yet here is God's promise, and that promise confirmed by an oath, in which oath He has sworn by Himself. To argue that this promise will not be fulfilled is to argue that the Lord of glory has not only told a lie but that He has perjured Himself by swearing falsely. If one of His little ones sinks down to eternal night, then God has sworn a lie. Would you rather believe that God swore a lie than to believe in the final preservation of the saints? If you sometimes pass through these dark and gloomy nights, it is but a sure evidence of the fact that you are a child of grace-a child of God; you have the spiritual life. If you did not have that life, you could never feel and realize the darkness; neither could you feel or realize and enjoy the sweetness of the manifestation of the Lord's heavenly presence. In Isa 54:17 we have this language: "No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord, and their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord." What a glorious promise and assurance for the Lord's poor little children here, where they are surrounded by so many temptations, and where the enemies are so thick and so numerous, and where Satan is continually near, and all his emissaries, with their fiery darts hurling at them. "No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper.'' The eternal God Himself will take care of the situation; and He will take care of you. "This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord." This is their heritage, and all the demons of the under world cannot prevent them receiving that inheritance. The Lord Himself is pledged to see that they receive it. "Their righteousness is of me, saith the Lord." They have no righteousness of their own, and they realize that fact. They mourn and grieve on account of their unrighteousness, but when they are enabled to realize and to have the assurance that their righteousness is of the Lord, it gives them joy and comfort. "The Lord" is "our righteousness." The Lord Jesus is made unto them "righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption."-1Co 1:30. His righteousness is sufficient. Being clothed with His righteousness they shall be landed safely on the sunny shores of sweet deliverance, and shall dwell forever in the presence of God in glory. Blessed assurance. Hold up your bowed down heads; your sorrows will all end some day, and eternal peace is yours in a better world than this. We may write some more on this same question-perhaps again next week. Remember us in your prayers. C. H. C.

FALLING FROM GRACE ARTICLE NO. 5

May 15, 1930

We promised last week that we would try to write some more on this question. So we will try to write a few more lines this week. This time we will start with the language of the Saviour recorded in Joh 10:27-29, which reads as follows: My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. In this text there are some people whom the Saviour designates as His sheep. In Joh 10:26 He said to some of the Jews, "But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you." Some of the people were His sheep and some were not. Those the Saviour designates as His sheep hear His voice. In Joh 5:25 the Saviour said, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live.'' Those who hear His voice and live are those He calls His sheep. They were His because the Father gave them to Him."My Father, which gave them me."The Father gave them to His Son for a possession; and the Saviour, by the power of His Holy Spirit, speaks to them and makes them alive from a state of death in sin. They are thus made alive in Christ."I give unto them eternal life."How can anything die that has eternal life? If one dies a physical or corporeal death, does not the natural life of that person cease, or come to an end? If the natural life was an eternal life, could one die naturally? Would, or could, the natural life ever end, if it was an eternal life? It is absurd to say that it could. But this life which Jesus here says He gives to His people is eternal life. That life is a never ending life. As the life is never ending, their final salvation in heaven is sure. There can be no such thing as one perishing in eternal torment to whom this life has been given. Not only is this true, but the blessed Saviour most emphatically says"they shall never perish."Never means not ever; not at any time; at no time, whether past, present, or future. As"they shall never perish,"when will one of them ever perish? The Saviour says not ever. As"they shall never perish,"at what time may one of them perish? The Saviour says not at any time. As"they shall never perish,"we repeat the question, at what time may one of them perish? The Saviour says at no time, whether past, present, or future. If at no time, whether past, present, or future, one of them shall ever perish, then it is certain that not one of the Lord's children will ever fail to finally enter heaven and eternal glory. We remember one time in public discussion with a gentleman that he said,"If the doctrine you preach- the final preservation of the saints-be true, the devil is the biggest fool ever heard tell of. If he could not get one of the Lord's children, after trying all these years to get one, he would have found out that he could not get one, and would quit trying, if he were not the biggest fool ever heard tell of."We replied by saying that we always liked to agree with a man when we can, and that we would agree with the gentleman that the devil is the biggest fool ever heard tell of, as is proven by the fact that he cannot get one of the Lord's children, and yet he keeps on trying; but, lo, it seems that the devil is not the only fool in the world, for here is another fellow who has not found this out, either. But we (Old Baptists) have found out better. We have learned that the Saviour told the truth when He said,"They shall never perish."Right here we wish to give three Scriptural propositions. First. Jesus prays for His people according to the Father's will. Second. The Father's will is that He should lose nothing. Third. The Father always hears Him. The first, above, is the first premise in the proposition. Let us prove that first premise. Ro 8:27 "And He that searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because He maketh intercession for the saints according to the will of God."The saints are the children of God, and the Saviour prays for them according to the Father's will. The second premise is that the Father's will is that the Son should lose nothing. Let us prove that. Joh 6:38-39 "For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of Him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which He hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.'' Those the Father gave to the Son are His people, His children; and the Father's will is that not one of them be lost, but that they be raised up again at the last day. The next proposition is that the Father always hears the prayer of His Son. He always hears the Saviour's prayer. Now let us prove that. Joh 11:41-42 "And they took away the stone from the place where the dead was laid. And Jesus lifted up His eyes, and said, Father, I thank thee that thou hast heard me. And I knew that thou hearest me always: but because of the people which stand by I said it, that they may believe that thou hast sent me." The word hearest (or hear) in this text must be in the sense of "to give audience or attention to; to listen to; to heed; to accede to the demand or wishes of; to listen to and answer favorably." This clearly shows that the Father always favorably answers the prayer of His Son. There is not a man in all this wide world who can make it appear that one of the Lord's little children will ever sink down in eternal torment and let these three Scriptural propositions remain true. Here they are again: Jesus prays for His people according to the Father's will. The Father's will is that the Son should lose nothing the Father gave Him. The Father always hears the Son. It follows, therefore, inevitably and certainly, that every child of grace will ultimately be saved in glory. Blessed assurance! Jesus, our loving Saviour, prays for His little ones. Dear child, you often ask those you believe to be God's children to pray for you. They may not know when you need their prayers. But your loving Saviour knows when you are in trouble, in sorrow, in distress, in soul afflictions, when the tempter is near and trying you; and as He prays for you, and knows when you need His prayers, He certainly prays for you when you are in such troubles; and the Father always answers Him favorably-always grants His request.

May these sweet and precious truths comfort your poor heart in your sad distresses, is our humble prayer. Pray for us. We may try to write some more on this question, perhaps again next week. C. H. C.

FALLING FROM GRACE ARTICLE NO. 6

May 22, 1930

We promised again last week that we would try to write some more on this question this week. This week we will begin with a text that is sometimes used to try to prove that a child of God may so fall away as to be finally lost. That text is Ga 5:4, but we want to quote beginning with verse 1: Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage. Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing. For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace. If the text here quoted teaches that a child of God may perish in eternal torment, then it contradicts the language of the Saviour used in our article last week, recorded in Joh 10:28 "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish." Does the inspired apostle contradict the plain statement of the Son of God? Did the Lord Himself make this plain, positive and unequivocal statement, and then inspire His apostle to write something which contradicts that statement which He had Himself made? Unless the Lord has done this, then the language in Ga 5:4 cannot possibly teach that a child of God can be finally lost, or that a child of God may finally land in eternal torment. For one to prove that Paul meant to teach such a thing in this text, he must first prove that the Son of God told a falsehood in the statement above quoted, or that He was mistaken in what He said. Does Paul contradict the teaching, or the plain statement, of the Saviour? Certainly not. Then he does not teach that a child of God may perish in torment, or be finally lost in eternal perdition. Then what is the teaching of the apostle in this text? In the preceding chapter he is treating of the difference between the law service and gospel service. He calls attention to the bondwoman and the freewoman. He says: {Ga 4:21-26} Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar. For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. This shows very clearly that the apostle had been treating in chapter four of the two covenants, and that Agar represented the law covenant, and he plainly says that the child of Agar was born after the flesh; and that covenant was a covenant of works. Isaac was the son of the freewoman, who represented the new covenant, or the covenant of grace, and he was a child of promise. "Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise."-Ga 4:28. This clearly teaches that the children of Jerusalem, the new covenant, the children of God, are children of promise. The old covenant, or law service, with all its rites and ceremonies, has been done away. The law service served its purpose; but when Christ came it was all fulfilled in Him, and was then done away. "Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman."-Ga 4:30. Some Judaizing teacher had been among the Galatian brethren and had taught them that they must be circumcised and keep the law in order to be saved-that they could not reach heaven without this. That was a false doctrine which they had imbibed from some false teacher. By embracing that doctrine they had departed from the doctrine of grace. The doctrine of grace, as taught by the Lord and His inspired apostles, is that sinners are saved in heaven, prepared for the service of God here, and prepared and qualified to live with God in heaven, alone by His grace, without works of any kind. "Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began."-2Ti 1:9. The Galatians had departed from that doctrine of grace; and in that way they had fallen from grace. They had not fallen from eternal life. They had not ceased to be the children of God. The apostle declares them to be the children of promise in Ga 4:28, and being the children of promise they were children of God, and God's children "shall never perish," though they depart from the doctrine of grace. There are many children of God who are taught a false doctrine and made to believe the same here in this world; but believing a false doctrine does not cause one to cease to be a child of God. Suppose Mr. Smith is the father of a boy we will call John, and suppose John has been taught that Mr. Jones is his father, and John believes that. Does that make John become a son of Mr. Jones? Does it cause John to cease to be the son of Mr. Smith? Any sensible person knows that it does not. Neither does it cause one to cease to be a child of God and become a child of Satan because he has been led to believe something that is not true. Those Galatian brethren had been led to believe that they were justified by the works of the law, and in turning from the doctrine of grace and believing in the doctrine of works in order to eternal life, they fell from grace. The old law worship and service had been done away, and these Galatian brethren had been taught the truth of gospel worship and service, and for a time had rejoiced in the same. In verse 1 the apostle admonishes them to stand fast in the glorious liberty of gospel worship and service, and to be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage-the bondage of law worship and service. To be entangled in law worship and service is to discard the work of the blessed Son of God. If we have to observe the rites and ceremonies of law service in order to be saved in heaven, then the death of Christ accomplished nothing-it was wholly unnecessary. We could be saved in heaven by observing the law just as well without the death of Christ as with it. That doctrine utterly denies the work of Christ. It utterly denies the doctrine of grace. God's children may, and sometimes do, deny the Lord and His doctrine, and thus, after having believed the truth, fall from grace and from their steadfastness. When they do that the Lord denies them the blessings He has promised His faithful and obedient children. Though He does this, "If we believe not, yet He abideth faithful: He cannot deny Himself."-2Ti 2:13. For a child of God to perish in eternal torment the Saviour would have to deny Himself; He would be compelled to deny the efficacy of His work; and this He cannot do. Therefore, a child of God cannot perish in eternal torment. This truth will stand through all ages. What we desire and need is the evidence, the assurance, that we are a child of God. Sometimes the evidences that are laid down in God's word (or some of them) are a sweet comfort and consolation to us; and we are glad of the assurance that though we should be deceived by some false teacher and led by him to believe a false doctrine, yet the Lord will not-cannot-deny Himself; and though we should lose the comfort here that may be enjoyed in believing the truth, yet we shall not lose the joys of the heavenly world and the glory of that heavenly home. This is a consolation and comfort to us. The doctrine of God our Saviour is comforting and consoling to the Lord's children here. Truth makes them free. Truth consoles them in trials and temptations. There is no comfort or consolation to them in the thought that they are liable to fall away and sink down in eternal ruin and despair at last. Therefore, that doctrine is not the doctrine of God. It is not the truth. The old servant of God was commanded thus: "Comfort ye, comfort ye my people, saith your God. Speak ye comfortably to Jerusalem, and cry unto her, that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned: for she hath received of the Lord's hand double for all her sins."-Isa 40:1-2. To tell the Lord's little children, who feel and realize their poverty and their utter dependence upon the Lord for His mercy and grace every day and every hour, that they may so fall away as to be eternally lost at last is no comfort to them. Therefore, one who speaks that way does not speak as the Lord commanded. May the Lord bless the thoughts here given to the comfort and encouragement and consolation of our readers, is our humble prayer. We may try to write some more on this subject next week. Pray the Lord to be with and direct us. C. H. C.

FALLING FROM GRACE ARTICLE NO. 7

May 29, 1930

We promised again last week that we would try to write some more this week on falling from grace. So we will try to write a few more lines on the subject. This week we will begin with Jude 1, which reads as follows: Jude, the servant of Jesus Christ, and brother of James, to them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called. In this text we find that Jude, the inspired writer, was addressing his short letter to "them that are sanctified by God the Father, and preserved in Jesus Christ, and called." It was the work of God the Father to sanctify them. To sanctify means to make free from sin; to cleanse from moral corruption and pollution; to purify; to make sacred or holy; to set apart to a holy or religious use, etc. It was the work of the Father to set them apart to a holy or religious use. The Father had chosen them, and set them apart to salvation, or to be saved. Sanctification is "the act or process of God's grace by which the affections of men are purified, or alienated from sin and the world, and exalted to a supreme love to God," etc.-Webster. It was the act or process of God's grace by which they were sanctified. God did that work by His grace. The Father had chosen them to salvation, and set them apart to that end; and by His own act in giving them the divine life, He had planted in their hearts a love for Him. Thus they had been sanctified, set apart, exalted to that high state or condition, in which they were brought to hate sin and to love God and holiness. These people were not only thus sanctified, but they were "preserved in Jesus Christ." To preserve is "to keep or save from injury or destruction; to guard or defend from evil; to protect; save; to save from decay by the use of some preservative substance, as sugar, salt, etc.;-to prepare so as to prevent decomposition or fermentation, as by seasoning, canning, etc."-Webster. As these people were preserved in Jesus Christ, they are kept from injury. If they are kept from injury, how could they sink down to eternal night? If one should sink down to eternal night, would he be kept from injury? Would it be an injury for one to sink down to eternal ruin? If it would be an injury for one to sink down to eternal ruin, and if they are kept from injury, then they are kept from sinking down to eternal ruin. They (the Lord's children) are kept from destruction, as to preserve is to keep from destruction. As they are kept from destruction, then they are kept from sinking down to eternal ruin. The inspired writer says they are preserved in Jesus Christ. Did he tell the truth? If he did tell the truth, then how can one of God's children ever be lost in eternal torment, or everlasting destruction, seeing he says they are preserved, and being preserved is being kept from destruction? No man on earth can ever show that one of God's little children will sink down in eternal ruin without first proving that the inspired writer did not here tell the truth. We are inclined to think this would be hard to do. They are not kept from destruction by their own power, nor by the power of the preacher, nor by the power of the church, nor by the power of any set of men, nor by the power of any institution on earth. They are kept by the power of God. See 1Pe 1:5. God has the power to keep them, and does keep them from destruction. He keeps them through all the trials and conflicts of this life unto salvation. He keeps them "ready to be revealed in the last time.'' Since they are kept by the power of God unto salvation, and He has the power to keep them, then not one of them will sink down in eternal ruin. As God has the power to keep them, and He does keep them ready to be revealed in the last time, then they will all finally be saved in heaven.

As to preserve is to save from destruction, and the Lord's children are preserved, then they are all saved from destruction. Not one of them, then, will ever be destroyed in an eternal hell. They will never sink down in everlasting destruction. They are saved from that by the Lord Himself, the inspired writer having told the truth. To preserve is to guard or defend from evil. The Lord Himself guards them and defends them from evil. Satan may tempt and torment them; but the Lord guards them; He defends them. If one of them is ever lost, it must be because the Lord is not able to defend them against Satan, the great enemy of their souls. But the Lord is able to defend them. As He is able to defend them, and does defend them, because He preserves them, then they are securely and effectually protected, defended, from the vicious attacks of their greatest enemy. Being thus defended it is impossible that one of them sink down in everlasting ruin. To preserve is to save from decay. As they are preserved by the Lord, then the Lord saves them from decay. Since they are saved from decay by the Lord of glory, then not one of them can ever perish in eternal torment. All the rottenness and decay that might be or can be caused by sin will be removed from them. They shall be finally made whole, without spot or wrinkle. They are saved by the Lord, and kept from the awful results and consequences of sin. They are preserved; they are kept from decay. They will all finally live with God and Christ in eternal glory. To be preserved is to be kept from decay by the use of some preservative substance. They are kept from decay by the use of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit has taken up His abode in their hearts. The Holy Spirit is a sure preserving substance, and by Him they are kept from ruin and decay. The love of God is shed abroad in their hearts by the Holy Ghost. The love of God is a sure preserving substance. By it they are kept from decay unto eternal glory. Sometimes the sisters say, "I lost my preserves;" or, "my preserves spoiled." That is a mistake. Perhaps they lost their fruit; perhaps their fruit spoiled. Why did the fruit spoil? Because they did not have it preserved. They had tried to preserve the fruit; they thought they had the fruit preserved, but they were mistaken. The Lord is never mistaken. He never has thought He had one preserved and was mistaken about it. If He has thought He had one preserved, it was sure that way, for "as I have thought, so shall it come to pass." He is never mistaken; He never makes a mistake. If the good sister had preserved the fruit it would not have spoiled. The Lord has preserved, and does preserve, His people; hence they do not spoil. They will not sink down in eternal ruin. To preserve is to prepare so as to prevent decomposition. The Lord's people are preserved in Jesus Christ. They are so prepared by the Lord for final salvation as that they are prevented from decomposition. As they are so prepared as to prevent decomposition, then they will never be decomposed-they will never decompose. As they will never decompose-having been so prepared as to prevent decomposition-they will never be finally lost. Not one of them can ever sink down into eternal night. They cannot so fall away as to be finally lost. In order that one of God's children so fall away as to be finally lost, he would have to decompose; he would have to decay. But they are preserved-kept from decomposition or decay. Therefore, they are kept from finally falling away and being lost. They are not only preserved, but they are "preserved in Jesus Christ." The sister may have her fruit preserved; but she may have it in a vessel that may be broken. If the vessel should be broken, then her preserved fruit is lost. But Jesus Christ will never be broken or destroyed, and God's children are preserved in Him. Since they are preserved in Him, then not one of them can be lost-unless they are cast out of Him. But Jesus has said that "him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." That is, he shall not, in any case, under no circumstance, be cast out. They are in the hands of Jesus and in the hands of the Father. No one is able to pluck them out of the hand of Jesus, and no one is able to pluck them out of the hand of the Father. See Joh 10:28-29. Since they are preserved in Jesus Christ, and shall, under no consideration, be cast out, and no one is able to pluck them out, then they cannot possibly be finally lost. How safe and secure the Lord's dear children are! The storms of persecution may rage; sorrow may sweep down over the soul like billows; temptations may assail them on every hand; poverty and distress may be their portion here in this world of sadness and sin; all the powers of darkness and the demons of the under world may be arrayed against them; but they are still safe and secure, for they are "preserved in Jesus Christ." He is the anointed Saviour. He was anointed to save them, and He saves them. The angel of His presence saves them. Lift up your heads; take comfort in the sweet assurance that your troubles and sorrows will soon end, and eternal joys will soon be yours. We will try to write some more on this question some time-perhaps next week. C. H. C.

MARRYING AFTER DIVORCE IN CASE OF ADULTERY June 5, 1930

John Owen was born in 1616, and died August 24, 1683. He was an able and eminent minister, and wrote many different works. We copy the following article from "The Works of John Owen," Volume 16, page 254, under the above heading. It is just what the Primitive Baptists have always believed on this question. C. H. C.

THE ARTICLE

It is confessed by all that adultery is a just and sufficient cause of a divorce betwixt married persons. This divorce, say some, consists in a dissolution "vinculi matrimonialis," (of the bonds of matrimony) and so removes the marriage relation as that the innocent person divorcing or procuring the divorce is at liberty to marry again. Others say it is only a separation "a mensa et thoro," (separation from bed and board-not free to marry another) and that on this account it doth not nor ought to dissolve the marriage relation. I am of the judgment of the former; for,First, This divorce "a mensa et thoro," (separation from bed and board) only is no true divorce, but a mere fiction of a divorce, of no use in this case, nor lawful to be made use of, neither by the law of nature nor the law of God; for-

1. It is, as stated, but a late invention, of no use in the world, nor known in more ancient times: for those of the Roman church who assert it do grant that divorces by the law of nature were "a vinculo,'' (absolute divorce) and that so they were also under the Old Testament; and this Action they would impose on the grace and state of the gospel, which yet makes indeed no alteration in moral relations and duties, but only directs their performance.

2. It is deduced from a fiction,-namely, that marriage among Christians is a sacrament of that signification as renders it indissoluble; and therefore they would have it to take place only amongst believers, the rest of mankind being left to their natural right and privilege. But this is a fiction, and as such in sundry cases they make use of it. Secondly, A divorce perpetual "a mensa et thoro" (separation from bed and board) only is no way useful to mankind, but hurtful and noxious; for,-

1. It would constitute a new condition or state of life, wherein it is not possible that a man should either have a wife, or not have a wife lawfully, in one of which estates yet really every man capable of the state of wedlock is and must be, whether he will or no; for a man may, as things may be circumstantiated, be absolutely bound in conscience not to receive her again who was justly repudiated for adultery, nor can he take another on this divorce. But into this estate God calls no man.

2. It may, and probably will, cast a man under a necessity of sinning: for suppose he hath not the gift of continency, it is the express will of God that he should marry for his relief; yet on this supposition, he sins if he does so, and in that he sins if he doeth not so. Thirdly, It is unlawful; for if the bond of marriage abide, the relation still continues. This relation is the foundation of all mutual duties; and whilst all that continues, none can dispense with or prohibit from the performance of those duties. If a woman do continue in the relation of a wife to a man, she may claim the duties of marriage from him. Separation there may be by consent for a season, or upon other occasions, that may hinder the actual discharge of conjugal duties; but to make an obligation unto such duties void, whilst the relation doth continue, is against the law of nature and the law of God. This divorce, therefore, supposing the relation of man and wife between any, and no mutual duty thence to arise, is unlawful. Fourthly, The light of nature never directed to this kind of divorce. Marriage is an ordinance of the law of nature; but in the light and reason thereof there is no intimation of any such practice. It is still directed that they who might justly put away their wives might marry others. Hence some, as the ancient Grecians, and the Romans afterward, allowed the husband to kill the adulteress. This among the Romans was changed "lege Julia," (in law of Julian) but the offense was still made capital. In the room hereof, afterward, divorce took place purposely to give the innocent person liberty of marriage. So that this kind of divorce is but a fiction. The first opinion, therefore, is according to truth; for,First, That which dissolves the form of marriage and destroys all the forms of marriage doth dissolve the bond of marriage; for take away the form and end of any moral relation, and the relation itself ceaseth. But this is done by adultery, and a divorce ensuing thereon. For the form of marriage consisteth in this, that two become "one flesh," Ge 2:24; Mt 19:6,-but this is dissolved by adultery; for the adulteress becometh one flesh with the adulterer, 1Co 6:16, and no longer one flesh in individual society with her husband, and so it absolutely breaks the bond or covenant of marriage. And how can men contend that is a bond which is absolutely broken, or fancy a "vinculum" (bond) that doth not bind? and that it absolutely destroys all the forms of marriage will be granted. It therefore dissolves the bond of marriage itself. Secondly, If the innocent party upon a divorce be not set at liberty, then,-

1. He is deprived of his right by the sin of another; which is against the law of nature;-and so every wicked woman hath it in her power to deprive her husband of his natural right.

2. The divorce in case of adultery, pointed by our Saviour to the innocent person to make use of, is, as all confess, for his liberty, advantage, and relief. But on supposition that he may not marry, it would prove a snare and a yoke unto him; for if hereon he hath not the gift of continency, he is exposed to sin and judgment. Thirdly, Our blessed Saviour gives express direction in the case, Mt 19:9 "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery." Hence it is evident, and is the plain sense of the words, that he who putteth away his wife for fornication and marrieth another doth not commit adultery. Therefore the bond of marriage in that case is dissolved, and the person that put away his wife is at liberty to marry. While He denies putting away and marrying again for every cause, the exception of fornication allows both putting away and marrying again in that case; for an exception always affirms the contrary unto what is denied in the rule whereunto it is an exception, or denies what is affirmed in it in the case comprised in the exception; for every exception is a particular proposition contradictory to the general rule, so that when the one is affirmative, the other is negative, and on the contrary. The rule here in general is affirmative: He that putteth away his wife and marries another committeth adultery. The exception is negative: But he that putteth away his wife for fornication and marrieth another doth not commit adultery. Or they may be otherwise conceived, so that the general rule shall be negative, and the exception affirmative: It is not lawful to put away a wife and marry another; it is adultery. Then the exception is: It is lawful for a man to put away his wife for fornication, and marry another. And this is the nature of all such exceptions, as I could manifest in instances of all sorts. It is to no purpose to except that the other evangelists {Mr 10:11-12; Lu 16:18} do not express the exception insisted on; for,-

1. It is twice used by Matthew, chap. x. 32 and chap. xix. 9, (Mt 10:32; 19:9) and therefore was assuredly used by our Saviour.

2. It is a rule owned by all, that where the same thing is reported by several evangelists, the briefer, short, more imperfect expressions, are to be measured and interpreted by the fuller and larger. And every general rule in any place is to be limited by an exception annexed unto it in any one place whatever; and there is scarce any general rule admitteth of an exception. It is more vain to answer that our Saviour speaketh with respect unto the Jews only, and what was not allowed among them; for,-

1. In this answer He reduces things to the law of creation and their primitive institution. He declares what was the law of marriage and the nature of that relation antecedent to the law and institution of Moses; and so, reducing things to the law of nature, gives a rule directive to all mankind in this matter.

2. The Pharisees inquired of our Saviour about such a divorce as was absolute, and gave liberty of marriage after it; for they never heard of any other. The pretended separation "a mensa et thoro" only was never heard of in the Old Testament. Now, if our Saviour doth not answer concerning the same divorce about which they inquired, but another which they knew nothing of, He doth not answer them, but delude them;-they ask after one thing, and He answers another in nothing to their purpose. But this is not to be admitted; it were blasphemy to imagine it. Wherefore, denying the causes of divorce which they allowed, and asserting fornication to be a just cause thereof, He allows, in that case, of that divorce which they inquired about, which was absolute and from the bond of marriage.

FALLING FROM GRACE ARTICLE NO. 8

June 12,1930

We promised again last week that we would write some more on this subject, perhaps this week. So we will try to write a few lines more. This week we will begin by reading Heb 6:13-20: For when God made promise to Abraham, because He could swear by no greater, He sware by Himself, saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee. And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise. For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife. Wherein God, willing more abundantly to shew unto the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath: that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us: which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest forever after the order of Melchisedec. In this promise to Abraham, which Paul here referred to, God said, "And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed."-Ge 22:18. And "in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed." This is a promise which the Lord confirmed by an oath. As He could swear by no greater, He sware by Himself that He would fulfill the promise. This promise embraces and includes every heir of promise. "If ye be Christ's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise."-Ga 3:29. If you are a child of God, "If ye be Christ's," then you are one of the promised children, embraced in the promise God made to Abraham. Men always swear by the greater. A man placed on the witness stand is requested to hold up his hand and the person authorized to administer the oath will say, "Do you solemly swear or affirm that you will tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, in this case, so help you God?" He does not say, "So help you, yourself." But "So help you God." Thus the man swears by the greater. If a person in whom you have confidence-you do not believe he would tell a lie, much less swear a lie-is put on the witness stand, and he testifies under oath that a certain thing is a certain way, you would believe it was that way. That would settle the matter with you. That would be an end of all strife with you. You would be confident the matter was just as the witness stated. That witness might be one who would not lie, but no man is a witness that cannot lie. In this case brought to our attention in our text the one making the promise and who confirmed it by an oath is one who cannot lie-much less swear a lie. Men can, and do, swear by one greater than themselves. But God could not swear by one greater than Himself. Here are two things God cannot do-He cannot lie, and He cannot swear by one greater than Himself. These are the two immutable things. These two things have stood through all the past ages, and will stand to all eternity. They are always the same. As God could not swear by one greater than Himself, because He is the greatest of all beings, then He swears by Himself. What for? That the heirs of promise, His children, might have strong consolation. That they may have double assurance of the certainty of the eternal joys and happiness of every little child of God. There could not possibly be any consolation in the thought that one of the Lord's children may fall away so as to be finally lost-that one of them might sink down into eternal night, or everlasting perdition. Such a thought would be anything else but consoling. Suppose you could have the certain and sure knowledge that you are a child of God today, but also be assured that you may at last sink down in eternal ruin and despair- could that possibly be any consolation to you? Would it not rather be a terror and a matter of distress and dread to you? But it is not the truth. God has sworn by Himself that He will remember every heir of promise. He has given His oath that you may have strong consolation. Christ is formed in His children the hope of glory. The anointed Saviour is the only hope of heaven and immortal glory for His little children. The hope of the Christian, the child of God, "emereth into that within the veil; whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus." Jesus is their hope, and that hope is entered within the veil. This hope is an anchor of the soul. This anchor is entered upward, "into that within the veil." This anchor is both sure and steadfast. The vessels that sail over the seas, on the mighty deep, all have anchors. Those anchors enter downward; but this one is entered upward. In time of storm those anchors are cast and go down deep into the sea. As long as the anchor remains steadfast, or sure, the vessel is secure and all the passengers on board the vessel are safe. If the anchor is sure and steadfast it will not give way. Sometimes those anchors give way. When they do give way, it only proves that they were not sure and steadfast. But this anchor is both sure and steadfast. The word sure means "admitting of no doubt, condition, qualification, or the' like; indubitable; positive;- said of things; as, sure evidence; a sure success. Entirely trustworthy or dependable; certain not to fail or disappoint expectation."-Webster. This blessed hope is entirely trustworthy; it is dependable. What are you hoping for, dear child of God? Are you not hoping for a better home, a better place, beyond this life, beyond death, beyond the grave? Yes; the hope of the poor little child of God reaches out beyond death and beyond the grave. He is looking beyond these to a better home, a better country-hoping for that. Blessed hope! This hope is entirely trustworthy; it is entirely dependable. It is certain not to fail or disappoint of expectation. There is no doubt about that. If a thing is sure it admits of no doubt; and the apostle says this hope is an anchor that is sure. The safety of the little vessel that is now sailing on the boisterous and stormy sea of life admits of no doubt. It is true that the Lord's dear children have sorrows, trials, troubles, distresses, disappointments, bereavements, sore temptations, and dire conflicts all along the rough and rugged journey. The sea of their lifetime and their journey here below is rough and toilsome. Sorrows sometimes sweep down over the soul like billows. The winds of adversity blow hard and fast; the lightnings of persecution flash vividly; the thunders peal loudly, and sometimes in quick succession. Sometimes the waves of trouble roll so high, and the clouds of sorrows and distresses are so dark and threatening, that the poor little trembling child almost gives up in utter despair. How poor and helpless he sometimes feels! But the anchor is sure and steadfast. The little vessel sailing on this boisterous sea is safe and secure. The anchor is certain not to fail, and as the anchor is certain not to fail, then the little child of God cannot be lost. Blessed hope! Blessed anchor! Blessed assurance! What a strong consolation amidst all the storms and trials of this life! The lightnings of persecution may flash; the waves of trouble and distress may roll high, the clouds may be black, with all their threatenings; Satan, with all his emissaries, may gather together to battle against one of the Lord's dear little ones, but the eternal God has given them an anchor that remains sure and steadfast. He has pledged under an oath, having sworn by Himself, to engage all His omnipotent powers for their eternal security and safety. They are kept by His power unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time. We feel like much more could be said along this same line, but we must stop for this time. May the Lord bless these thoughts to your comfort, and may they bring strong consolation to your poor heart, is our humble prayer. We have received many letters from the Lord's little children telling us they have enjoyed these articles which we have been writing on this subject. Those letters have been much comfort and consolation and encouragement to us, along with the thoughts we have been giving you. Remember us in your prayers. If we still feel impressed that way we will try to write more on this question. C. H. C.

ANOTHER EDITOR

June 12, 1930

In another column in this paper will be found an article from Elder S. N. Redford, of Valley Springs, Texas, giving his consent for his name to be placed on our editorial staff. We are glad to have Brother Redford associated with us again. Many of our readers will remember that some years ago his name was on the staff, and that he was editor of the Southwestern Department. We have always held Brother Redford in the very highest esteem, and we haVe loved him dearly all the while as a dear brother in the Lord and as a servant of the Master-even during the divided condition of our people in Texas. We are glad that we can be again associated with this dear brother, as well as with many others. How much better it would be if all our people were together, as they once were, and all walking together to the house of the Lord. May the Lord help us to not only pray for the peace of Jerusalem, but help us to labor to that end; help us to "strive for the things that make for peace." It is so much better for us to be striving to build up, rather than to tear down and to destroy. Brother Redford will write for the paper, and will be glad to take subscriptions. Again we say that we are glad to have him with us. May the good Lord bless his labors to the good of our readers and to the good of His cause, is our prayer. C. H. C.

FALLING FROM GRACE ARTICLE NO. 9

June 19, 1930

According to our promise we will try to write a few more lines on this subject-the final preservation of the saints, or the possibility of a child of God being finally lost. This time we want to begin with the language of Paul, the inspired apostle to the Gentiles, as recorded in Ro 8:28-34, which reads as follows: And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. Moreover whom He did predestinate, them He also called: and whom He called, them He also justified: and whom He justified, them He also glorified. What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. In this text the apostle declares that "all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to His purpose." This text has often been quoted to prove that all things in existence, and all things that ever transpire, work together for good to them that love God, etc. It is very evident that the apostle means no such thing by this expression, for the simple reason that he tells us in Ga 5:17 of two things that do not work together. In that place he tells us "For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would." Here are two things that work against each other. They work in opposition to each other. They are contrary to each other. Therefore, they are not working together, but contrary to each other. This is a condition that exists in the life of every child of grace, so that they cannot do the things they would. What would they do? They would live free from sin and above and without sin. This is the great longing and desire of every child of grace; but they cannot do that, for the simple reason that they still possess the same old sinful nature which they always had. They still have the same fleshly nature to contend with, and on account of still having the same old sinful and fleshly nature, which is contrary to the Spirit, they cannot do the things that they would. They will have this warfare as long as they live in this world. And this warfare within is an unmistakable proof and evidence of the fact that they are in possession of the Spirit, and proves that they are the children of God. It is also true that God and Satan are not working together. Is it true that God and the devil have formed a partnership business and are working together for the accomplishment of one certain end? Is the devil working together with God, and in harmony with Him, for the accomplishment of the eternal happinesss and glory of the Lord's children? They must be thus working together, if the expression "all things work together" means all things in existence work together. Nobody but Absoluters believe that expression means that; and, if their doctrine be true, they may ascribe as much glory and honor for their salvation to the devil as to the Father or to Jesus Christ; for, according to their doctrine, the Father, Jesus Christ, the Holy Spirit and the devil are all working together for their salvation and eternal deliverance-for their eternal deliverance from what? According to their doctrine they are all working together for their final deliverance from the predestination of God; for they say that God predestinated all their sins. Every child of grace knows, when he rightly considers, that this doctrine is not the truth. If the term "all things" always means everything in existence, when it is used in the Bible, then there is nothing under the sun which does not belong to every child of God in the universe, for the apostle says in 1Co 3:21-23 "Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are your's; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are your's; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's." If one of the Lord's children should see a stray horse going around he might take the horse up and lay claim to him under the plea that "all things are yours," according to the Absoluters. But we did not begin to write this article to refute the doctrine of the Absoluters. We have digressed, though what we have said is true. The "all things" the apostle had under consideration are described and mentioned in the text. In Ro 8:31 he says, "What shall we then say to these things?" What things? These "all things" which are working together for their good. What all things are working together for their good, then? God the Father is for them in foreknowledge and predestination; God the Son is for them in atonement and justification; God the Holy Spirit is for them in calling them out of nature's night and darkness into the glorious light and liberty of the children of God. The final end and design to be accomplished by the work of these three divine persons in the Trinity is the glorification of every heir of promise. God the Father knew them in some special sense in which He did not know others. "And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity."-Mt 7:23. Is there no sense at all in which He knew them? Certainly, He knew them as wicked men, sinful beings; but He did not know them as He knew others. There is a special sense in which He knew others that He did not know these. So, there is a special sense in which He knew this people- the heirs of promise. They were known as His covenant people before the world was; for the covenant was an everlasting covenant. See Heb 13:20-21. The Father not only knew them in the covenant, but He predestinated that they should be conformed to the image of His Son. This is the eternal purpose of the Father. He has purposed it, and He will also bring it to pass. Thus it is clear that God the Father is for them in foreknowledge and predestination. Then God the Holy Spirit is for them in calling. The Spirit calls all that the Father knew in the covenant and predestinated should be conformed to the image of His Son. This is the direct and immediate work of the Spirit, and it is accomplished without any human agency or works of men. Thus, the Father and the Spirit are working together for the final salvation and deliverance of every child of grace. The Spirit not only calls them out of nature's night and darkness, but also preserves and keeps them. God the Son is for them in making atonement, or in justification. The Son works with the Father and the Spirit. They are working together-not at variance. The Son died for all that the Father predestinated should be conformed to His image-all that the Father gave Him for an inheritance. Thus, the three are working together, and all that these three do works together for one end, which is the glorification in heaven of all those who are called according to God's purpose. They are called by the Holy Spirit according to the purpose of the Father. They will finally be glorified in heaven, for the apostle emphatically says, "and whom He justified, them He also glorified." God's children are all justified. They are "justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus."-Ro 3:24. "What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?" This is a stronger way of saying that no one can successfully be against them. If no one can be against them, successfully, then they must all necessarily be finally glorified with Jesus in the heavenly world. Since God is for them, then all the powers of darkness combined cannot drag one of them down to eternal night. If the Father spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for them, will He not also freely give them all things necessary to their final happiness and glorification in heaven? Surely, since the Father gave His darling Son, the darling Son of His bosom, to suffer and die for them, He will give all things else necessary to land them safely on the shores of eternal bliss and glory. He is going to see to it that not one of them is lost. "Who shall lay anything to the charge of God's elect?" His elect are those the Father knew in the covenant and predestinated should be conformed to the image of His Son. Since all their sins are charged to the Son, who shall lay anything to their charge? "The Lord hath laid on Him the iniquity of us all."-Isa 53:6. Since the Lord has laid all their iniquity on His Son, now who shall lay anything to their charge? Since nothing can be laid to their charge, how can one of them sink down to eternal night? If one of them should be cast down in everlasting darkness and ruin, they would go there without sin or iniquity, and without anything being laid to their charge. God has justified them. Though they were, in nature, ungodly, yet God justifieth the ungodly.-Ro 4:5. Since they are justified by the Lord Himself, then no one can condemn. The law has been satisfied in the person of Christ for them, and therefore the law cannot condemn one of them. And Jesus is making intercession for them; He is praying for them; and the Father always hears and answers the prayer of His beloved Son. They will all finally be with Him in glory, for Jesus has prayed, "Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with me where I am; that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst me before the foundation of the world."-Joh 17:24. They will all finally be there. We are hoping for that final deliverance. May the Lord bless these precious truths to the comfort of our readers. We may write a little more on this subject next week. C. H. C.

FALLING FROM GRACE article no. 10

June 26, 1930

According to promise last week, we will try to write a few more lines this week on the question as to whether it is possible for a child of God to so fall away as to be finally lost. A short time ago a fellow in Texas asked for some sample copies of The Primitive Baptist. A copy of a few issues were sent to him containing our articles on this question. It seems that the article "riled" him a little, and he wrote quite a lengthy letter, in which he displayed some temper. He said that we do not have sense enough to pound sawdust into a rat hole. Perhaps not. But gentlemen do not write that way very much. Anyhow, we would rather be a fool for Christ's sake, and believe what the Lord said, than to be a wise man and be a Campbellite. We do not know what this fellow is, but he writes like a Campbellite. If he is not one, then we would apologize to the Campbellites. Judging from the letter the poor fellow needs regeneration. This is all the attention we shall give him, and we say this only to let him know that we received his blatant effusion. We are not writing these articles for the purpose of debating, but for the comfort and consolation of the Lord's little children, to give them assurance from God's blessed word of their security, and of the certainty of their final deliverance from sin and all its dire effects and of their final happiness and glorification with the God of their salvation in the heavenly world. This week we will begin our article by reading Ro 8:35-39: Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. Could language be any stronger than this? If none of these things, nor anything else, shall be able to separate one of God's little ones from His love, then how can one of them be separated from that love? A mother who loves her child would not allow her child to suffer untold tortures and agonies if she could possibly prevent it. The loving mother would unhesitatingly go into the flames and snatch her child from the flames. "Can a woman forget her sucking child, that she should not have compassion on the son of her womb? yea, they may forget, yet will I not forget thee. Behold, I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands; thy walls are continually before me."-Isa 49:15-16. If the mother would unhesitatingly go through fire to snatch her child from the flames, would not the Lord Himself go into the very flames of hell to take one of His children away from that place, if one should get there, seeing that He loves His children with a greater and stronger love than the love of a tender mother? Could a loving mother be satisfied while seeing her child-the child she bare-suffering agonies and torment? Every loving mother knows that she could not be satisfied while beholding such a sight. "He shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied."-Isa 53:11. If the mother could not be satisfied to see her child suffering torments, how much more the Lord of glory would not be satisfied to see one of His children, for whom He suffered, bled and died, suffering in eternal torment; for His love is greater than a mother's love. Let us state the matter this way:

1. "He shall see of the travail of His soul, and shall be satisfied."

2. But He could not be satisfied and see one of the objects of His love for whom He died suffering the torments of hell.

3. Therefore, not one of the objects of His love, not one for whom He suffered, not one of His children, can ever possibly sink down in eternal torment-not one of them can ever go to an eternal hell. Suppose we should admit that none of the things enumerated in the text can separate one of the Lord's children from His love, but make the statement, or claim, that they can go away from Him and from His love, and thus sink down into eternal night. If one of them should thus go away from the Lord, would it not be because of the influence of Satan that they thus go away? And if Satan can thus influence one of God's children to go away from Him, could he not influence others to do the same, if he wanted to? God loves them, and does not want them to thus go away; but Satan influences one to do so, in spite of the Lord. Then, why could he not influence all the others to thus go away from the Lord, if he wanted to do so? It certainly follows that if Satan could thus influence one of the Lord's children to so depart from the Lord as to be eternally lost, he could so influence every one of them thus to do, if he wanted to. Then, if there should be one that he does not influence to thus depart from the Lord, would it not necessarily be because Satan did not want him? How many, then, would ever be saved in heaven? Would it be any more than just those the devil did not want and would not have? Certainly not. None would ever be saved in heaven, according to that position, only those the devil would not have. We are glad we do not believe such a doctrine, and we are glad the Bible does not teach such. "Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?" This question is asked in such a form as to admit of only one answer, and that is, No one-none. A proposition stated in the form of such a question is the very strongest way of stating the proposition. Hence, the inspired apostle has said, in the very strongest way of saying it, that none-no one-not one-is able to separate one of the Lord's little children, one of those who have been called out of nature's night and darkness by the Holy Spirit, one who has been born from above, one who has been brought into divine relationship with the Lord- no one is able to separate one of them from the love of Christ; no one is able to separate one of them from the love of God; which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. In our text the apostle mentions tribulation, distress, persecution, famine, nakedness, peril, and sword. Can Satan do more than to bring these things upon the Lord's dear children? Think of the tribulations of the servant Job; the Hebrew children cast into the fiery furnace; Daniel cast into the den of lions; Joseph tempted by the wife of the king and then cast into prison; think of the saints who passed through the trials mentioned by this great apostle in Heb 11:32-38. Let us read it: And what shall I more say? for the time would fail me to tell of Gedeon and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthae; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets: who through faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens. Women received their dead raised to life again: and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection: and others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment: they were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented; (of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth. "In all these things we are more than conquerors through Him that loved us." We remember the day the World War closed. The news was flashed over every country in the world on that day that the armistice was signed, and the firing ceased, and the war ended. There were more glad hearts that day, doubtless, than on any day since the world was made, and perhaps more than will ever be again. Our country and her allies were conquerors. But "in all these things we are MORE THAN CONQUERORS through Him that loved us." Can you imagine how they can be more than conquerors if one of them may sink down into eternal night? Dear child, some-yea, even many-of these trials may be yours to endure and to pass through while you are here in this world of sin, trouble, sorrow, distress, sickness, pain and death-but you are at last more than conquerors through Jesus your blessed and adorable Saviour. "For I am persuaded." The inspired apostle was fully persuaded of this one fact which he here states. He was confident of this. He was sure of this-and sure of it by divine inspiration. Sure of what? "That neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Dear child, whether you live or die, you shall not be separated from the Lord's glorious presence in eternity. You can't ascend so high, or descend so low, as to be separated from Him. If it were possible for you to sink below the depths of the bottomless pits of hell, you cannot sink so low as to be separated from Him. Wherever you may be, the Lord is there; and "in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for evermore."-Ps 16:11. Where the Lord is that is heaven for the Lord's little children. If you love the Lord, it is because God loved you first. "We love Him, because He first loved us."- 1Jo 4:19 "Yea, I have loved thee with an everlasting love: therefore with lovingkindness have I drawn thee."- Jer 31:3. Since God's love is everlasting, and He loved you first, then He always has loved you and always will love you; and nothing is able to separate you from Him and from His love. Just as sure as you love the Lord, just as sure, also, as God lives and reigns in glory, just that sure will you, some sweet day, live with Him in the heavenly world-in eternal glory. May that be your happy lot, and may these precious truths comfort your hearts in all your sad distresses here, is our humble prayer. We feel like we could shed tears of joy with you in the sweet assurance of these blessed truths. We do not know that we shall share the glories of heaven with you, but it is our blessed and sweet hope that we shall. Please remember us in your prayers. We may not write any more on this question, as we are just now feeling a desire to take up another line; but we will try to be governed by the way we feel impressed when the time comes to write again. C. H. C.

ETERNAL LIFE NOW

July 3, 1930

We have been asked whether people receive eternal life while here in this world, or do some just have a promise of it now and receive it in the world to come. Some who have argued, and who take the position, that people do not receive eternal life while in this world have argued that the sinner must comply with certain terms and conditions in order to have the promise of eternal life, and that he must then live in obedience to the commands laid down in the New Testament in order to receive that life in the world to come. In Joh 5:24 we read, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." In this text the Saviour emphatically says those who hear His word and believe on the Father have everlasting life. If they do not have everlasting life while here in this world the Saviour did not tell the truth about it. Then He says such a one "is passed from death unto life." The original language in our modern English means "have passed out of death into life." It is in the past tense-something that has already been accomplished. In 1Jo 5:13 we read, "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God." Here the inspired apostle plainly says he has written that "ye may know that ye have eternal life." Was he trying to get them to know that a thing was true which he knew was not true? Certainly, if people do not receive eternal life while here in this world he knew it. If he knew that to be true, and yet was writing that they might know they have eternal life now, was he not a false teacher? In verse 11 he says, "And this is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son." Verse 12 says, "He that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life." If a man does not have eternal life while he is here in this world, then no man has the Son while here in this world. But some do have the Son, and those who have the Son have life. If a man does not believe that people receive eternal life while here in this world he does not believe the Bible. Many more places could be cited, but these are sufficient. C. H. C.

Ac 2; 28:31 July 10, 1930

We have been requested to give our views through the paper of Ac 2:38, especially the latter part of the verse, "And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.'' The verse reads as follows: Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. This language was addressed to the people present who had heard the preaching of the apostle, and who "were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?" These were the same people who were "amazed and marvelled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were born?"-Ac 2:7-8. "Others mocking said, These men are full of new wine."-Ac 2:13. This shows that there were two classes of hearers present that day. Ac 2:5 says that "There were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven." The word devout in this text is the same word translated godly in 2Pe 2:9, which reads, "The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished." So these people were devout, pious, godly persons. These were the people who were amazed and who were pricked in their hearts. The effect produced by being cut in the heart and being cut to the heart is quite different. The people who stoned Stephen to death were cut to the heart, but not in the heart, by his preaching, and it made them mad, and they stoned him to death. But these people were cut in the heart, and cried out, "What shall we do?" "Then Peter said unto them, Repent." To repent is to turn from the former course of life, to turn from the former way of living, to turn from their former conduct. They were not to repent in order to regeneration, for the simple fact that they were already godly in heart. They had a heart that could be pierced by the words of the apostles; hence they already had "a heart of flesh." The Lord had already performed His promise, "And I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh."-Eze 36:26. This being true, they were already children of God, but had been walking the wrong way. They are here commanded, or instructed, to turn from that wrong way in which they had been going, and to walk in obedience to the commands of the Master. "And be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." A great many people claim that the apostle meant for them to be baptized for the remission of sins. If this be the meaning of the apostle, then the expression "for the remission of sins" must refer to and modify the word baptized. This cannot be correct, for the simple reason that the modifying word or clause must be placed as near as possible to the word or clause modified. This being true, it follows that if the expression "for the remission of sins" modifies or refers to baptized, then that expression would necessarily immediately follow the word baptized. The sentence would have to read this way: "Repent, and be baptized for the remission of sins every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ." But it does not read that way, for the simple reason that it is not that way. It is true that the word Christ is capitalized in our translations, as though it is a proper name, but it is not a noun-that is, the Greek word is not a noun. 'The Greek word, with the letters simply changed into English letters, is Christou. It means anointed. Liddell and Scott's Greek Lexicon, the highest and best known authority on the Greek language, says it is a verbal adjective. If the word is translated into English it would be anointed, or, the anointed. A verbal adjective is a word which denotes action, or being acted upon, and is also descriptive. Jesus was acted upon, by the Father, in that He was anointed with the Holy Spirit above measure. The Holy Spirit was poured out upon Him without measure. So He is described as the anointed one. Jesus was His name; see Mt 1:21. Jesus means Saviour. He was the anointed Saviour. He was anointed to save. "He shall save His people from their sins."-Mt 1:21. In Mt 26:28 we have this language: "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." Literally in our present day English the text would read, "For this is my blood, that of the new covenant, which for many is poured out for remission of sins." The words here translated "for remission of sins" are precisely the same words translated "for remission of sins" in Ac 2:38. In this text we have the plain and positive statement by the Saviour that His blood is poured out for remission of sins. Was the pouring out of His blood sufficient to remit sins? If so, then water baptism is not necessary in order to the remission of sins. As the expression, "for the remission of sins," is precisely the same in the original, and the pouring out of the blood of Jesus is sufficient for the remission of sins, then Ac 2:38 does not teach that baptism is in order to the remission of sins. The phrase "for remission of sins," in Ac 2:38, is an adverbial phrase, and modifies anointed. It tells for what purpose Jesus was anointed. He was anointed to remit sins, or for remission of sins; and the pouring out of His blood was sufficient for that. He was anointed to put away sins by the sacrifice of Himself; "when He had by Himself purged our sins."-Heb 1:3. The language, then, simply means, "Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus who was anointed to remit your sins." He was anointed for the express purpose of remitting your sins, and you should be baptized in His name. "And ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." This expression cannot mean here that they shall receive the Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit, as a gift in the sense of being born again, for the simple reason these people were already children of God; they had already been born of God. Then, they "shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" in the sense of the comforting and assuring influence of the same. They will have the witness of the Spirit that they are rendering acceptable service to the Lord, and shall have His approving smiles. They shall enjoy the manifest presence of the Spirit, and be enabled to rejoice in the same. C. H. C.

RULES OF DECORUM

July 10, 1930

We received a letter from a sister a few days ago requesting us to print the rules of decorum of the church for her, as she wanted to read them. She said she had been a member of the dear old church nearly thirty-three years, and has never heard the rules read in all her life. Evidently the good sister has either missed being at some of her conference meetings, or else the rules are never read in the church. How can the members ever know what the rules are if the rules are never read in conference? The rules should be read in conference occasionally, not only that the members may know what they are, but so that the friends may also know. When a person unites with the church, generally speaking, that person should have some little idea as to what the rules are. He should have some idea of the rules the members agree to be governed by, for he thereby agrees, in uniting with the church, that he will be governed by their rules. The rules of decorum of the different churches are practically alike in sentiment, but they are not all worded alike. We cannot print the rules for the sister that her church has, for we do not possess a copy of them. They may not be worded just like the rules of our church here in Thornton. We have no idea that they are worded just alike. For the benefit of any of our readers who may be interested we will try soon to publish in The Primitive Baptist a copy of the rules of decorum which we have in our little church here at Thornton. C. H. C.

WILL NOT OUR PEOPLE CONSIDER?

July 17, 1930

In writing for and editing a religious paper it is much pleasanter for one to pursue the even tenor of his way, always writing about those things which please and comfort and which will have the approval of all God's people. When our religious editors depart from this course and take sharp issue with brethren, it is not to their liking, I am sure, but because they feel that in no other way can they be true to the cause they represent. There may be exceptions to this but they are rare. I recently read an article in one of our exchanges which has deeply wounded my feelings and broken my spirit. I have tried to cast it aside and forget it, but I cannot until I have called my brethren's attention to it. This time I have no word of criticism for the brother who sent in the article nor the editor who published it, but I do want to voice my condemnation of those good brethren among us who were responsible for it. It seems that some of our brethren just can't get a vision of our denomination beyond their own little section. They seem to have little consideration for the feelings of others, and the idea that their church can do as she pleases and none have the right to complain has been played to the limit. They will labor for peace and union in the school, in the town, or in the community, but when it comes to our denomination they are unmerciful toward others and seem to prefer their own foolish whims and unnecessary childish toys than the love and fellowship of their brethren. The Banner Herald, under its present management, whether for weal or woe to itself, stands firmly committed against any and all church auxiliaries. She is determinedly opposed to any and all "Aid Societies" as adjuncts of the church. Christ gave us but one organization-the church-and with that we are satisfied. If we may add one, we may add others, and soon the church will be lost sight of and cannot be distinguished from the organizations of the world. It is difficult for us to find words to express our condemnation of such things among Primitive Baptists; suffice it to say, we have no fellowship for them. In this we believe we voice the sentiments of a very large per cent of our people. The article mentioned above carried a clipping from a Georgia secular paper which reads as follows: The Ladies Aid Society of the Primitive Baptist Church held a most enjoyable and profitable meeting Monday afternoon from 3 to 5 o'clock at the home of Mrs.-----. A special Christmas program had been arranged by Mrs.-----, who had charge of the meeting. She read the Scripture lesson, the eighth Psalm, and the Lord's prayer was repeated in'concert. Song, "Stars of December;" reading, "Christmas Thoughts," by-----. The Christmas lesson was then read by Mrs.-----and comment made by different ladies. Reading, "The Christ Child,'' by-----. A social hour was enjoyed and Mrs.-----served a lovely salad course, assisted by Mrs.-----. The guests present at the meeting were * * * * To me, this seems unpardonable. These good women knew how many of their brethren feel about such things, but they ignored our feelings and our advice and had their way. This is a good church and there are no better ladies than those,mentioned in this notice. The writer feels that they are much better than himself. But for them, by such foolish and unnecessary course, to destroy the labors of months of many of us for peace and union, and at a time when things looked so promising, I repeat, is almost unpardonable. It cuts deep, and we are made to wonder whether or not some are determined to bring us to the parting of the way. Now, there was nothing wrong in these sisters meeting at their sister's home as they did. That is to be commended. There was nothing wrong in serving a salad course, or any other course, if she chose to do so. There was nothing wrong in reading the Bible and commenting on it. There was nothing wrong in any of this. But when they style themselves as an"Aid Society of the Primitive Baptist Church"they go beyond their limit and we feel we have a right to complain. By what authority do they do this? Has the church in conference authorized this society? Has she recognized it as her auxiliary? Does she exercise authority over it and determine the work it is to perform and the manner in which it is to be done? Does this society report to the church in conference? Or does it consider itself independent of the church? Suppose a few of us at Statesboro were to decide to go into the fire insurance business and we advertise our organization as the"Fire Insurance Company of Statesboro Primitive Baptist Church.'' The public would at once understand that this company was organized by, and was acting under, the authority of the Statesboro Church. And doubtless the church would at once complain and compel us to drop her name in connection with the organization and its work. The same is true of Aid Societies of Primitive Baptist Churches. There are no such things. No church among us has sponsored one. No church has authorized such organization. A few good sisters have met together for social and religious intercourse, and feeling that they wanted to be "up to date" and get themselves before the public as truly "progressive" and having pulled out of the old ruts, someone foolishly gave them the name of the Aid Society of the Primitive Baptist Church. Doubtless it was unthoughted upon their part, but they usurped authority, and their action was in contempt of the church, which alone has all authority in all matters affecting her body. It is a principle in law that an organization is bound by the acts of its agent, and if this aid society is a creature of the church the church is bound by its acts-its acts become hers. We are not complaining because our sisters meet and spend certain hours together. It would be better if they did this more. And if they want to serve refreshments when they are together that's their business, not mine. But we do insist that they shall not, however pure their motives, publish to the world that our CHURCH has "Aid Societies," and thus wound the feelings of good brethren and hinder our labors for the union of our distressed people. While many of us are laboring to unite our broken ranks and bring peace to our distressed people, if others will not feel disposed to help in this great work, may we not at least expect of them that they will not "rock the boat." Brethren, throw all this worldly foolishness to the winds. There is nothing that will insure such joy, peace and prosperity as just being plain, humble, old-time Primitive Baptists. W. H. C. REMARKS The above article by Elder Wm. H. Crouse, editor of the Banner Herald, is copied from that paper of July 1, 1930. The article he refers to is an article by Elder J. S. Newman in The Primitive Baptist of June 5. We are glad to see this article from Elder Crouse, and we want our readers to see it and to know that at least some of those known as Progressives condemn such things as Ladies' Aid Societies. We most heartily approve of the sentiment the brother expressed in the following language: The Banner Herald, under its present management, whether for weal or woe to itself, stands firmly committed against any and all church auxiliaries. She is determinedly opposed to any and all "Aid Societies" as adjuncts of the church. Christ gave us but one organization-the church-and with that we are satisfied. If we may add one, we may add others, and soon the church will be lost sight of and cannot be distinguished from the organizations of the world. It is difficult for us to find words to express our condemnation of such things among Primitive Baptists; suffice it to say, we have no fellowship for them. In this we believe we voice the sentiments of a very large per cent of our people. It is true that Christ gave us but one organization- the church-and it is also true that He put everything in the church that it is necessary to have in it. He was wise enough to know what would be needed in the church in every age; and nothing will ever be needed in the church which He did not place there. We may just as well add one thing in or to the church which Christ did not put there as to add another thing. Let us have nothing but the church, and nothing in the church but what Christ has placed in it. In this we will find just what Elder Crouse states in the following words: "There is nothing that will insure such joy, peace and prosperity as just being plain, humble, old-time Primitive Baptists." We are ready and would be glad to labor for union with all who are ready to be just plain, simple, humble, old-time Primitive Baptists. Let us just be that, and throw to the winds anything we may have that is contrary to that. C. H. C.

QUESTIONS ON ORDER

August 7, 1930

Elder C. H. Cayce: I want your opinion on the following questions: 1st. Would your association accept a member on confession of faith-one who had been excluded from a church in an association in line with your association-without first making peace in the church where he was excluded?

2. Would your association accept as a member on confession of faith one who had been re-baptized into an Absolute Predestinarian Church, who was a minister in that faith and order?

3. Who was a Socialist, and while in that party denounced all Baptists?

4. And was a long time doing evangelistic work for the Missionaries, and was a pastor for that people, dealing in Sabbath schools? Your opinion wanted as early as possible. Yours in hope, G. L. Peters. Lakeland, Fla. REMARKS The churches in our association would not receive a member on confession of faith who had been excluded from a sister church. We would consider it gross disorder to do so. This is really an answer to all the questions above. For a church to receive a member on confession of faith who had been excluded from a sister church while the church that excluded the person is still in existence is simply to deny that said church has the God given right to discipline her own members, and is to deny that she has the right to say who is not entitled to membership in her body. And if one church does not have that right, then no other church has the right. If one gospel church has that right, then every gospel church has the same right. This thing of receiving members on confession of faith who have been excluded from a sister church has caused more trouble and disruption in our ranks, perhaps, than any other one thing. If we ever expect our churches to dwell together in peace, we must quit that way of doing, and respect the right of the churches to discipline her members. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO ELDER W. M. BRECHEEN

August 7,1930

Dear brother, we do not know how to advise you. Advice is cheap, and it is often a very easy matter for people to say we should do this or do that; but to do the thing is another matter. We believe the Lord impresses His children, as well as His ministers, with the duty He requires of them; and we believe it is their duty and best for them in the end to try to follow such impressions, and to discharge the duty He requires of them. We believe they enjoy an ease and peace of mind in the discharge of their duty. "If ye sow to the flesh, ye shall, of the flesh, reap corruption." "God is not mocked; whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap." May the Lord bless you and your dear companion, and enable you to do your duty as He may require, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

TRIP TO ALABAMA AND MISSISSIPPI

August 14, 1930

We left home Wednesday morning, July 16, at 3:20 for a trip to Alabama and Mississippi. We took our family with us, to visit wife's father and mother, B. B. Lawler and wife and the family, at Brownsboro, Ala. It is our desire to see that wife visits them at least once every year, for we know that she will not have them with her always. We took our time and stopped for a rest a couple of times on the trip, and arrived there Thursday morning at about 8 o'clock. Then we rested some Thursday and Friday. On Saturday and Sunday we went to Briar Fork, and were with the church there those two days. We were glad to meet Elders B. G. and G. A. Stephens and J. M. Warren there once more. Several brethren were there from Woodville, and a good crowd present both days. We enjoyed a good and pleasant meeting with those good people. They enjoy going to meeting, and rejoice to hear the truth preached. On Monday and Tuesday we had the pleasure of being with the good brethren at Union Church, near Woodville, once more. Elders H. P. Houk, John Page and Fred Stewart were present. They always have good congregations at this church, and they have good singing, too. Brother E. D. Thomas usually leads the singing, and he sure enjoys singing the good old songs of Zion, and many others enjoy helping, too. It makes the poor minister feel like they are interested in the service to go there and see how they enjoy the song service. They meet an hour or more before preaching time, and then put in the time singing. We enjoyed being with those good people one more time. That is the place where we had the debate a few years ago with I B. Bradley, who represented the Campbellites. It was a very pleasant discussion, and our people say the debate did our cause good in the community. On Wednesday we had the pleasure of being with the brethren at Flint River Church once more. This is the place where our wife united with the church. Her father (B. B. Lawler) is a deacon in this church, and his father was a deacon there when he passed away. This is the oldest Baptist Church in the state. It was organized October 2,1808. The association met with that church in October, 1908, just one hundred years, to a day, from the time the church was constituted. We attended that meeting, at which time the hundredth anniversary of the church was celebrated. The Fullerites tried to take that celebration away from our folks -a thing they were no more entitled to than the Campbellites or Catholics. B. B. Lawler and his father have served that church in the deacon's office for more than fifty years. This church has never had anything to do with the modern missionary enterprises and inventions of men. They are not large in number as they have been in some of the days gone by, but they still have a few faithful ones who are content with the good old way our fathers trod, and in due time the Lord will reward their faithfulness. The way may look dark sometimes, but the Lord will not forsake His faithful ones. On Thursday we took leave of the dear family, Brother and Sister Lawler and family, and drove to Amory, Miss., near which place we thought the Tombigbee Association would meet the next day. We had got the idea some way that this association would meet at that time with the church at Hatley. We went to the good home of Brother E. R. Pennington, arriving there late Thursday afternoon, July 24, and found then that we were mistaken, but that a union meeting was to be held Friday, Saturday and Sunday with Grub Springs Church, near Aberdeen. Friday morning we went to that union meeting. There we met Elders J. C. Huddleston, W. V McDonald and J. D. Holder. It was an enjoyable meeting. The preaching was all a unit, a oneness, and the Lord's sweet presence was felt among us. It was our expectation to come on home, but, by special request, we agreed to remain over on Monday and be with the church at Hatley. Brother Holder preached there Sunday night, and we, with Elder McDonald, attended the service. On Monday we tried to preach for them. This is a good church, and the brethren enjoy their services. Elder Huddleston is the good pastor of both of these churches, and they esteem him highly and love him as a true and faithful servant. We left Amory early Tuesday morning, July 29, for home, and reached home just before night. We felt very much fatigued, and in need of some rest. In a day or so we felt to be all right again. Our health is much improved since a few months ago, and we feel so thankful that we were able to make this trip and meet with those dear children of God once more. We enjoyed the trip very much, and feel so thankful to the good brethren and sisters for the kind treatment given us and the kind consideration they had for us. We shall never forget their kindness. May the richest blessings of heaven be theirs, is our humble prayer. Please pray the good Lord that our health may continue to improve, so that we may still go among His dear people. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO W. H. HANCOCK

August 14, 1930

We have no fellowship for whisky drinkers. It is a shame and disgrace upon them and the church. They should be excluded. We have no desire or inclination to visit among people who tolerate such practices. We prefer to abstain from-stay away from-such appearance of evil. C. H. C.

ASSOCIATIONS VISITED

August 28, 1930

We left home on Friday morning, August 8, in company with Elder John R. Harris and Sisters Cloud and Grubbs, for Atkins, Ark., to attend the Point Remove Association, which was in session on Friday, Saturday and Sunday. When we arrived Elder Lindsay was preaching the introductory sermon. They had service morning, afternoon and night, both Friday and Saturday, and on Sunday morning. Meals were prepared and served in a grove near by. We failed to get a list of the names of the ministers in attendance, and we may not remember all who were there, but those we remember were Elders J. M. Lindsay, J. H. O'Neal, J. C. Haskins, R. L. Piles, W. H. Lee, John R. Harris and the writer, and Brother J. T. George, who is exercising in a public way. The preaching was all a unit, and not a discordant note was sounded. It was a pleasant meeting. Elder Harris returned home from there, and we went on filling some appointments-which had been arranged by Brother Emmett Russell. From Monday to Thursday inclusive we filled appointments at the following named places: Howard school-house, Monday; Denny schoolhouse (we think that is the correct name of the place), Tuesday; Macedonia, Wednesday; Hagarville, Wednesday night; New Providence, Thursday. Elders R. L. Piles and J. C. Haskins were with us at these places, and sometimes one or both of them took part in the service. Elder Haskins preached at Denny schoolhouse Tuesday night. Elder W. J. Jordan lives near this place, and we visited him in his good home. He was present at the service at the schoolhouse. Elder J. J. Brown lives near New Providence and we had a pleasant visit in his good home. Friday morning we went from Elder Brown's home to Friendship Church, near Scranton, where the New Hope Association convened that day and continued over Saturday and Sunday. We did not make a list of the names of the preachers at this meeting, but the best we can remember at this writing the following brethren in the ministry were present: Elders D. W. Witt, J. J. Brown, J. C. Haskins, J. L. McClelland, R. L. Piles, W. H. Lee, John R. Harris, G. W. Reed and the writer, and also Brother J. T. George. There may have been others, but we are writing from memory and may unintentionally overlook some. It was a good and pleasant meeting. They had service morning, afternoon and night on Friday and Saturday and then on Sunday morning. Three sisters came forward on Sunday and asked for a home in the church there, and the ordinance of baptism was to be attended to that afternoon at 3 o'clock by Elder Brown. We did not stay to witness the baptizing, as we had a two hundred mile drive to make to come home that night. We enjoyed the trip all the way. The brethren and sisters were all good to us. They did all they could to make us comfortable, and also to prepare for us such things as our physician had instructed us to eat. We shall never forget their many acts of kindness to us. We have not mentioned all the homes we had the pleasure of visiting, but we remember them, and pray the Lord's richest blessings to rest upon them all. We arrived home at 10:10 Sunday night, August 17, and found all as well as usual, except that wife and one of the children were suffering with some painful boils. We trust we are thankful to get back home feeling as well as could be expected and to find all as well as they were. We shall never forget your kindness, and trust you may remember us in your prayers. C. H. C.

Jas 1; 5:20,20 September 4, 1930

If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain. Pure religion and undeflled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.-Jas 1:26-27. Two things we learn from the above text, at least, are that there is a vain religion and also what the pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is. They are not at all alike-and yet they are what people do. So, another thing we learn from this text is that religion is not something people "get," but it is something they do. Religion is what we do, not something we "get." We have heard much said by the world since our early recollection about people "getting religion." Worldly "religionists" have told us for years and years that we must "get religion" in order to be saved in heaven; that we will remain unsaved unless we "get religion." But we see from this text that religion is not something people "get." It is what they do. They may be doing the kind that is vain; and they may be doing the kind that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father. However, we are rather of the opinion that not many are doing the right kind. There is also another religion mentioned in the Bible. Paul said: For ye have heard of my conversation in time past in the Jews' religion, how that beyond measure I persecuted the church of God, and wasted it: and profited in the Jews' religion above many my equals in mine own nation, being more exceedingly zealous of the traditions of my fathers.-Ga 1:13-14. We learn here that Paul practiced the Jews' religion before he was made a child of God by regeneration- before he was born from above. That religion was to persecute the saints and to destroy the church of God. This is another bad kind of religion to practice. We do not think it has all disappeared from the world yet. Sometimes persecutors even get in the church, and cause trouble and distress there. It is worse for a persecutor to be in the church, or to be identified as a member of the church, than it is for them to be in the world. Better things are expected of the members of the church. It is a bad state of affairs when a member of the church does not bridle his tongue, and thereby practices a vain religion. Behold, we put bits in the horses' mouths, that they may obey us; and we turn about their whole body. Behold also the ships, which though they be so great, and are driven of fierce winds, yet are they turned about with a very small helm, whithersoever the governor listeth. Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth! And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. For every kind of beasts, and of birds, and of serpents, and of things in the sea, is tamed, and hath been tamed of mankind: but the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison. Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God. Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.-Jas 3:3-10. This shows something of the vain religion, and what the practice results in. It is deplorable, indeed. The wrong use of the tongue-not having the tongue bridled -defiles the whole body; it is a little fire, but kindles a great conflagration; it brings destruction, sorrow, distress, divisions and misery. It is a fire; it burns deep in the hearts of the Lord's little children, and makes scars in their poor bleeding hearts which they will carry with them to their graves. The scars can never be erased, for the burns were made too deep for the scars to ever be removed while they live in this world of sorrows and troubles. It is a world of iniquity. The unbridled tongue can fill the world with its unholy work! It sets on fire the course of nature. How quickly it can, and sometimes does, set the whole being on fire with madness, venom, and a spirit of destruction and revenge! "It is set on fire of hell." But there is a pure religion-a better kind, which the Lord's little children should be careful to practice. They should be careful to bridle the tongue, first. Say nothing about a person which you would not be willing to say to his face. Be careful, then, even, as to what you say. "Let your words be seasoned with grace." Be sure that you do not exaggerate in your use of words. Then, remember that the pure religion is to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction. That is a part of the pure religion. This does not mean to go to see them and "sponge" on them-to try to get all you can from them. To visit them in their affliction is to minister to them; administer to their necessities. A person that never does anything to help a poor widow along, or never does anything to help the poor fatherless children to fight the battles of life, never visits them in their affliction, no matter how many times he may go to their homes. He may go to their homes and eat some of the provisions they have obtained by their hard labors and toils, but he is not thereby visiting them in their affliction. If you want to enjoy the practice of some of this right kind of religion, try going to see some poor widow or orphan children in your section and administer to their needs; say a few words by way of encouragement to them that will help them to bear their troubles, and that will assure them that they have a true friend who is ready to lend a helping hand. Try this just once, and see how good it will make you feel. We are just as sure it will make you feel good as we are sure God lives and reigns in glory. Another part of this pure and undefiled religion is to keep himself unspotted from the world. No man can keep himself unspotted from the world and at the same time have his garments spotted with the institutions of men. He cannot belong to the institutions of the world and keep himself unspotted from the world. Neither can he keep himself unspotted from the world and have his breath smelling like a rotten whisky jug. He cannot keep himself unspotted from the world and engage in such revelry and wickedness as the world engages in. He cannot keep himself unspotted from the world and use profane language. He cannot keep himself unspotted from the world and visit houses of ill fame, the speakeasies, the grog shops, the picture shows, theaters, and such places as are the gathering places for the wicked and profane. "Birds of a feather flock together.'' The dance hall is no place to practice the pure and undefiled religion. There are so many ways one may have the spots of the world that we cannot here enumerate them all. How careful we should be as to how we live. Those who have professed the name of Christ should endeavor to live above reproach, so as to have none of the spots of the world, and so as to not bring shame and disgrace and reproach on the cause of the Master. May the good Lord help us to so live. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO MRS. EMMA V SMITH

September 4, 1930

Evidently it is the Lord's will that His children be banded together to keep house for Him in a church capacity, or else He never would have set up His kingdom here in the world for them. He most certainly requires His children to go to the church and tell what great things the Lord has done for them. Then He requires them, as His bride, to keep a clean house for Him. One part of the work of the ministry is to gather His children together; to teach them the true doctrine and order of God's house, and to teach them where the true church is to be found. Then it is their duty, when thus taught, to ask for a home in that church, and to labor therein according to the teaching of His blessed word. The Lord's children are commanded to let their light shine as a lighted candle on a candlestick. The candlestick is in the true church. The only way, then, for them to let their light shine as a lighted candle on a candlestick is to have membership in the church, and to endeavor to live as the Lord requires the membership to live. They may have their light on the candlestick, but then the light may be obscured by a dirty life-not walking right-and it would not shine very far. Those of God's children who live righteous lives and walk humbly and circumspectly before Him, enjoy blessings here in this world that His disobedient children do not and cannot enjoy. The home of God's children in heaven, and their happiness in heaven, does not depend upon what they do, either good or bad. That depends wholly and solely upon the finished work of the crucified and risen Redeemer, and they are joint-heirs with Him. Being joint-heirs with Him, they will finally enjoy heaven just as He does. They will have and enjoy heaven with all that heaven means. But those who walk in disobedience will miss much here in this life that they would enjoy by living in humble obedience to Him. When the Lord was here in person on earth He never called a woman to the apostleship. Not one of the seventy He sent out to preach was a woman. The Lord never had a woman for a prophet in the whole of the prophetic age. As the Lord never called and sent out a woman prophet, and never sent out a woman preacher in the early age of the gospel church, we conclude He does not do that now. He does not change. He is the same in every age. No matter what sort of inference we may draw, we know the Bible does not tell us of one woman preacher the Lord ever had. As we have no such example, and the Scriptures teach us everything we should practice in the church, then the Lord's church should not have a woman preacher now. A woman preacher, praying in public, and such like things, reminds us of a crowing hen. If you had a hen in your flock of chickens to begin crowing, you would kill that hen. You would remove her from the flock. If a woman goes to preaching in the church of God, she should be removed from the flock. We have known some persons who had church privileges to "pick up" and move to destitute places where they could have no church privileges. No one is to blame for their destitute condition but themselves. We do not know that God's ministers are under any special obligation in such a case to hunt up such persons to feed them. Some have thus deprived themselves of church blessings and privileges for worldly gain. They are the losers, and they justly suffer for their own doing. But there are many of the Lord's dear children who are deprived of these blessings and privileges through no fault of their own. It is the duty of the Lord's ministers to go to such places and feed and hunt out the Lord's little ones. More of this kind of work should be done, and we believe the Lord would bless such labors. May the good Lord bless you, dear sister, and restore you to health, if it can be His holy will, is our humble prayer for you; and may He sweetly reconcile you to His will, is our prayer. C. H. C.

1Co 16:24 September 11, 1930

We have been requested to give our views of 1Co 11:34, which reads, "And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come.'' If you will get your Bible and turn to the chapter and begin reading with verse 20 you will see that the brethren at Corinth were guilty of converting the sacramental supper into a drunken feast. For this ungodly practice the apostle rebuked them sharply. In thus eating and drinking they did eat and drink condemnation to themselves; they did thus eat and drink unworthily. The Lord's supper should not be eaten to satisfy natural hunger. They should eat at home to do that. If they come together to make a feast of the Lord's supper, they come unto condemnation. It would be better to abandon the sacramental supper altogether than to make a feast of it. It should be observed in remembrance of our Lord and Master, and is a solemn thing. It is a sign of His suffering and death, and should be engaged in, having that in remembrance. We even doubt the propriety of having dinner on the ground at the church on that day, especially having the dinner before communion service. We think that if they are to have dinner on the ground, let the communion service be attended to first. We are aware, however, that in some places, perhaps many, they have the preaching service, then adjourn for dinner, during which hour they have their minds on worldly things, and feast on the danties that are prepared, then gather together again for the communion service--their stomachs all full and their minds dull, and in poor condition to think on what the bread and wine truly represent. We do not think this is really best. C. H. C.

MOURNERS ARE BLESSED

September 11, 1930

"Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted."-Mt 5:4. The Saviour does not here teach that one will be blessed provided they will mourn; but one who is a true mourner is a blessed character. A mourner is one who has been blessed with the light of God's Holy Spirit shining in his heart, which has made known to him the fact that he is a sinner, and shows him the deceitfulness and hatefulness of sin. Having been made to see all this, he begins to mourn on account of sin. One who has been enabled to see these things is in a blessed condition, though he may not know it. But the promise of the Saviour is that "he shall be comforted." The Comforter will come and sweet peace shall fill the heart of every true mourner. The Spirit of God will bear witness with his spirit that he is a child of God. No such true mourner will ever sink down to eternal night, but will finally enjoy heaven with all that heaven means. C. H. C.

WILL THEY KNOW EACH OTHER?

September 11, 1930

The above question is one which is not clearly made known to us in the Bible. Some passages may be construed to teach that we shall know each other in heaven, but it cannot be positively proven-so we think. Paul says we shall know as we are known. Fleshly ties and relationships will be done away. All the redeemed will know Jesus as their Redeemer and Saviour, and that they themselves are redeemed from sin, and they will be like Jesus, and will be perfectly happy and glorified -and that will be enough. C. H. C.

COMMUNION WITH TRUMPET FOLKS October 30, 1930

We have received a letter from a brother in a certain section asking about such a case as one of our brethren being at a church in line with the Trumpet, Elder J. C. Morgan, editor, and that church going into the communion service, and this brother partaking of the communion service with them. Those churches following Elder Morgan are the ones who are refusing to make peace by adjusting what little differences there may be. It seems to us to be very inconsistent for them to allow our members with them in their communion service, and yet are unwilling to adjust the little differences that may exist and recognize our churches and their work. You brethren who are among the Trumpet faction and want peace can do no better than come on and let us bury our little differences, if there are any, and come together and live in peace as brethren should. C. H. C.

CHRISTMAS GIFT

December 18, 1930

It is a great custom and habit the people have been engaged in since before our day of giving presents on Christmas time. Much money has been spent very foolishly most every year on this line since we can remember. Some years many people spend money foolishly for presents that are useless and worthless, and that can be of no possible benefit to any person in the world. This is wasteful and extravagant, and teaches our children to be wasteful and destructive. It is wrong and sinful. This year, perhaps, not so much money will be wasted in that way. But it has been instilled in us by precept and example so that we wish to remember our friends and loved ones with some kind of remembrance at this season of the year. This is all well and good, provided we give something that will be of benefit and of some good to the recipient. Do you not think you could do some poor saint much good by making them a present of The Primitive Baptist as a Christmas gift? That would bring comfort and joy to their hearts every week for the whole year of 1931. They would get comfort and consolation from reading its pages many times during the year, when cast down and in distress. Send us the name and $1.50 for a year's subscription to any you wish to send the paper to for a whole year as a Christmas present. If you want us to tell them who sent the paper to them, just ask us to tell them about it. If you do not want them to know, you need not tell us to tell them. We are offering this reduced price to help you give this good present. Another good present would be a Bible or a Testament. Just send us the amount you want to pay for a present of that kind, and we will send the best book we can find for the money. Rush your orders to us so we can get the books to them by Christmas. Thank you. C. H. C.

ARE YOU "BLUE?"

December 18, 1930

If you are feeling "blue," and all cast down, all "down and out," all forsaken, and that you have nothing in the world to come your way but sadness, disappointments, distresses and trials and conflicts-just sit down and begin to count up your blessings, one by one, and see if you do not have employment for quite a long time. Are they not more than can be numbered? "Why art thou cast down, O my soul? and why art thou disquieted in me? hope thou in God: for I shall yet praise Him for the help of His countenance."-Ps 42:5. C. H. C.

CLOSE OF VOLUME XLV December 18, 1930

With this issue we close the forty-fifth volume of The Primitive Baptist. In many respects this has been a hard year. We have had distressing times, and it seems that it is not yet all over. Yet, we have had many things to be thankful for. True, we had a financial depression which started last winter, and then we had the severe drouth, with such a great crop failure in many parts of the country; and many people are out of work, and can get nothing to do. We have known of some even offering to work for their board. All these distressing things have caused many to have The Primitive Baptist discontinued to their address. Last winter we thought we could see hard times ahead, so we saved up all we could and bought enough paper to run us through the year. Thus we were, in some measure, prepared for the hard times. Still, we have had a struggle to get through; but we have been blessed not to miss an issue during the year, and have been able to get the paper out in the regular size every week. Many other papers have either reduced their size or have skipped several issues. The Lord has been good to us, and we feel thankful, we trust, for His many rich and wonderful blessings. We have tried during the year to do more writing for the paper than we had been doing, but these hard times during the last few months made it necessary for us to cut down expenses, and that made it necessary for us to do other work; and so we have not been writing during the past few weeks as we would like to. We hope, soon, to be doing more writing again. Some time ago we made mention that we had so much good matter on hand for the paper that we do not have room for. Several sent us small contributions to help pay the expense of printing some extra pages. We have not yet been able to do the work, but hope to do that in a few more weeks. Some brethren have complained because we have not recently stated where we stand in regard to some things that have agitated the minds of some of our people in the past. Just here we will say that on all the principles which have characterized our people in the ages past, we stand where we have stood all the while. We stand now just where we stood in the time of the trouble with the Kirklands, Todd, Strickland, and others, and where we stood in the time of the trouble with the whole Progressive move that was agitated among our people some years ago, and which brought trouble and distress in our ranks. We are still satisfied with the "good old way" of our fathers, and as we find taught in God's blessed Book. We still want nothing that we do not have "thus saith the Lord" for. We do not think it wise to continually "hammer" on the things that have been "threshed out" by our people in days gone by, and upon which they have already spoken in unmistakable terms. When that has been done, the issue should be considered a dead one. That ends it. Then we may let that alone. To let it alone, we mean to let those things be forsaken by our people, and not try to engage in them again, to the hurt and confusion of good brethren. There are differences among our people in local customs, and these things should be matters of forbearance. If everything in the church in all sections of the country were just as we would like to have them, and just as we would have them to be, then there would be no forbearance necessary on our part. There would be no place for forbearance. The Lord knew there would be mistakes made, and differences would arise in these things; and hence we are taught the need of forbearance. We should "let patience have her perfect work" and "forbear one another in love." We now bid you farewell in the Lord, and hope to greet you again in the first issue of the next volume, beginning January 1, 1931. C. H. C.

1931

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME FORTY-SIX

January 1, 1931

We now begin the forty-sixth volume of The Primitive Baptist, and we are also just entering on a new year. This volume begins with the first day of the new year. This is the day that so many of us make new resolutions. Many of us annually renew our vows and resolutions on the first day of the new year, only to find ourselves again, at the end of the year, about where we were at the beginning of the year-so far as concerns our new resolutions. We still know no more of what is in the future for us than we did a year ago, or even many years ago. No matter what our age or experience may be, we cannot penetrate the future and see what is in store for us. Each year of the past brought its joys and sorrows; and, judging the future by the past, this year will also have its joys and sorrows. But what they may be, no mortal can tell. Many of our readers will, no doubt, cross over the dark river before this year of our Lord, 1931, is past. It may be that the editor will be called to go, too. None of us know about that. "And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there: save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me. But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God. And now, behold, I know that ye all, among whom I have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no more. Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God."- Ac 20:22-27. The Holy Ghost witnessed that bonds and afflictions were to be endured by the Apostle Paul. Bonds and afflictions abide every true servant of the Lord, if he is faithful and true to his trust. But in the midst of all these bonds and afflictions there is a peace and calm quietude that is worth more than all this world. The peaceful feeling that we are "pure from the blood of all men," and that we "have not shunned to declare all the counsel of God," is worth more than all the world beside. In this we have the blessed assurance that we shall "finish our course with joy," and "the ministry, which we have received of the Lord Jesus." Let us, then, have our faces turned Zionward, with renewed determination in the beginning of this new year, and the beginning of this forty-sixth volume of The Primitive Baptist, to "press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus."- Php 3:14. Some of us may feel that everything looks dark and gloomy, and that the prospect for the cause looks gloomy, and that the old church is declining and is destined to go down. We may become discouraged and cast down on account of these things. But the old church is not gone, and it is not going to become extinct.. "The gates of hell shall not prevail against it" -so said the Lord of glory, while He was here on earth. He knew what He was talking about. He was not guessing. He established the kingdom, and His everlasting honor and power are pledged to preserve and keep it. He has allowed the winter seasons to come, and has chastised His people for their wrongs in all ages; and He is doing that yet. After a time of distress, when the distress has been sufficient to bring us to our right places, He will appear again in the manifestation of His mighty power in favoring Zion. In all our sadness and declension we do not need any of the inventions of men to help the old church. We do not need the things the world engages in that we may bring about a revival in the old church. Perhaps we have already gone too much after some of the things of the world and the inventions of men. If we have, it is high time for us to forsake those things and go to God in sackcloth and ashes, in humble prayer to Him, that He would lift up His countenance upon us once more in His heavenly smiles. The world may have their revivals, so-called, and by their efforts work up an interest in their affairs; but the Lord has not instructed the members of His kingdom thus to do. They are instructed to look to Him. "I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase." Let us try to do more planting and watering, and leave the matter with the Lord to give the increase. Let us not bring wood, hay, stubble, to build up the gospel kingdom. Let us do more preaching, leaving the result with the Lord. Let us "contend earnestly for the faith that was once delivered to the saints." The Lord has preserved and kept His church here in the world for about nineteen hundred years. He put it here to stay. He has preserved it in spite of our sinfulness and wickedness, and He will still keep it in the world somewhere. "Unto Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus throughout all ages, world without end."-Eph 3:21. Here we have it that it is "throughout all ages, world without end." "Unto Him be glory in the church"-not out of it-and this throughout all ages. How can it be throughout all ages, unless the Lord keeps His church standing throughout all ages? It could not be. The identity of the church may be destroyed and the church become extinct in some locality. This, has come to pass in many localities. When this is the case it is on account of our own wrong doing. "But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another."-Ga 5:15. That is the reason -or one reason-why the church becomes extinct in a locality-it is because they are consumed one of another. You never knew of a church becoming extinct in any locality where each and every member was doing his duty, and every person standing in his place, round about the camp, did you? Let us all "awake to righteousness, and sin not."-1Co 15:34. Let us not put in our time as fault-finders. Perhaps some of us have been too suspicious of our brethren. Let us try to lay all these things aside, and beg the Lord for His mercies, and pray Him to prosper Zion. Let us pray the Lord of the harvest to send laborers into His harvest. We have enough idlers already. We need laborers-faithful laborers. Lord, send them, and then help us to esteem them as gifts from thee. C. H. C.

WOMEN PROPHETS

January 1, 1931

Sometime ago we wrote an article concerning women preachers and prophets. Some have called our statement in question, that not one of God's prophets or preachers which He sent out in the days of the prophets and apostles were women. They were all men. Some have called this statement in question, and claim that there were women prophets, or prophetesses. Yes, there were women called prophetesses, and there are women in this day called preachers, too. But will you tell us which prophetic book in the Old Testament was written by a woman? What book of the Old Testament was written by a woman? Tell us, also, please, where it says in the Old Testament that the word of God came to a woman, for her to prophesy, as it does concerning Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and others. Is it there? No. Tell us, too, when the Lord sent out a woman, as He sent out the seventy. Tell us where He sent out a woman, as He sent out the twelve, or as He sent Paul. Tell us where He ever said to a woman that she should sit on one of the thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. There is no such thing in the Book. The Lord never had a woman to write a book for the Old Testament, nor for the New Testament. Again we say that a woman preacher is like a crowing hen. C. H. C.

ENCOURAGING LETTER

January 1, 1931

Several days ago we received the following letter. More often we receive some letter of complaint, or finding fault with something we have said, or because we have not said something the writer thinks we should say. Were it not for the fact that we occasionally receive a letter like the following, we feel that we would give up in despair. We often get so discouraged and so cast down that we feel like our efforts and labors are all in vain. We often feel that it is of no use to keep on striving in the service, as we have been trying to do for many years. Perhaps it will not be long until we may receive an honorable discharge from the warfare. We do not want to give up; but we do desire to be enabled, by the grace of God, to continue to "endure hardness, as a good soldier," if it is necessary to endure it in order to continue to fight for the principles of truth as taught in God's blessed Book, and the principles which have characterized our people as distinct and different from the world in all the ages of the past. We do not print the brother's name who wrote the letter, as it was written as a private letter to us. May the Lord bless the dear brother, with all our readers, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

THE LETTER

Dear Brother Cayce: I wish I knew how to comfort you and encourage you. I know that you have spent your life for our dear people, and still they continue to war and fuss about non-essentials, and draw on their imagination, and think evil one of another. I do hope the Lord will give you grace to earnestly contend for the things that make for peace, as you have done all your life. Surely the end is near, and how it will be with me I cannot tell. I feel so sad and lonely of late. I often feel that I have deceived you and all the Lord's dear people, and sadness and sorrow is all I have in this life. O wretched man that I am! I grieve; I mourn; and yet I rejoice at times. I try not to burden anyone with my troubles. If there is not a better day for us here, I am sure there is a beautiful home over yonder for you and all who love Him here. I cut cord wood two days this week, and I just could not get you off my mind. I could see you hard at work for our cause, and likely someone writing you in a way he should not. May God bless you, is my constant prayer.

WRONG AT HOME

January 8, 1931

Some brethren seem to have an idea that if a church or brethren do wrong they have gone from home. Wonder if any of those brethren ever had any children to do wrong without leaving home? We note that the different factions of Baptists have been compared to the prodigal son, with the idea that one faction remained at home and all the other factions left home. This has brought us to wonder if the son who remained at home ever did any wrong. It seems to us that according to the teaching of the Book that boy did about as bad as the boy who left home. Anyway, he manifested a very bad spirit when the prodigal returned. Evidently he was actuated by a wrong spirit then. Perhaps some of them are the home son that object to reconciliation. Churches can evidently do wrong without leaving their identity as churches of Christ. So can individuals do wrong without leaving their identity as followers of Christ. If not, then no follower of Christ can go wrong, make a mistake, or commit a wrong. If that does not savor of a claim to sinless perfection in the flesh, we confess that we do not understand things as they are. If churches, as churches, cannot do wrong, then confess their error and repent of it as churches, then the Bible is all bosh, for it teaches that they can. To repent of an error is to quit it. Churches in the New Testament were commanded to repent. If they had ceased to be churches of Christ-had gone off from identity as churches of Christ-then the command for them, as churches, to repent is meaningless, and such commands are a solemn mockery. If a church going into disorder always destroys her identity as a church of Jesus Christ, then she could not repent as a church, and could do no orderly act-there could be no such thing as a church repenting. If she could not do an orderly act while she has disorder in her body, then she could never get in order again. It would be a disorderly act for her to even repent, if she could not do an orderly act after having gone into disorder.

Brethren and churches may do wrong without leaving the old home, and when they do they should repent of those wrongs and live in peace and fellowship with each other. C. H. C.

THE PROGRESSIVES

January 8, 1931

Several months ago, or a few months ago, there was a suggestion in the Banner-Herald for a meeting of the different factions of the Primitive Baptists who are agreed on the fundamental principles of the doctrine to meet together to confer with each other with a view to a union. We have had several letters in regard to the matter, and some have asked us for an opinion in regard to uniting with them. We have endeavored to be as near neutral in regard to such a union as we well could. We think the matter of adjustment of the differences between the "Old Liners" and the "Progressives" is something that more directly concerns the brethren where they had the trouble than the brethren in other sections. We do not want to meddle with it. We do not even wish to encourage a meeting with them to consider the matter of differences if it is likely to cause more trouble among us. Personally, we do not see how it could do any harm for our brethren to meet with them in a kind and right spirit to discuss these matters, and to get their view point as to what they are willing to do, and to give our ideas as to what our own people would be willing to do. All parties should be kind and perfectly frank and honest with each other. Now, what we are writing this for is: We want each one of our readers to write and tell us if you are opposed to such a meeting, or if you wish to have such a meeting, or if you are willing for such a meeting to be held. A postal card will do. Just say, "I am opposed to any meeting with the Progressives," if you are opposed to it. If you are willing for such a meeting to be held just say, "I am willing for our people to meet and confer with the Progressives." If you are in favor of such a meeting just say, "lam in favor of meeting and conferring with the Progressives." If we find that our people are opposed to such a meeting we want to be in position to say they are opposed to it. We do not wish to encourage any meeting of the kind if it would cause trouble. What we mean by this is that we want to know the wish and desire of the brethren where they had the trouble, so we may know what might be their desire as to what we should do. We do not want any controversy over the matter, and will not have any. We want the sentiment of the brethren, so we can tell any who have asked us and who may ask us. Please write us at once. We want to say, frankly, that we are no more in favor of the use of organs in Old Baptist Churches, or of affiliating with secret orders, or any other progressive measure or departure from the principles which our people have stood for in all the ages past, than we were when the trouble came up with the "Progressives. '' We stand now upon the same principles we have stood upon for more than forty years-ever since we have had a name with the Primitive Baptists. Since there has been some talk of meeting with the "Progressives" to talk over the matters of difference we have been asked if we would attend such a meeting. Now, what we want is to know the mind of the brethren. If they desire it, or are willing for such a meeting to be held, we are willing to attend the meeting, if the brethren wish us to do so. Otherwise, we do not wish to have anything to do with it. We have had enough trouble in our ranks without inviting more. Again we ask you to please write us at once. This means all the brethren and sisters who are in the section where there was trouble and division with the "Progressives." C. H. C.

MANY THANKS

January 8, 1931

We wish we could find words to say how much we appreciate the kind remembrances of us during the holidays. Many sent us cards, all of them nice, expressing wishes for our health, happiness and pleasure-not only for us, but also for our companion, who so faithfully and tirelessly works with us. Several sent substantial remembrances. These acts of kindness and expressions of Christian love and sweet fellowship were all appreciated more than we are able to tell you. May the richest blessings of heaven rest upon every one of you, is our humble prayer. Most every year we have been sending out a few cards, or something, as an expression of our remembrance of some of our good friends and brethren and sisters; but this time we have had to omit that. Our financial condition has been such that we had to cut out that expense, small though it has been. In the financial flurry which has hit our state, as well as some other states, in which so many banks have closed, we have been hurt, along with many others. The little bank here in our town was hit, with so many others, and had to close their doors. This hurt us, but we do not yet know to what extent. Plans are being worked on now for the organization of a new bank to take over the assets of the old bank, which we hope may be accomplished before many more weeks, and we are hoping for a better condition of affairs before many more months. Remember us in your prayers. C. H. C.

VALID BAPTISM AND SOME HISTORY

January 15, 1931

The first Baptist Church in Boston was organized May 28, 1665. See Hassell, page 525; History of New England and the Baptists by Isaac Backus, Vol. 1, page 298. Other authorities could be cited, but this is sufficient. On August 10, 1713, Elisha Callender became a member of this church. He was a son of Ellis Callender, who became pastor of the church in 1708. On May 21, 1718, Elisha was ordained as pastor of this church. The presbytery that ordained him consisted of Dr. Cotten Mather and his son and John Webb. These three men were Congregational ministers. See Backus' Church History of New England, page 137; Encyclopedia Britannica, Ninth Edition, Vol. 15, page 631; Backus' History of New England, with Particular Reference to the Baptists, Second Edition, Vol. 1, page 421, and Vol. 2, page 419. Here is a historical fact, that this church, the first Baptist Church organized in Boston, Mass., which was in 1665, had a preacher ordained for them as pastor of the church, on May 21, 1718, by three Congregational ministers. If there was a Baptist preacher in the presbytery the records do not tell us about it-so far as we can find. Arguments may be made for and against a proposition, but facts cannot be argued away. Some brethren are contending that disorder in the line of ordination will make void and invalidate all official work following in the line of that disorder. If their contention be correct, then none of us have any valid baptism, for there are none of us but what follow in the line from this act of the Boston Baptist Church. If you can, suppose you trace your line back and see if you do not find that your ancestors in the church and ministry were not in some way tied on to this disorder. We are not trying to argue that we should practice such as was there practiced by this church, but simply to show the fallacy of the contention of some of the brethren. Callender baptized many persons, no doubt. Then later Samuel Stillman was called as pastor of this church. "A revival of religion began in that church in 1769, which caused the addition of eighty members in three years, to a church which had not seventy members before."-Backus, Vol. 2, page 419. According to the contention of some, this church lost her identity when she had Callender ordained by three Congregational preachers in 1718. Now, if you can trace your line of ordination by succession, suppose you try running the line and see if you do not find yourself springing from that disorder back there-and if you do, then you have no church identity, according to the contention of some; and in this case, you have no valid baptism, and none of the rest of us have it. Now, why do you want to fuss about a thing, when no one has it? Jeremy Condy was ordained pastor of this first Baptist Church in Boston on Feb. 14, 1739. He was pastor of that church when George Whitefield held a revival meeting in Boston. We have been under the impression that Whitefield was an Episcopalian, and really he was that; but he fell in with the Wesleys. The Wesleys embraced Arminian views, while Whitefield was a Calvinist in doctrine, so that from Whitefield's teaching sprang what was known as the Calvinistic Methodists. Whitefield preached in Boston in 1740, under which there was a revival in the city. Some of the members of this Baptist Church were favorable to the revival, and it appears that they took some part in it. This resulted in a division in that church, and the exclusion of those who were favorable to the revival. About a year after this those who were favorable to the revival, and who were formerly members of this Baptist Church, came together and formed themselves into a church and called it a Separate Baptist Church. This church was organized in 1742. See Backus' History, page 177. In 1743 Ephriam Bound was ordained their pastor. "Philip Freeman, member of a Baptist Church in London, came over to Boston, and joined that new church; who sent an account of their principles and conduct to Dr. John Gill, which obtained his approbation, and a considerable present was sent them from London."-Backus, Vol. 2, page 53. From this time those who were opposed to the Whitefield revival began to be called Regular Baptists, and the others were called Separate Baptists. The Regulars and Separates continued to preach in different parts of the country and to organize churches. They had no dealings with each other. Preachers went out from both the Regulars and Separates into the Virginias and the Carolinas, preaching and organizing churches. Remember, too, please, that these Separates originated from this church in Boston which had a man ordained to the ministry by three Congregational ministers-ministers who engaged in and recognized infant baptism, or infant sprinkling, if we are not mistaken, as they sprang from the Presbyterians. At any rate, they evidently practiced sprinkling or pouring for baptism. As to their practicing infant baptism, see Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia, Vol. 1, page 538. As to their springing from the Presbyterians, see Encyclopedia Britannica. At the close of the seventeenth century there were sixteen Baptist Churches in the United States, or the territory now called the United States. See Hassell, page 525. All those churches recognized and affiliated with the church at Boston. Did they all lose their identity as Baptist Churches, on account of affiliating with the Boston Church? Did they all get into such gross disorder that they could not administer gospel baptism? If what was done back there would not cause them to all be in such disorder that they could not administer valid baptism, would it have that result now? If such would destroy identity now, it would have done so then. If it did destroy identity then, it follows that the Primitive Baptists, nor any other Baptists, can administer valid baptism now; and if that be so, then no one now has valid baptism. Then, why are you so strenuous now about baptism-seeing you do not have it, according to your own contention? Remember that we are not arguing that Baptists now should practice what the Baptist Church in Boston did. What we are calling attention to this for is simply to show that a disorderly act does not invalidate baptism. If it would do so now, it would have done so then. If it did invalidate baptism then, none of us have it now. No matter which horn of the dilemma you take, you cannot "get anywhere." The Kehukee Association was formed in 1765. Some of the churches were constituted on the General Baptist order, many of them holding to the doctrine of a general atonement-springing from the General Baptists of England. Those churches of the General Baptist order had been formed previous to 1765. In 1755 many of those churches were reformed in doctrine through the ministry of Elders Vanhorn and Miller. Then in 1765 they formed the Kehukee Association, composed of seven churches of the Regular Baptist order. But many of them engaged in the disorderly practice of immersing people who were unregenerate. They would immerse any who were willing to be immersed, whether they were professors of religion or not. Some years after the formation of the Kehukee Association they made a proposition to the separate Baptist Churches for a union. "The Separates objected to the Regular or Kehukee Baptists in the following particulars:

1. Because they did not require strictly from those who applied for baptism an experience of grace.

2. Because they held members in their churches who acknowledged they were baptized before conversion.

3. Because they indulged too much in superfluity of apparel. There were other objections of minor importance. The most forcible objection of all appeared to be the retention of members who had been baptized in unbelief; and this was admitted on the part of the Regulars to be wrong; on which account several of their churches sought to correct it, by requiring all such of their members to be baptized."-Hassell, pages 697, 698. This caused a division in the association in 1775, which continued until 1777. Take note that the historian says that some, or several, of their churches sought to correct the matter. He does not say that all of them did. From this statement it is very evident that some of them did not attempt to correct the matter. If not, then some of them retained persons as members who had been immersed without being first regenerated. If gospel baptism, in order that it be valid, requires a gospel subject-one who has been born again-then they had members without valid, or gospel, baptism. How do you know but what some of those persons were afterward ordained to the ministry and immersed great numbers of people? And how do you know but what your baptism came through that very channel? Have you got gospel, or valid, baptism, anyway? Can you prove that you have? If so, how? In 1777 ten churches came together in union as the Kehukee Association of United Baptists. Six of those churches were Regular Baptist Churches and four were Separates. See Hassell, page 698; Burkett and Reed's Church History, pages 48-51. Remember that the Separate Baptists started from an excluded faction in Boston, who took part in the Whitefield revival. Did that union of two factions-the Separates and Regulars- put the whole thing in disorder? Did it destroy their church authority, so that they could not administer valid baptism? If such a union of factions would destroy identity now, or put both the uniting parties in such disorder that they could not administer valid baptism, would it not do the same thing then? If not, why not? Do principles ever change? If such a union then did not destroy their right and authority to administer valid baptism, how could it do so now? On pages 302 and 303 of Semple's History of Virginia Baptists we find the following: In 1791 a case was brought before the association (the Ketocton) which produced considerable agitation. James Hutchinson who was born \n New Jersey, but raised in Loudon County, Virginia, had gone to Georgia, and there first became a Methodist and then a Baptist preacher. Previous to his joining the Baptists he had been baptized by a Methodist preacher. When he offered to join the Baptists of Georgia it was made a question whether his baptism, being performed by an unbaptized person, was valid. The Georgia Baptists decided that it was valid. In the year above mentioned Mr. Hutchinson came to Virginia to see his relations in Loudon County. While he was there his preaching became effectual to the conversion of many. Mr. Hutchinson baptized them. These things stirred up the question in the Ketocton Association whether the baptism of Hutchinson and his new disciples was valid. The decision here was just the reverse of the decision in Georgia. They determined not to receive either him or those baptized by him, unless they would submit to be re-baptized. After some time they consented, and the ordinance was re-administered. Their proceeding on this occasion was more strict than that of any other association upon the same subject. The question has been before most of the associations at one time or other, and in every other instance they either deemed it unnecessary to re-baptize or left it to the conscience of the party to be re-baptized or not. Here we have the information that this preacher, James Hutchinson, was received by the Baptists in Georgia on his baptism administered by a Methodist preacher. How many persons he baptized in Georgia for the Baptists we do not know. But he returned to Virginia and preached and baptized in the bounds of the Ketocton Association, and the Ketocton would not receive him or his baptism; but the historian informs us that the action of the Ketocton was different from the action of any other association in the state. All the others deemed it unnecessary to re-baptize, or else left it to the individual. Evidently it was the common practice to receive members from other denominations without administering baptism. Now, if this common practice in those days would invalidate their work which might follow, then will you please tell us who has valid baptism now? Remember that we are not arguing or contending that persons should be received from other denominations without being baptized by our people; but we are simply producing these historical facts to clearly show that if disorder in the church, or churches, makes baptism invalid when administered by them, then it necessarily follows that there is no such thing as valid baptism in existence today. No sort of arguments will remove these historical facts. As Baptists, we are all, throughout the entire South and Southwest, descendants of those Virginia and Georgia Baptists. We all have to go back through that line to tie on to the Baptist line in the settlement of this country. Time will not remove the difficulty-but only makes it the worse-for none can now go back behind all that and correct the matter. It has already been done, and cannot be undone. Now, will you "Simon-pure" brethren, who refuse to accept the work of your brethren, please tell us how pure your baptism is? Which is black-the pot or the kettle? If the validity of baptism rests in the person administering the ordinance, and requires that no disorder be in the line, then there is no such thing as valid baptism. The validity of baptism does not rest in the person administering the ordinance, but rests in the church authorizing it. It is the church that does the work, and the person who administers the ordinance is only the agent of the church-is the one through whom the church does the work. It may be done in an irregular way, but irregularity does not invalidate the thing done. A thing may be valid, yet done in an irregular way. The regular way for baptism to be administered is by one who has been set apart by authority of the true church to administer her ordinances. Baptism might be administered by an impostor. Of course, if baptism is administered by such a one, the church would be ignorant of the fact that he is an impostor. But ignorance concerning a matter does not make a good thing of a bad thing. If a thing is not done right, ignorance would not make it right. Hence, if there has been an impostor in the line through which your baptism has been handed down, and if baptism administered by an impostor is not valid, then your baptism is not valid. We all know that there have been impostors in the church and among the ministry all along the line. Such positions concerning the validity of baptism is to simply argue that there is no valid baptism today. May the good Lord help us all to search for the truth, and help us to have the courage to stand upon the same, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

THE PROGRESSIVES

February 12, 1931

In The Primitive Baptist of January 8 we had an article concerning a proposed meeting with the Progressives to kindly discuss the differences between them and our people, to see if terms of agreement might be reached for a union. We asked our people to write us and say whether they would favor such a meeting, or if they are opposed to it. We did not ask for a long letter from any containing reasons for being opposed to it or for favoring it. In that article we very plainly said: We want to say, frankly, that we are no more in favor of the use of organs in Old Baptist Churches, or of affiliating with secret orders, or any other progressive measure or departure from the principles which our fathers have stood for in all the ages past, than we were when the trouble came up with the Progressives. We stand now upon the same principles we have stood upon for more than forty years-ever since we have had a name with the Primitive Baptists. Notwithstanding this plain statement some brethren have taken it upon themselves to write us a long letter as though we had written something that sounded like we were in favor of taking in all the new measures the Progressives have or have had. This has only taken our time unnecessarily-to read those long letters telling of the new things the Progressives introduced, and why you could not fellowship this thing or that thing. Nobody asked if you could fellowship this or that measure, and we had plainly stated that we have no use for the new measures. We cannot understand why some brethren will be so forgetful and thus put a lot of unnecessary work on us, and write as though we were trying to get our people to accept some new things that are foreign to the teachings of the Scriptures. Now, when you read this do not write us a long apology, for we are not hurt with you, and it is not necessary to send us a lot more writing that is not necessary to take our time to read. We want you to write us everything it is necessary and beneficial for us to have, but we are overworked already without having unnecessary things to do. We are willing to do everything necessary to be done; and we are willing to do everything our brethren think is necessary to be done, even though it is not really necessary, so far as we are able. But if all would first ask, "Is this really necessary?" they might save themselves and others some time and labor. Do let us try to be considerate. Now, in regard to the meeting. Quite a number have written that they are in favor of having a meeting with the Progressives to discuss the matters of differences in a friendly way. Quite a number have written that they are opposed to such a meeting. Some have assigned their reasons, and some have not. No matter about what their reasons are; this is the way the matter stands. We have had enough to satisfy us that our brethren are not yet in a condition for us to make any effort toward reconciliation with the Progressives. If an effort for reconciliation with them will bring trouble in our own ranks, the only thing to do is to let the matter alone. Not only is this true, but we have heard some from the Progressives, too. Now, some of the Progressive brethren may be ready to lay aside the things that caused the trouble and the division; but it is evident that some of them are not. If any of the Progressive brethren are ready to abandon those things, and want to get in line with our people, no doubt they can do so without the proposed meeting. It is useless to talk about a union with our people unless those things are dispensed with. It seems that the main things that are in the way are musical instruments in the churches, affiliation with secret orders, protracted meetings, Sunday schools, and some societies. These things are all comparatively new among the Baptists, and our people would not be willing to consider a union with those brethren unless these things are abandoned. We would be glad to see all true Primitive Baptists together, but we are not willing to depart from what is recognized as Baptist principles and practice. Let us all lay aside our prejudices and try to labor for the things that make for peace. C. H. C.

SHOULD FORGIVE

March 5, 1931

We have been requested to give our views on Mt 18:21-22, and Lu 17:3-4. The citation in Matthew reads thus: Then came Peter to Him, and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, I say not unto thee, Until seven times, but, Until seventy times seven. The citation in Luke reads thus: Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him. It seems to us that these expressions from our Saviour are so plain that they need no explanation. That the Saviour here teaches His disciples that they are under obligation to forgive each other their trespasses there can be no question. He does not simply teach that they should forgive one trespass, but He teaches that there should be no end to it. Seven in Scripture is generally considered to be a full and complete number. The disciple of Christ is required to forgive, not only seven times, but seventy times seven. There is no end to the matter. In Luke it is plainly taught that the follower of the Lord should forgive seven times in a day-and that means seven times in every day. There is, again, no end to it. Forgiveness is needed all along through the journey of life. It is needed every day. A trespass, however, is one thing and an offense is another thing. A brother may trespass without bringing shame and disgrace on the cause. Therefore, trespasses should be forgiven. When a brother is guilty of committing an offense, he is guilty of a crime which brings shame and disgrace upon the whole church, and upon the cause of the Master. No matter how great one may be considered to be, and no matter how highly he may be esteemed in the church, and no matter how useful he may have been in and to the church, if he commits an offense which brings shame and disgrace upon the church, he should be dealt with. For example, if one is guilty of public drunkenness, swearing, or such like offenses, the church should deal with him. To continue to retain such persons in fellowship as members of the church, is to say to the world that the church condones, favors and harbors such crimes by her members. This brings shame and disgrace upon the church, and brings the church into disrepute. Such things should not be countenanced by the church to any degree. The parties guilty of such should be dealt with just as soon as the church is informed of such conduct. But a brother may trespass against another, or against some rule of the church, and yet not be guilty of a crime that brings disgrace upon the church. For example, when a person unites with the church he thereby subscribes to the covenant and agrees to be governed by the rules of the church. In the rules the members agree to meet together for the public worship and service of God. A brother may neglect that meeting, and thereby transgress, and he thereby becomes guilty of a trespass. If the brother is given to see the error of his way and confesses his wrong, he should be forgiven. We are instructed that"if thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him." If a brother trespasses against us, and we fail to do what the Saviour instructs here, then we have become a transgressor, just as much so as the brother who was guilty of the trespass. If we become guilty ourselves, do we not need to be forgiven, as well as the brother who has trespassed? Then, how does it become us to refuse to forgive? We are taught in the above passages to forgive continually if the trespassing brother repents; that is, if he turns from his wrong and asks forgiveness, as is expressed in Lu 17:3-4. It is not so expressly stated in Mt 18:21-22; but here we are told to forgive until seventy times seven. In Col 3:12-13, we have this language: Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; forbearing one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. The word quarrel in this text means a complaint. If you have a complaint against a brother, you are commanded by the inspired apostle to put on bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, long-suffering; forbearance. If everything was always just as you would like to have it in the church, or elsewhere, there would be no place for you to exercise or to use forbearance. There would be nothing for you to bear with. It is true that the church should not bear with everything. As stated before, they should not bear with things that bring shame and disgrace on the cause. But we should bear with each other's weaknesses, our thoughtlessness, our neglect of the many things which it would be better for us to attend to. Instead of trying to destroy our brother who has made some mistake, and perhaps has neglected some things we think he should have attended to, let us try to help him along to a better way of living. Let us try to encourage him to a more diligent discharge of his duty. Perhaps, after all, he has not done any worse than we have. Suppose the Saviour had never forgiven us until we asked Him to, or until we had repented. Do you think you would have ever been forgiven? What did you do to get the Lord to forgive your many and grievous sins? "Even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye." How about it-do you do that way? Lord, help us to forgive our erring brethren. C. H. C.

GENERAL MEETING

March 12, 1931

For some little time now some of the brethren in Texas have been talking and writing about having a general state meeting of the brethren. Waco has been talked of as a place for such a meeting. That city is near the center of the state, and would be a convenient place, so it seems to us. About the fifth Sunday in May has been suggested as a suitable time for holding such a meeting. We understand the object of the meeting is, first, to worship and serve the Lord; to sing and pray and preach together-to preach the truth as our people have done in the ages past, for the comfort and benefit of the Lord's dear children. Another object would be, as we understand, to try to further the work of peace among our poor and afflicted people-not to try to forsake any principle of right and truth; not to try to see how far apart any of us are, but to try to see how near we are together. If such a meeting is conducted in the right way, and all go there with prayerful hearts, it might result in great good to our bleeding cause. It is a great pity that all our people who are agreed on the great fundamental principles of the gospel are not together. Great forbearance is needed in these dark and distressing and strenuous times. May the Lord help us all to exercise forbearance and strive for the peace of Jerusalem. C. H. C.

VALID BAPTISM

March 12, 1931

If we have been rightly informed, and if we are not mistaken, some years ago there was a preacher by the name of Thomas who was excluded from the church in some of the eastern states. We think it was in Tennessee that he was excluded. He went to Texas and joined an Old Baptist Church out there on a forged letter. Later it was found out that his letter was forged. He baptized quite a number of people, we understand. This caused a considerable stir among the churches. Some of the churches had those persons baptized again who had been baptized by Thomas. Some of the churches refused to have persons baptized again who had been baptized by Thomas. Still more stir was caused by this. The churches called for a council to consider the matter. The council said that the baptisms administered by Thomas were valid because administered by gospel and orderly churches. Thus the matter was settled. Now, if we have not been rightly informed, and if we have not correctly stated the facts, will someone who knows the facts, please tell us what the facts are, and cite us to the records? Now, if the foregoing are facts, will some of the brethren in Texas who are so particular about orderly and valid baptism please tell us if they are in line with the baptism administered by this preacher, Elder Thomas, who was excluded from the church? According to the contention of some, baptism administered by Thomas was no good, because he was excluded. Are you not in line with the baptism admistered by this excluded preacher? Are you not in line with churches that have baptism, or did have baptism, administered by him-and that work retained by them? Are those churches in disorder because they retained that baptism? If so, and you are in line with them, are you in order? Please answer these questions kindly. No use to get mad and out of humor because we ask about these facts. Which is the blackest, the pot or kettle? Let us be careful not to contend for something that will unchurch ourselves. Let us be consistent. C. H. C.

WHY NOT SAVE ALL?

March 19, 1931

A few months ago we received the following: Dear Elder Cayce: I have just finished reading, for the second time, the Cayce-Srygley discussion, and fail to find the answer to this question: If God saves without conditions on the part of the sinner, why is not everybody saved? Why does He save a few and not save all? I can't possibly see, for my life, how He could save a few and send the balance to hell and be a just God. It looks like partiality to me. I know I am ignorant and very unlearned and don't understand the Scriptures; but the plan of salvation looks so simple to me; for, if we confess our sins, He is faithful arid just to forgive us our sins. I don't believe that we can do any good thing that will save us; but it looks to me like we've got to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and He will save us and forgive us our sins. If you have time to answer the questions at issue I would appreciate it. I've asked several Primitive Baptists this question, and haven't yet found one able to answer it. Yours in humble hope, E. C. Ward. Pine Valley, Miss.

OUR REPLY

For the satisfaction of Friend Ward we will try to offer a few remarks and comment a little on the foregoing letter. It seems to be a puzzle to the writer as to why God would save some of the race and not save all the race. The question asked would imply that God is under obligation to the sinner to do something for him. If God is under obligation to the sinner to do something for him, then God could not justly condemn the sinner without first doing that something. This would necessarily say that the condemnation of the sinner is not just. If the condemnation of the sinner is not just, then the salvation of the sinner is not a matter of grace-is not by grace. That simply denies that salvation from sin is by grace. It is not a wonder to us why God does not save all the race, but the wonder to us is that He saves any of the race. Friend Ward says it looks to him like "we've got to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and He will save us." How can those people believe on the Lord Jesus Christ who have never heard about Him? If people have to believe on Jesus in order to be saved, then it would be impossible for one to be saved who has never heard about Him. This would condemn to eternal perdition every person who has ever lived and died, or who ever will live and die, without hearing about Jesus. If those who have never heard about Jesus can be saved.without believing on Him, then a person does not have to believe on Him in order to be saved. Anything which must be performed, or complied with, as a condition in order to be saved must be absolute, universal, and without exception. That is, if a certain thing must be done by one person in order to his salvation, then that thing must be done by any and every other person in order that they be saved. If a thing is necessary to be done by one person in order that he be saved, then no person can be saved without doing that thing. Hence, if one person of the human race must believe on Jesus in order that he be saved, then no person of the human race can be saved without first believing on Jesus. This would not only lose in eternal torment all who live and die without hearing about Jesus, but it would also inevitably exclude all infants from salvation who die in infancy, because they are not capable of believing on Jesus. Friend Ward says, "I don't believe that we can do anything good that will save us; but it looks to me like we've got to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and He will save us.'' Is believing on the Lord Jesus Christ doing something good? It is either good or bad. If it is doing bad, and the Lord will not save one unless he believes, then he must do something bad in order to be saved. If believing on the Lord is doing something good, and the Lord will not save one unless he first believes, then we must do something good in order to be saved; and if we can believe on the Lord before He saves us, and believing on Him is doing something good, then we can do something good in order to be saved. But if we must believe on the Lord in order to be saved, and believing on Him is doing something good, and we cannot do anything good in order to be saved, then no one can believe on the Lord in order to be saved. Friend Ward has contradicted himself, and is in a dilemma from which he cannot extricate himself. Every person who says that one must believe on the Lord in order to be saved gets into the same dilemma. If God could not remain just and save some of the race without saving all the race, then He could not be just and allow any of the race to perish. This would imply that God is under obligation to all the race, and would deny that the condemnation of any of the race is just. It would deny that God's law is just-and all are transgressors. All the world are guilty before God. {Ro 3:19} All, both Jews and Gentiles, are under sin. {Ro 3:9} The law is holy, and just, and good. {Ro 7:12} As all are sinners, and the law is just, then all are justly condemned. As all are justly condemned, then God is not under obligation to do anything for any one of the race. As He is not under obligation to do anything for any one of the race, then He may save one or more of the race and not save another, and still His justice remains untarnished. If He could not do this, then the condemnation of the sinner is not just; and if the condemnation of the sinner is not just, then God's law is not just. If God's law is not just, then no one could be justly condemned on account of sin. If God saves one sinner by His mercy and grace, and does not save you, then will you say that God is not just because He does not save you also? Will you say that God is under obligation to save you, because He saves another? Will you deny that you are a justly condemned sinner? If so, then you deny that you are a sinner. If you admit that you are a sinner, a transgressor of God's just law, then you must admit that your condemnation is just. If your condemnation is just, then God is not under obligation to save you because He saves another. If He is under obligation to save you because he saves another, then He would be under obligation to save all the race if He saved one of the race. That being true, in order that He remain just, He must either save all the race or else allow all the race to be lost in hell. But God is just, and is under no obligation to save any. Hence, His justice is not tarnished if He saves some and does not save all. Instead of His justice being tarnished thereby, the fact that He does save some only manifests His mercy and makes His grace shine with effulgent glory. No unregenerate sinner ever Scripturally believes on the Lord. Those who truly believe on Him have already been born of God. "He came unto His own, and His own received Him not. But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on His name: which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God."-Joh 1:11-13. In this text "were born" is in the past tense-something that was done, completed, finished, at some time in the past. "Believe" is in the present tense- something in the present time. They were born of God first, and then believe as a result. There is not a man in all the world who can take this text and apply the rules of language to it and make it appear that belief preceded being born of God. If any man will do so, we will leave the Old Baptists and join his church. No man can make it appear that a thing existing in the present was necessary in order that a thing be accomplished or done in the past. The past is first, and the present follows after. They were born of God, in the past, and they believe in the present, after they were born in the time past. Hence, those who believe were born of God before they believed. This being true, it cannot be true that one must believe in order to be born of God; but it is true that one must be born of God in order to truly believe on the Lord. The Ephesians did not believe on the Lord in order to be saved. They did not do anything good in order to be saved. If one now must believe in order to be saved, then the Ephesians had to believe in order to be saved. Whatever the Ephesians had to do in order to be saved, that is what one will have to do now in order to be saved. If the Ephesians had to do something in order to be saved (believe, or any other condition), if we can find what they were doing when they were saved, then we will have found what they had to do in order to be saved, and we will also have found what every other person must do in order to be saved. What were they doing? Let us read Eph 2:1-2,3, and see: And you hath He quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others. Were they believing? What were they doing? They were walking according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air; they were having their conversation in the lusts of the flesh; they were fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; they were by nature the children of wrath. When were they doing these things? All the time prior to the time that the Lord saved them. Did they have to do those things in order that the Lord save them? If not, then they did not have anything to do (not even believe) in order that the Lord save them; for those were the things they were doing all the time until the Lord saved them. But why did the Lord save them? Let us read Eph 2:4-7 and see: But God, who is rich in mercy, for His great love wherewith He loved us, even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) and hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: that in the ages to come He might shew the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. Again, we ask, Why did the Lord save them? Because He loved them-"for His great love wherewith He loved us." That is the reason why, and not because they believed. The final end of it all is that "in the ages to come He might shew the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us through Christ Jesus." His mercy and grace in the salvation of poor, lost, ruined, hell-deserving sinners will shine with effulgent glory in all the ages of eternity. Praise be to His holy and matchless name for such unspeakable love, mercy and grace. C. H. C.

VALLEY OF DRY BONES

April 30, 1931

By request I will write my views on the "valley of dry bones." And should my views be different to yours will you please remember that I am willing to admit I might be wrong. Let that be as it may, it is my views that is asked for and not yours. As I see it, preaching is connected with these dry bones living. The hand of the Lord was upon the Prophet Ezekiel and carried him out "in the Spirit of the Lord, and set him down in the midst of the valley which was full of bones." The Lord caused the prophet to pass by them "round about,"and he was asked the question, "Son of man, can these bones live?" Notice his answer: "O, Lord God, thou knowest." These dry bones did not then, and do not now, represent or refer to dead, alien sinners, but to the children of God who are living after the flesh, or have been. The Lord told the prophet to "Prophesy upon these bones, and say unto them, O, ye dry bones, hear the word of the Lord." Paul said, "We are laborers together with God." Please notice that the Lord told Ezekiel to say to the dry bones to "hear the word of the Lord." I will quote verse five to prove that after the Lord told the prophet to tell these dry bones to hear the word of the Lord, that the Lord Himself spoke to these dry bones, "Thus saith the Lord God unto these bones, Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live." It is the Lord's work in the hearts of His disobedient children that causes the gospel to be a savour of life unto life. "And I will lay sinews upon you, and will bring up flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you, and ye shall live; and ye shall know that I am the Lord." Here is the utility of the gospel ministry, as shown in the next verse. "So I prophesied (preached) as I was commanded; and, as I prophesied, there was a noise, and, behold, a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone. Then said He unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, thus saith the Lord God, Come from the four winds, O, breath and breathe upon these slain, that they may live. So I prophesied as He commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood upon their feet, an exceeding great army. Then He said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel; behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts." Preaching did not have one thing to do in making these bones the whole house of Israel, but it did have something to do with these bones coming together and these "slain, that they may live." The valley of dry bones are the whole house of Israel, though they were not together, but when the prophet began to tell them as he was commanded, there was a noise, and, behold, a shaking, and the bones came together, bone to his bone. This is what occurred a few years ago right here in Texas, when stout-hearted and rebellious Israel met at Dallas, Texas. There was a noise heard and a shaking took place. The apples of discord were shaken off and we were all together before we hardly knew it. "And the bones came together, bone to his bone.''"Take the one stick, and write upon it, for Judah.'Take another stick, and write upon it, for Joseph."Judah was Jacob's son by Leah while Joseph was Jacob's son by Rachel. These were the two bones, families, the whole house of Israel, though divided against each other. The Lord told the prophet to"join them one to another into one stick; and they shall become one in thine hand."This very thing being done is why we are called the"consolidated Baptists.'Neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all.''-Verse 22. The different tribes of Israel did not lose their identity as Israelites because they were divided against each other. And the different groups of our people have not lost their identity as churches just because they are divided against each other. The tribe of Benjamin was a small tribe, yet it was one of the twelve tribes of Israel and had the same right to function as the other tribes of Israel did. The nations surrounding Israel had no right to function for the Israelites, any more than the Arminian world has a right to do work for us. I am unwilling to look upon the different groups of our people as I do the different Arminian orders. I would love to see our people unite their forces, ground their arms, quit devouring each other and build up the waste places in Zion. Who will join with us in this much needed work? J. S. N. We have been requested to give our views on "The Valley of Dry Bones." The above expresses our views. We do not see where we can improve it any. C. H. C.

GLAD TIDINGS BOUGHT

May 21, 1931

We have just closed a deal with Elder J. H. Fisher whereby we have bought the subscription list and accounts of the Glad Tidings. All the Glad Tidings subscribers will receive The Primitive Baptist. It will take us some time to go over the list of names on the Glad Tidings list to compare with the list we already had. Some of you may get two copies of the paper until we get all straightened out, but you will not be charged for two papers. That is, if you were taking both papers you may get two copies of The Primitive Baptist for awhile, until we get the two lists combined in one. There may be some families where both papers have been going, one in one name and the other paper in another name. If you get two papers that way, please write us about it and explain the matter as soon as you can, so you may help us get all things straight as they should be. As soon as we can we will send a letter to each subscriber to the Glad Tidings and tell you how we find your subscription marked on the book. Brother Fisher admits there may be mistakes. He agrees with us that we should make any correction the subscriber thinks is right. Each subscriber on the Glad Tidings list will be given full credit on our books for the whole time paid to. What we mean is this: If you are paid a year ahead on the Glad Tidings, we will give you credit for the full year on The Primitive Baptist. If you are behind and owe the Glad Tidings anything, it is coming to us. You can send your remittance to us and be sure to tell us what it is for, so we can find the account and give you proper credit. If you prefer, it will be all right with us for you to send your remittance to Brother Fisher. He will report it to us. We believe it is best for the cause for the two papers to be consolidated. The Glad Tidings subscribers will get a weekly paper now, as The Primitive Baptist is published weekly. Let us all do what we can now for this paper and try to make it a blessing to the cause, and not have our interests divided. Let us all try to work together for the advancement of the blessed cause. We have added the name of Brother Fisher to our editorial staff. We trust he will make use of our columns and that he may be led to write for the comfort and benefit of all our readers. Brother Fisher has sent us some obituaries and other articles he had on hand which we will publish as soon as we can possibly get to them. If any of the Glad Tidings subscribers have missed any copies of the paper, write to Brother Fisher, and he will send you the copies you missed. If he cannot supply them, let us know and we will mark up your time on The Primitive Baptist to make good all copies you have missed. We trust that this consolidation will be for the good of our blessed cause. How many of you will write and tell us you are going to do what you can to help us extend the circulation of the paper and help to make it a blessing to the cause? C. H. C.

BIBLE CONFERENCE

July 23, 1931

We see in the Banner Herald, the Progressive organ, that they are to hold their "Bible Conference" in Jacksonville, Fla., August 25, 26 and 27, and that Elder J. B. Hardy, of Perryton, Texas, is on the program for an address at 3 p. m. on the 26th. We also see a short article in the same paper from Elder Hardy that he has held a meeting at Childress, Texas, beginning on Friday before the fifth Sunday in May, and that ten ministers attended the meeting, and that there were nine additions. C. H. C.

ELDER T. S. DALTON CALLED HOME

August 20, 1931

In the Advocate and Messenger for August, 1931, we find the sad news that Elder T. S. Dalton has been called to his eternal home. He passed away suddenly on July 30, 1931. He was eighty-five years old June 3. Brother Dalton lived and labored years ago in West Tennessee, Texas and Illinois. No doubt many-or at least some-of our readers in these sections will remember his work in the ministry, and his able defense of the doctrine of grace in discussion with those who opposed the truth. From the Advocate and Messenger we copy the following: As this issue of the Advocate and Messenger goes to press the sad news comes of the sudden death of Brother Dalton, who, on June 3, was eighty-five years old. He died suddenly about 5 a. m. today-July 30. Just a few days ago the editor received from him two excellent editorials, both of which appear in this issue. God blessed him with a strong mind and warm heart until the last-filling his preaching appointments and attending to other religious duties until he heard the summons, "Child, your Father calls, come home." Many hearts will be saddened by Brother Dalton's going. He was my dear friend-I shall miss him so much. Our editorial staff not long since suffered the loss of Elder Hassell. Now Brother Dalton has laid down his pen. Let us pray that God will give us others like them. And pray for his dear devoted wife and children in this time of deep sorrow. An extended notice will appear later. -Editor. Brother Dalton was an able minister of the gospel and will be greatly missed. May the Lord give us more such men. And may His richest blessings rest upon his dear companion and children in this sad hour of distress, is our humble prayer. Most of our old preachers-those who were in the service when we began trying to speak in the name of the Master forty-one years ago-are gone. They have been called from the field of battle and service here below to their long eternal home. Not many more struggles here, and we trust we shall meet them in a better home beyond the dark river. C. H. C.

ELDER J. H. PHILLIPS DEAD

October 15, 1931

Elder J. H. Phillips passed away on the evening of October 4 at the home of his daughter, Sister Nora Rhodes, near Huron, Tenn. He had been in failing health for some time. We know this is sad news to many of our readers, as it was to us. We had known Brother Phillips from boyhood, and he was our bosom companion in our early ministerial life. We were as brothers, and were brothers. He served many years on our editorial staff. We could not help shedding some tears of sorrow at the news of his going away. He was faithful and true to the cause of the Master-he "was true as steel." He never betrayed a trust. As a man there are none better than Jim Phillips was, and but few equal. His life was honorable and above reproach. In all his life as a servant of God he never brought a single ripple or wave of trouble, yet he was faithful and true and firm for the principles of truth and righteousness. He suffered much privation and toil for the cause we love, and endured much physical suffering for many years. But his sufferings are over now. We grieve for him as for a true and faithful and devoted brother and friend. We loved him more than we can tell. His children have our deepest sympathy. May the good Lord bless them, is our humble prayer. The churches and brethren whom he so faithfully served have our sympathy. You will miss his kind and mature counsel and advice. Will you remember it all now, and not forget it, and live according to it? May the Lord help you to do so, is our humble prayer. So many of our loved ones and dear friends are passing away. But it will not be long until the time shall come that we hope to meet them in that better country. May the Lord help us, and may He send true and faithful servants to fill the ranks as they are thinned out by the passing away of those faithful ones who have been called home to that better land. C. H. C.

MERRY CHRISTMAS

December 24, 1931

You are now reading the fifty-second issue of The Primitive Baptist for the year 1931. About one thousand and four hundred letters during the year from home folks. Some of these letters have been of praise to our heavenly Father, some instructive and wonderful messages from His bountiful storehouse, some of grief and sorrow. All of which reminds us, "Mixtures of joy and sorrow, daily we pass through." Yet, after all, if we would stop and count a few of our blessings, we have much to be thankful for. All of us have drunk the dregs of the great financial depression throughout our country. Even yet the old saying holds true: "From the day you were born till you ride in a hearse, things are never so bad that they couldn't be worse." Let us try to forget the heartaches and sorrows of 1931 and press on, ever looking unto Jesus and the merciful Father, our All in All. Merry Christmas to all. Mrs. C. H. C.

CLOSE OF VOLUME XLVI

December 24, 1931

This issue of The Primitive Baptist closes the forty-sixth volume of the paper. With the close of the volume comes the close of another year. We are all one year nearer to our eternal home than we were one year ago. During the past year many of our brethren and sisters and kind friends have been called to their long sought home. There have been many sorrows, trials and conflicts during the past year. Much suffering has been endured by many. Yet we have much to be thankful for. Many who were without food and feed stuff now have a bountiful supply for another year. Yet we know that money matters are close. Sometimes during the year we could not see how we could possibly pull through the year and meet expenses and keep the paper going out every week in its full size. Many other papers skipped a number of issues, and many others came out only half size. So far we have not missed an issue, nor has the size been reduced. Besides, we promised just fifty-one issues per year when we made the paper a weekly again, but this year you get fifty-two issues, as there are fifty-three Thursdays in this year. So, as there are fifty-there Thursdays in 1931, there will be no paper next week. We have had a "hard pull" for the last two years. Everything still looks dark and gloomy to us. But, the Lord willing, we hope to greet our readers again in the issue for January 7, 1932. Until then, farewell; and please do remember us in your prayers. C. H. C.

1932

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME XLVII

January 7, 1932

With this issue we begin the publication of the forty-seventh volume of The Primitive Baptist. During the past forty-six years there have been many changes. There have been "wars and rumors of wars;" there have been earthquakes and famines and pestilences. It seems that crime has been on the increase-especially during the past few years. Graft and wickedness seem to prevail in high places-as well as low. Business enterprises are going bankrupt; taxes are on the increase; city, county, state and national governments seem to be on the very verge of bankruptcy. It seems to us that upon very slight provocation, under existing conditions, there might be a mighty and wholesale overthrow and crumbling of governments. It seems, too, there is still a great spirit of unrest in religious circles. Graft and wickedness not only prevail in matters of state, but also in religious circles. Crime and wickedness are winked at and condoned and hidden and wrapped up. It is a wonder to us that the Lord is so good as to let this old world continue to stand. Surely He is longsuffering. The drouth in 1930 and the shortage of crops were distressing. People had been living too fast. In 1931 bountiful crops were made, and farmers have plenty to eat and to feed on for another year or more. Yet there are cries of distress all over the land, as well as all over the civilized world. It seems that starvation is staring millions of people in the face-and that, too, in the midst of plenty. The farmers can get very little for what they have to sell, or for their surplus crops. It seems that we have all forgotten God, and have been unthankful to Him for our many and wonderful blessings. The end is not yet. Covetousness and hoarding will not bring relief. But we must stop here along this line. We now begin a new year. We are still marching on nearer to the end of the tiresome and troublesome journey. We need new strength and courage to fight the battles which lie before us-if our life may still be spared. We desire to look to Him from whom all blessings come. We still see no reason why this paper should not continue to advocate the same principles which have been advocated through its columns during the past forty-six years. There is no reason we can see why there should be any change along that line. May the good Lord bless, sustain and keep us and all the readers, is our humble prayer. Please pray for us and help us all you can. C. H. C.

BIOGRAPHICAL January 7, 1932

For some time we have been considering the matter of printing in The Primitive Baptist a picture of some of our ministers with a biographical sketch of each one. We have thought to put something like this in the paper at least once each month. We would like to have a picture and an article of this kind from one of our ministers in each issue of the paper, but the cost may be too much. Our companion has been attending to the details of this matter for us. So, now, here she comes to the editor, and says, "I want an article from you for the next issue of the paper to start this thing off. I already have the picture." Now, what can I do? I just cannot write a sketch of my life that will be worth a thing in the world to anyone-living or dead. I cannot go into detail regarding my "ups and downs." I need not recite the incidents, or accidents, or occurrences that have come to pass in my life. Since I have been connected with this paper in 1886, and since I united with the church in 1889, and since I was ordained to the work of the ministry in 1896, my life has been an open book. Many of the things I have witnessed and have been engaged in and have passed through are already matters of record. What must I do? What can I say? I am the oldest son, and the oldest child, of Silas Fleming Cayce. He was ordained to the work of the ministry November 9, 1878, by Elders Wm. Howard, N. G. Phillips and H. Gilbert. He began the publication of The Primitive Baptist January 1, 1886. He was the oldest son of James Hardy Cayce, who was a Primitive Baptist and the oldest son of Elder Fleming Cayce, a Primitive Baptist. If we have the record correct, Fleming Cayce was the oldest son of Shadrack Cayce, a Baptist-of the old sort; and he was the oldest son of J. F. Cayce, who was also a Baptist before the modern sort were born. We do not certainly know, but have reason to believe that he was a minister. I have in my possession a walking cane which belonged to J. F. Cayce, which has been handed down to the oldest son from generation to generation. It has been in the Old Baptist family all along, and in the hands of the oldest son each time. We trust it may be the will of the good Lord that it may still be handed down in the same way to generations following. My mother was Flora Magdalene Beasley, a daughter of Elisha Beasley, who lived and died about Clinton, Ky. He and grandmother Beasley were buried at Mil-burn, Ky. According to what my dear old mother and father told me while they were yet living, I was born into this troublesome world on June 1, 1871, on a little hill in the town of Moscow, Ky. In the summer of 1879, I saw myself a ruined and condemned sinner in the sight of a just and holy God. I was just eight years old then; yet the agonies which I endured are fresh in my memory. Many times I heard father and mother praying for their poor boy; but their prayers did not bring peace to my soul. I tried reformation of life; but that gave no relief. Many times in secret, as well as in secret places, the very breathing of my poor heart went out in supplication to the God of all grace, begging Him to have mercy upon me, a poor sinner. I went thus bowed in sorrow and distress till about the spring or summer of 1885, perhaps just before I was fourteen years of age. One afternoon, though the sun was shining, yet all looked dark and gloomy to me. I went off to a secluded spot to try to pray one more time for mercy. It seemed that my pleadings for mercy were no better than mockery. I arose and started to the house. Before I got there I looked toward the sun, as it was just above the western tree tops. It seemed to me that I was there sinking into eternal despair-that I would never see the sun rise again. In my heart I felt to say, "Farewell; before you rise in the east in the morning, I will be suffering the vengeance of eternal torment." As I turned to take another step toward the house the burden was gone. I did not know how nor where it went. I felt to be at perfect peace and perfect ease. I then thought to go to the house and tell mother what a blessed Saviour I had found, but something seemed to whisper, "You might be deceived, and you might deceive her." Then I began to beg, "Lord, if deceived, undeceive me." "Lord, what shall I do?" Then the impression came to be baptized and to proclaim the riches of His grace. I tried many times to get that old burden back again, so I might know how and where it went. But I was never able to get back into that condition any more. Since that memorable day I have had many sore trials and conflicts, but the sweet hope I there received in the crucified and risen Redeemer has never yet been entirely obliterated. True, sometimes it seems that the evidences I have are so little and so dim that I can hardly claim that I have a sweet hope in Jesus; but in all the sorrows and heartaches and distresses through which I have come, it has been sweet and precious to me. I would not give it now for all this poor world. On the second Sunday in August, 1889, I went to the church in Greenfield, Tenn., and told them some part of the reason of my hope and asked for a home with them. I confessed my sins, as did those who went to John for baptism. I remember how that they kindly took me into their sweet fellowship, with tears freely flowing down their cheeks. I did not tell them of any impression I had to try to speak in public. I thought perhaps that might leave me. The home and place they gave poor me with them was delightful to me. That dear old church and place will be precious in my memory as long as I retain the faculties of my mind. No matter where I may go, nor where I may roam, that dear old church, and those precious loved of God, who so kindly gave me a resting place with them, will be precious in my memory. On Thursday before the second Sunday in September, 1889, a dark and cold and cloudy and gloomy day, the church assembled at the water-a pond near the town of Greenfield-and my sainted father led me and my sister (Meda, who passed away in May, 1911) down into the water and laid us beneath the yielding wave. When he raised me up from under the wave, the clouds overhead were divided and the sun shone brightly over the scene. There I left a burden which I have never felt since. Once more sweet peace and joy filled my poor soul. When I turned my eyes toward the congregation on the bank, it was seemingly as glorious to me as though the very gates of heaven had been thrown open wide, and the angels had been beckoning me home to glory. Many times in my sorrows and heartaches my mind goes back to that time, and I yet sometimes feel a consolation in meditating upon that scene and that time, and the sweet feeling I then enjoyed. I may never reach that heaven of eternal rest beyond, but I had a little taste of heaven there. It may be that all the heaven I will ever enjoy is what little rejoicing I get here in this life-but I still want to seek that peace and ensue it, even if there should be no hereafter. On Saturday night, January 4, 1890, I made my first effort to speak in the name of Jesus. That was at the home of a Brother Morris in Wayne County, Tenn. A few years back I was passing that place with my dear wife and children. We stopped and I took a look at the place, and my mind went back in meditation. It was solemn to me. On Saturday before the second Sunday in October, 1890, the church at Greenfield liberated me to speak in the name of the Master at any place my lot might be cast. Sometime after this, circumstances making it more convenient for us, our whole family moved our membership to the church at Ralston. On the sixth day of December, 1896, I was ordained to the work of the ministry at and by the authority of this church. The presbytery was composed of Elders W. W. Sammons, S. F. Cayce and K. M. Myatt, and Deacons W. I Tucker and T. P. Rawls. These were all precious and dear servants of the Lord to me. They are all gone now to that better home beyond, but I hold them in sweet and precious memory. I loved them all. I love their memory yet. I have traveled many miles, by day and by night, through heat and through cold, to try to tell the Lord's humble poor of the riches of the Master. I have tried to "count all things as loss" to try to serve the Lord and His people. I am well aware that I have made many mistakes. I have had many trials to endure. Some of the hardest trials a poor mortal could be called on to endure have been mine. When I now look back I feel that I have been able to accomplish so little that it seems my life has been almost, if not altogether, in vain. I am now past sixty-older than many of my ancestors lived to be. I realize that I am now nearing the end of the journey. My trials and troubles will soon be over. I no longer look forward to joys and pleasures in this life. I find myself now sometimes looking forward to joys beyond the river of death, beyond the grave. How will it be with me when I reach the end of the way? I do not know; but that sweet hope still lingers, and is dear to me as I pass on nearer to the end. When mother passed away she said, "Son, I will meet you over yonder in that better home." I said, "Mother, I do not know that I will be there, but I hope so." I am still hoping. Sweet hope; precious hope; glorious hope. Will it fail me in the end? It will not be long until I shall try it. I am willing, I trust, to risk it. Now, I must quit. Perhaps I have written too much. Please throw the mantle of charity over and around me, and please do remember poor me and my dear loved ones in your prayers. Will you love and cheer and care for my dear companion and children when I am gone- the dear good woman and children who have helped me to bear the many burdens for the cause of the Master? C. H. C.

THINGS APPRECIATED

January 7, 1932

We (Elder Cayce and I) wish to thank each one who so kindly remembered us with Christmas greetings. The kind words of encouragement, the many wishes for our happiness, and invoking the Lord's blessings upon us and ours, and the tokens of love are highly appreciated. The many words fitly spoken to Elder Cayce are as "apples of gold in pictures of silver;" make him feel perhaps his efforts in his Master's service have not all been in vain. A number of you are taking advantage of the Great Subscription Offer. This offer has been extended. We trust many will take advantage of this great offer. We wish to buy enough paper to do during this year. Had we not done this last January we do not know what the outcome would have been. The object in making this Great Offer is to buy enough paper now to do during 1932. By having the paper in our office we believe that we can keep the paper a weekly. We want it to keep going each week. Some of our ministers and members are trying to get the paper in each home of the membership of their church. We think that is a good plan. We believe that each reader will be benefited in some way by reading the paper. In this paper you see Elder Cayce's picture and biographical sketch. In February fourth paper we will have Elder Webb's picture and biographical sketch; in March third, Elder Newman's picture and biographical sketch. We intend to have a biographical sketch and picture in the paper once each month this year. We would like to have one each issue. The cost in getting the plates made makes us fear to try to have a picture in each issue. Will you tell your brethren, sisters and friends about this new feature, so they will send in their subscription so as not to miss any copies? We trust that you will continue to write for the paper. Please do not ask us to publish church trouble. If our own fleshly brothers or sisters err, we want to keep that to ourselves, and talk about it as little as possible. Then should not we be more cautious, and not broadcast the faults of our kindred in Christ? Write of your good meetings; of the mercies and wonderful love of our God. Praise Him in words and actions. Make your articles short and to the point. Many ask concerning Elder Cayce's health. For the last several months his health seems much improved. His general condition is much better. However, he is now (January 1) confined to his room with a slight attack of flu. Our wish for you is that the year 1932 will bring you and me closer to God, and that you may bask in the sunlight of His love and mercy. Mrs. C. H. Cayce.

THE OUTLOOK

February 4, 1932

We feel that it is due our readers that we tell them frankly what the prospect is now for us to be able to continue sending The Primitive Baptist out weekly during this year. During the last two years our subscription list has fallen off considerably, and unless our subscribers put forth extra effort right now and send us a lot of new subscribers we do not see how we are going to be able to continue the paper as a weekly through this year. We must raise enough money to meet a few outstanding bills and to buy enough paper to run through the year, if we continue as a weekly-and we must do this immediately, or within the next few weeks. Right now is the time we have to make our plans for the year -and then we have to work through the year according to those plans-unless we are able to do better or have to do worse, as unforeseen circumstances may require. Surely most of our subscribers could take advantage of the offer that is running in the paper. Surely many of our subscribers could get some new subscribers at one dollar for this one year-just half price for the paper. Will each one of you go to work right now and see what you can do during the month of February? What you all do this month will, in all probability, decide as to whether the paper may be sent on as a weekly during this year. Will you help us to continue it weekly? C. H. C.

ELDER HUTCHENS COMPLAINS

February 18, 1932

In the Lone Pilgrim (Lone Pilgrinder, as Brother Copeland calls it) Elder Hutchens, the editor, makes some complaint against a number of his subscribers. In the January issue he says: "As stated sometime ago, I have sent each subscriber who was in arrears a statement of their account. Less than half of them have answered this statement. I must say I cannot understand why so many will not answer. If I owed you, what would you expect me to do when you wrote me about it? Ignore you entirely, or tell you if I could not pay?" Well, Brother Hutchens, according to your doctrine, it is very evident that the Lord absolutely predestinated and fixed in eternity that you should send those statements out, and that less than half of them should answer. Of course, if your doctrine is the truth, God absolutely predestinated from eternity that those subscribers should be in arrears, and that they should not pay you. They could not help getting in debt to you, according to your doctrine; and then they could not help not paying you, because, according to your doctrine, God absolutely predestinated from all eternity that they should do that way. Of course, according to your doctrine, the reason why they will not answer is because God predestinated that they should not do so. We do not see why you cannot understand that-it is as simple and plain as can be. If God absolutely and unconditionally predestinated from all eternity everything that comes to pass, and unalterably fixed that all things come to pass just as they do come to pass, then God unalterably fixed that those persons should not answer your statements. But he says he cannot understand why they do not answer. Evidently he does not understand the doctrine he says he believes. It seems to us that if he believes what he says he does he would understand just why everything is the way it is. He says he believes God predestinated and fixed everything to be just as it is. If He did, then He predestinated and fixed that his subscribers should not answer his statements, and that is the reason why they do as they do. Of course. But Elder Hutchens says he cannot understand it. Of course not-who could? Elder Hutchens also says: "If each one had paid their subscription promptly I could have kept the paper in book form, and 64 pages." Certainly. But according to his doctrine, it is evidently true that God unalterably fixed it in eternity that he should not continue his paper in book form, "and 64 pages." Why complain at the subscribers about it? God is the one who so fixed and arranged and predestinated it, and now Elder Hutchens is complaining at what he says he believes. But he is complaining at the ones who had nothing whatever to do with the fixing of it, and who could not help the way it is fixed, nor could they change it if they were to try. But according to the doctrine advocated by Elder Hutchens, they could not even try, because if God fixed it that they should do what they do, then He must have also fixed it that they should not do any other way-He so arranged and fixed it that they should not even try to do any other way. If we believed as Elder Hutchens says he does, and he owed us something, and we should write him about it, we would expect him to do just as God has absolutely fixed and predestinated and arranged for him to do. That is the way your subscribers have done-if your doctrine is the truth. Elder Hutchens also says: "I cannot continue to send the paper to those who are behind indefinitely. So there must be something done about it, and to you who have not written me, I ask what you expect me to do?" We did not know that subscribers for a paper who are in arrears ever get behind indefinitely. We suppose Elder Hutchens means that he cannot continue to send the paper on indefinitely to those who are behind. Of course he cannot, unless it should be so that God has absolutely fixed and predestinated that he should do so -and in that case we are inclined to think he would do so, whether he can or not! But he asks those who have not written to him what they expected him to do. Of course, if they believe as Elder Hutchens says he does, they expect him to do just as God did in eternity predestinate, fix, and arrange for him to do. He thinks that honesty would suggest that if they cannot pay him they would write and tell him so. Then, if they do not write and tell him they cannot pay, they are not honest. But if God so predestinated and fixed that they should do that way, then God fixed it that they should not be honest. Then God is "accessory" to the fact! They would have been honest, and would have paid the elder, if God had so arranged in eternity for it to have been that way; but He arranged it to be as it is! Therefore, the dishonesty and the stealing and lying comes from God's arrangement and fixing! That's their doctrine! C. H. C.

DID NOT LIKE IT

March 10, 1932

The Primitive Baptist:

Your paper came to me some time ago, and I felt glad and thought I enjoyed reading it, insomuch I wrote a few lines of thanks for the same. So much was said about peace, I felt maybe the Lord was working through you all for peace. But, alas, when February 18 reached me and I saw how Mr. Cayce bounced on Elder Hutchens, even throwing slugs at the name of his paper, I read the piece through, and, I am sorry to say, I saw nothing like a sheep hunting a quiet pasture, but, instead, a wolf, ready to bounce on anything that is food for his pen. So I am sorry this confidence I had in you all working for peace is so soon killed. So please stop the paper. I do not care for the family to read it. Yours, H. H. Phillips. Ladell, Ark.

REMARKS

All right, Brother Phillips. According to Elder Hutchens' doctrine, we could not help it-we had to say what we did say-and you can't help it either. There is no peace to be had with the doctrine Elder Hutchens advocates. Many good brethren have been blinded and deluded by such teaching but we are glad to work for peace with any who are ready to abandon that doctrine. C. H. C.

THIRTY MISSIONARIES WAITING TO GO

April 28, 1932

We are in receipt of a clipping from a paper called The Other Sheep, which reads as follows: Thirty missionaries waiting to go to the needy fields. Why cannot they go? No money. Twelve fields calling frantically for reinforcements. No help can be sent. Why? No money. Ten missionaries who ought to be furloughed home. They cannot come. Why? No money. Ten thousand souls waiting for the salvation of Christ. It cannot be carried to them. Why? No money. Souls moving toward hell; the workers in foreign lands too few to rescue them; the missionaries at home anxious to go, yet cannot do so. Why? Lack of money. Is the money here in America? Yes. Why will not our people give it? Lack of deep interest. Sixty thousand Nazarenes omitting one meal a week for a year, at a cost of 20 cents a meal, would, if that small amount were devoted to missions, send in $600,000 in a year. Don't say "we cannot," but say rather "we will not." Poor missionaries! It is so bad that they want to go to the fields-that they are so anxious to go-and stop some of those souls who are so fast moving toward hell, and yet they cannot go. "Why? NO MONEY." What a pity that salvation is so scarce. Why is salvation so scarce now? "No money." We wonder if anybody had salvation before money was invented. Just think! The depression has been on now since 1929. The common people, and people generally, have no money. The poor "Nazarenes," as well as other poor, many of them, no doubt, have to miss more than one meal a week, even if that meal would cost no more than ten cents-and yet no salvation! What a pitiful plight we are in! If such as the above is the fact in the case, it looks to us as though the whole combined world is on the downward road to an eternal hell-and that all are going at lightning speed. The great majority have no money to give, and not many meals, either; the few who have the money are hoarding it, and will not give it, and will not turn it loose so that others might give it. The poor benighted heathen rushing toward an endless hell-and they are utterly helpless to stop; and God Himself cannot stop them. They are all going to hell on account of the fact that a few are hoarding the money. If the throne of God shines forth in justice in the ages of eternity, and the above effusion is the truth, then these hoarders, and those who will not give, will all be landed in hell with the benighted heathen. It is absurd to say that the poor heathen will suffer in an endless hell on account of this covetousness and stinginess of the American people, and the American people go free. The whole "fraternity" will go down to an eternal hell together. Thank the Lord, salvation is not hinged on such as that. "Ten thousand souls waiting for the salvation of Christ." "No money." Poor things. It seems that somebody has the salvation and the money, too. Why? Because, "Don't say 'we cannot;' but say rather 'we will not.'" There you are. If we say we cannot, then we lie, because we just "will not." Lord, help us! What blasphemy! Such as this is enough to make the angels blush! Did ever the devil himself invent a more deceitful and lying scheme to get money? It is no better than hijacking or bank robbery. It is nothing other than a scheme to beg money and to get money under false pretense. "For thus saith the Lord, Ye have sold yourselves for naught; and ye shall be redeemed without money."- Isa 52:3 "They that trust in their wealth, and boast themselves in the multitude of their riches; none of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him; (for redemption of their soul is precious, and it ceaseth for ever;) that he should still live for ever, and not see corruption."-Ps 49:6-9. If these passages of Holy Writ do not prove that men and money have nothing whatever to do with the redemption and eternal salvation of sinners, then language does not mean anything at all. "Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, who by Him do believe in God, that raised Him up from the dead, and gave Him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God."-1Pe 1:18-21. This tells the truth about the whole thing. Sinners are redeemed by the blood of Christ, and it is by Him that they believe in God; and it is by Him that they are saved. The works of men and their money are all left out of the work of salvation and deliverance from sin and its ruinous consequences. Your faith and hope are in God, and not in men and money. When will men cease to pervert the truth and to teach such blasphemous heresy? C. H. C.

SOUPY SALVATION

July 7, 1932

There will be hundreds who shall appear in the Judgment who will bless Brother Cox for this wonderful work. Much of the money to carry on the work is now coming from those who have been saved at these free lunch services. We sometimes sing, "There is power in the blood," and there is, but there is power in SOUP to get men to the blood.-Ben M. Bogard, in Baptist and Commoner, June 24, 1932. If the above does not teach a "soupy salvation," then what does it teach? "Power in SOUP to get men to the blood!" If that were not so ridiculous it would be real funny! "There will be hundreds who will appear in the Judgment who will bless Brother Cox for this wonderful work.'' Wonder how Parson Bogard found that out? It is not in the Book. By revelation John saw the finally redeemed in heaven, and heard them singing. Wonder what they sang? Was it this:"Unto the name of Cox be glory, honor, majesty, might and dominion, because he brought salvation to us through the SOUP route?"But we suppose John did not know about the soup business. The Lord did not reveal to him the fact that sinners could be brought to the blood of Christ and made the recipients of the merits of that blood by pouring soup into their bellies-so it seems. Perhaps these modern fellows have taught the Lord something that He did not know when John was on the Isle of Patmos. If the Lord would give us another Book it would have all these modern"scientific"ways of getting sinners to the blood of Christ set forth in it -perhaps. Of course, until the Lord does give us another Book having such blasphemous tomfoolery in it, those of us who are"old-fogy,"and who rely on the teaching of the Book God has given us, will have to still go on believing that the Lord does not need to have Cox, or Bogard, or others, to feed SOUP to people in order that He reach them with the blood of Christ. It seems to us that a man can get to the blood of Christ just about as easy through the water of baptism as though a bowl of SOUP. If this does not put things together"for your whiskers,"we never saw it done! SOUP and salvation connected together! Get salvation down the poor fellows by feeding it to them in their soup! Several years ago, at the time of the Boxer uprising in China, the missionaries in that country called for help from the"home lands"asking for their soldiers to be sent to China. We suppose they wanted the soldiers to subdue the unwilling Chinese; and if they would not be subdued, then shoot holes through them to let in the light of the gospel, or to shoot salvation into them with their guns. Of course that would be a severe way of saving those heathen Chinamen. But over in Memphis, Tenn., according to Mr. Bogard, the Rt. Rev. Mr. Cox, D. D., has a more humane way of saving the"down and outers.'' Mr. Cox just feeds salvation to them in their SOUP. We have been aware, for years, that properly made and prepared soup was pleasant to the taste, and was good to fill the stomach-but, wonder of wonders!-here is a new use for soup! Feed 'em SOUP, and thereby give 'em eternal salvation and save 'em from eternal perdition! What will these fellows say next? C. H. C.

THE LONE "PILGRINDER"

September 15, 1932

The "Lone Pilgrinder" has suspended publication, having been consolidated with "Sovereign Grace," a paper recently being published in California. We note in that paper for August this statement, in part: "Because of financial conditions of the Lone Pilgrim Elder Hutchens has seen fit to combine our two papers. A more detailed article will appear (D. V) in the September No." From this notice it seems that the "Pilgrinder'' will grind no more pills. We saw some complaints in the "Pilgrinder" before it suspended publication about the subscribers not paying up. We suppose, according to their doctrine, that God absolutely and unconditionally predestinated from all eternity that the subscribers should take the paper and not pay for it, and that Elder Hutchens should complain about it, and that the said paper should suspend publication. Brother Hutchens, you have our sincere sympathy, and may the good Lord have mercy on all who advocate such doctrine. C. H. C.

REMARKS TO GEO. W. LANGFORD

December 22, 1932

We are of the opinion that sometimes people may lay too much stress on some of the exercises mentioned by Brother Langford in the foregoing article. A Christian experience does not necessarily mean that the person agonizes for perhaps months or years, and then has a miraculous deliverance from his troubles. One does not have to have such an experience and be able to remember and tell all about it in order to be a child of God, or to be born from above. To be a child of God is to have been born of God, born from above. Brother Langford, you do not remember when you were born into this natural realm. The very first natural thought or emotion you ever had, you had already been born into this natural realm. Natural emotion springs from the natural life. Spiritual emotion springs from the spiritual life. Just as sure as you have ever had a spiritual emotion, just that sure you already had the spiritual life. You may not remember when you were born into the spiritual realm any more than you can remember when you were born into the natural realm. Remembering and knowing these things is no more necessary in the one case than in the other. John the Baptist was given to leap for joy by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit before his natural birth into this world. Brother Langford, do you suppose John the Baptist could tell such an experience as some tell in their writings? We are sure he could not. But he could love the Master and could love the truth and righteousness just as well as the Apostle Paul could. And he was a child of God, and heaven was his home; all the joys of heaven are his. God is as able to regenerate an unborn infant as an adult, and to plant His love in their hearts. He regenerated John the Baptist before he was born into this world. So with one of the prophets. When the children of Israel were delivered from Egyptian bondage there were many men able to bear arms, besides women and children, brought to the Red Sea. The enemy was in pursuit, and there seemed to be no way of escape. The sea was before them, and a mountain on either side. They were entirely hedged in. The Israelites began to complain at Moses, and to say, "Why did you not leave us in Egypt to die, where we might have had graves to be buried in? Why did you bring us into the wilderness to die?" Moses answered, "Stand still, and see the salvation of God; for the enemy that thou seest today, thou shalt see no more forever." Then Moses stretched his rod over the waters and they were divided, and the Israelites marched through as by dry land. The waters went back together and drowned the Egyptians who had essayed to follow. Then the children of Israel sang the song of deliverance on the other side of the sea. They journeyed forty years in the wilderness before they crossed over Jordan into the promised land. When they had journeyed thirty years in the wilderness those who were in their infancy and in their mother's arms when they reached the Red Sea were grown to manhood and womanhood. They could not remember when they came to the Red Sea; they could not remember the complaint made to Moses; they could not remember seeing the enemy in pursuit; they could not remember seeing the waters divided; they could not remember the march through the sea; they could not remember the song of deliverance on the bank of the sea-they could not remember any of these things and tell about them. But there was something they could do. They could praise God for their deliverance just as well as those who could remember those things and tell all about them. They could love the Lord as well as the others could. So, you, dear brother, if you cannot remember and tell all about these things-you can love the Lord as well as those who can tell the things you speak of them telling. Do you love the Lord? This is an unmistakable evidence for you that you are born from above-heaven-born and heaven-bound. "Every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God."- 1Jo 4:7. Do you love the Lord's children? This is the very best evidence one can have that he is a child of God. "We know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren."- 1Jo 3:14. Does the gospel come to you in power, and in much assurance? "Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God. For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance."-1Th 1:4-5. How much better evidence do you want than these? May the Lord's richest blessings rest upon you. C. H. C.

CLOSE OF VOLUME XLVII

December 22, 1932

This issue closes the forty-seventh volume of The Primitive Baptist. Another year is drawing to a close -and another New Year will soon usher in. The passing year has been one of much distress. Thousands are suffering for food and shelter, and yet we are in the midst of plenty. Our legislative authorities are dillydallying in matters which concern money lenders and the money powers, instead of doing the things necessary to open up markets for our surplus products, and thereby give relief, and open work for the poor producers and unemployed. Crime is still on the increase. Governments-county, state and national-are on the verge of bankruptcy. Many of the professed followers of the lowly Jesus are careless and indifferent about the service of the Lord. They let the service of the Lord and the things which concern their spiritual welfare and well-being come in as a matter of the last and least concern. Many of them "cannot afford" a few pennies for reading matter for their spiritual comfort and benefit-but do they let worldly matters be of more concern? Should we economize in church and spiritual matters first? Or, should that be the last? Well, things still look dark and gloomy to us in many respects. But with us the battle will soon be over. We have been "in the field" a number of years now, and the end of this present year is just one more year's battles fought, trials endured, sorrows ended, and difficulties surmounted or gone around, and brings us that much nearer to an honorable discharge from the warfare. Our wife has been confined to her room and bed with an attack of flu for a little more than a week, but is now better and able to sit up some. Please remember her and us in your prayers. There will be no paper next week, as we always skip one week at Christmas time. We now bid you all adieu for the year 1932, praying the Lord's richest blessings may rest upon every reader, and desiring an interest in your prayers when you go to the throne of grace. C. H. C.

1933

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME XLVIII

January 5, 1933

We now begin the forty-eighth volume of The Primitive Baptist. We are facing another new year, with its joys and sorrows, its pleasures and disappointments. We need renewed energy and strength for the battles of life, just as much as we ever did. Although these are trying times-such times as try men's souls-yet we have all been wonderfully blessed. Our hearts should be filled with gratitude and thankfulness to God that matters are as well with us as they are. We have been blessed to send this paper out during the past year without missing a single issue, and without reducing the size of the paper for any one issue. Just as we promised at the beginning of the year, we sent out 816 pages of reading matter during the year 1932. We cannot promise that for this year. Many of our subscribers during the past two years have had their names dropped from the list. Many have written us to stop their paper, as they were not able to pay for it. We wish we were able to give the paper to all who are really not able to pay for it, but we cannot do that. We do give it to many-a great many-and would be glad to give it to many more. When we have done all we can, we can do no more. If we have no subscribers for the paper during these hard times, we will have no paper to send out when times do get better-and they surely will get better some day. We do not believe that these hard times are altogether the work of Satan. We believe the Lord is suffering these times as a chastisement for some people. He scourges His people for their sins and wickedness, and He scourges nations for their wickedness. It seems that almost the entire civilized world is in distress-the depression is almost world-wide. When the chastisement has been sufficient then it will stop. We do not know when that will be. Do you? Let us try to trust the Lord and mend our ways. Let us all be more devoted to Him and to His service. Let us try to serve and help one another. He will not forsake His humble followers. "Trust in the Lord, and do good; so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed."-

Ps 37:1 and 2Co 6:17, they excluded from their fellowship those guilty of immoral, unscriptural or disorderly conduct. They debarred or excluded from fellowship persons who sold spirituous liquors; those who drank to excess; those who borrowed money and did not repay it; those who married irreligious and disorderly companions; those who did not treat their companions with proper love and kindness; those who told lies; those who swore; and those guilty of unchastity. Upon thoroughly satisfactory proof of heartfelt repentance, the churches were rejoiced to restore excluded members again to fellowship. They silenced preachers for improper conduct which was not thought to be so gross as to demand their exclusion; and, upon proper repentance, restored to them the privilege of exercising their gifts in public.

Some of the churches observed the Lord's supper weekly, but most of them monthly. Singing was not commonly practiced; and when engaged in, it was only at the close of the meeting, so that all opposed to it could freely go out, and the church would not be offended. * * * A very few churches observed the washing of feet; but this was placed among the things indifferent, and was never made a bar to fellowship. Some churches had a love feast before the Lord's supper. On page 845 we find the following: As to feet washing-This appears to be an open question among Baptists, some approving and others disapproving the literal observance as a church ordinance or rite, and all getting along harmoniously together. * * * Some of the Kehukee churches have never observed it at all; others have occasionally observed it upon motion of someone in conference, and attended to it during some week day at the meetinghouse, or at some private house at night, and this at long intervals. Others observe it annually, and connect it with communion or the Lord's supper; while others repeat it quarterly, and in every instance connect it with communion, which almost invariably occurs on Sunday, after the preaching services are ended. In a footnote at the bottom of the same page Elder Sylvester Hassell says: It is the final result of all my researches among the Old School or Primitive Baptists of the United States that about one-half do, and one-half do not, practice the washing of feet as a church ordinance or rite. On page 846 we read: This irregularity, we must confess, shows more difference among orthodox Baptists than all other practices or observances adhered to by them put together. Some are ready to conclude on the account of this diversity that they are not one people; that they are divided and cannot walk together. But this is a wrong conclusion; they are one people still, and do not allow the observance or non-observance of this rite to affect their fellowship with each other. The churches composing the Kehukee Association will perhaps represent, on this subject, all the churches in the United States, some engaging in the practice of feet washing more or less, and others not at all. We conclude, therefore, if the discordant views on this subject have not broken fellowship among the dear children of God for the last hundred years, that they never will; and that the faithful in Christ Jesus will continue to press onward, hand in hand together, "toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus," through the remaining portion of the Christian dispensation. It would be deplorable and contrary to ancient usage among Baptists if any one or more should at any time hereafter, on either side of the question, set up a bar of communion between themselves and those who differ with them on this subject. Such a dogmatical or dictatorial spirit should not be encouraged or even tolerated in the household of faith. It would look selfish and out of place. We would be glad if all our brethren could see this matter alike and all would engage in the practice of it. But it would look bad for us to set up a bar of non-fellowship against brethren who have been fellow-shipped and loved and esteemed in the Baptist family all the years of the past. We are not ready yet to say that we are "the standard," and that all must come to our view or be read out of the denomination. May the Lord lead us all to have forbearance and to love one another. C. H. C.

HOW TO ORGANIZE

October 19, 1933

We have been requested to say through the paper how churches should proceed to organize an association. As we understand the matter, there is not much to do. A church may invite sister churches to meet with her by messengers to consider the advisability of organizing an association. If the churches see proper to go into such an organization they may meet at a place and time agreed on for the purpose. The constitution, if they wish to have one, may be submitted to the several churches for their approval, with the articles of faith and rules of decorum. Then when they assemble for the constitution, they may adopt the constitution, articles of faith and rules of decorum which the churches have approved of, proceed to elect their officers and proceed with their business. It seems to us that this would be all that would be necessary. Some associations have too much of a constitution, we think. It seems to us that the different churches meeting by messengers with another church for mutual worship, and have as little business as possible, would be for the best. C. H. C.

PAPERS MISSED

November 30, 1933

Circumstances over which we had no control made it necessary for us to skip several issues of this paper. We failed to get out any paper for October 12 and 26 and for November 9. We have mailed the issue for November 19. This writing is being done the 21st. We will get out no paper for the 23rd. This writing will be in the issue of November 30. Circumstances are such that we will have to skip every other week for the remainder of the year. It is possible that we will have to continue on this way through next year. From the time that the NRA proposition began to be put before the public, we have been carefully studying its workings and the propositions for the codes, and so on. It soon became very plain to us that we could not observe the code and continue to publish The Primitive Baptist. Some of the requirements were such as to make it impossible for us to get the paper out weekly, as we had been doing, and to observe the code. The code required a reduction in work hours to forty hours per week for all employees. We were working the employees only forty-five hours per week. We were paying most every employee the same rate per hour that we paid in 1929. The only reduction we had made was a reduction in the number of hours per week to forty-five. As we had five employees, besides ourself and wife, a reduction in work hours to forty per week would leave us short twenty-five hours per week. The code also required a raise in the rate of pay on some of the employees. We were sure we could not get a printer to move here to live when we could give him only twenty-five hours work each week. This was a problem we saw facing us. This condition made it seem impossible to us to continue to get the paper out every week. So we have skipped the weeks as above stated. It is simply impossible for us to cut down the number of hours and increase salaries and continue to get the paper out. It could not possibly mean anything else but failure, and for the paper to go down. It caused us no little worry and anxiety. The only thing we could see to do was the one step we took. We laid off every employee after the issue for October 5 was mailed. Since then we have had our type set on a machine in an office in another town and your editor and wife have been doing the work of getting the paper out, except that a few times we have had Brother Webb to run the press and some others to help do the mailing. The editor and wife will have to get the paper out. We have been getting out another edition of the Good Old Songs, and have been giving the employees some extra work on that job. We have been working code hours and paying them what we understood to be the code price, though we have not signed any code. We saw no alternative only to put our work where the code would not apply. The owner may work as many hours as he pleases; but his hired help in the plant must work only eight hours a day and only five days a week. This is making the books cost us more than they would have cost us otherwise. We are sure that every employee we had would be glad to go back on the regular job at the same rate of pay they were getting; but we are afraid to do that. The government steps in and says we shall pay so much and work so many hours. If this is not dictatorship, then you may give it what name you please. It seems to us that the probabilities are that we will have to continue as we are doing next year-at least, for a part of the year. We are sorry this is so, but we see no other way now. Our subscription list has been falling off for three or four years. It is less now than it has been for years. Not only so, but we have been offering the paper at greatly reduced prices. Many of the subscribers have renewed at the price of only one dollar for the year. How in the world could we increase the pay to the employees, and reduce the price of the paper-or take subscriptons at reduced rates-and continue to send the paper out weekly? We feel sure that our subscribers will see the utter impossibility of us doing so. If those who have been working with us in the office are not employed elsewhere we would be glad to put them back to work as soon as conditions will permit. We regret to give any of them up from the work. But we have been forced to take this step by reason of the existing conditions. We trust the subscribers will bear with us, and all will put forth an extra effort right now to help us increase the list, and get it back to where it has been, so we can get back to a weekly again and put these people back to work in the office. And do not forget that your renewal and new subscriptions will be appreciated. C. H. C.

CLOSE OF VOLUME XLVIII

December 28, 1933

This issue of The Primitive Baptist brings us to the close of another volume-volume forty-eight. For forty-eight years the paper has been published, without any suspension or change of hands or ownership, except from father to son. The way has sometimes been rough and rocky. There have been trials and conflicts, and many dark and dismal scenes. Yet in the midst of them all, the Lord has been good and kind and merciful; and by His help we continue to this day. There have been many changes during these years. Many changes have come even during the past year- the year that is now just drawing to a close. The future still remains dark. We cannot tell what the future holds in store for us. We trust that we can adopt the sentiment contained in this quotation from Paul: "And now, behold, I go bound in the spirit unto Jerusalem, not knowing the things that shall befall me there; save that the Holy Ghost witnesseth in every city, saying that bonds and afflictions abide me. But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God."-Ac 20:22-24. The past few years have been severe. These are times that try men's souls. The "depression" has been as trying on us, perhaps, as on many others. We tried our best to keep the paper going weekly; but it finally came to where we could see no possible way to continue to do that. The NRA codes put requirements in them that we could not possibly meet or comply with and get the paper out every week. We have already made some explanation of that. The way things look to us now it seems that we will have to continue as we are now- sending the paper out every other week, or perhaps, twice a month. In connection with the increase in cost which compliance with the codes would bring us, our subscription list has continued to fall off for the past three or four years, and it is now less than it has been for twenty years. We have tried during the past year or two to hold the subscribers on the list at most any price they felt able to pay, and still they have continued to drop off the list. We have tried to be hopeful that things would be better, and we still hope-rather, we are wishing they be better. The next issue of the paper will be due January 11, 1934, when we hope to greet you with the beginning of another volume and in the new year. We wish for all our readers a merry Christmas and a happy New Year. May heaven's richest blessings be yours to enjoy, is our humble prayer. C. H. C.

1934

INTRODUCTION TO VOLUME XLIX

January 11, 1934

We now begin the publication of the forty-ninth volume of The Primitive Baptist. The past forty-eight years have wrought many changes. Perhaps there are very few subscribers on our list now who were subscribers when the first issue was sent out from Fulton, Ky., by our sainted father. If there is one on the list now who was on the list then, we would be glad to hear from him. Let us hear from every one of you who were on the list then. Have you seen any change in the doctrine contended for in our columns now and then? Is the paper not advocating the same principles now that it was then? There have been great improvements in some things, but there has been no improvement in, or on, the doctrine of God our Saviour. The principles of truth are the same now that they have ever been. Why should we turn from those principles now? We greet you with renewed hope and trust and confidence in the Lord in this, the beginning of a new volume of The Primitive Baptist. Other things fail; but the Lord has never failed. All His precious promises are sure. Although there have been trying times during the past few years, yet the Lord has promised to never leave nor forsake. "When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; and through the rivers, they shall not overflow thee: when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burned; neither shall the flame kindle upon thee."-Isa 43:2. This is God's promise, and it is as sure today as when it was first made. We have been passing through some trying times, but we feel that the Lord has preserved and kept us to the present. We feel that we are under renewed obligations to Him for His rich and wonderful blessings; and we are under renewed obligations to our subscribers for the help they have been in the past in supporting the paper. We have made mistakes in the past. We do not promise that we will do better in the future; but we will promise to try. We now promise to try to do more writing for the paper this year than last. We have had so much more good matter for the paper than we had space for, and still have many good articles that we do not have room for, that we felt like it would be better to give preference to the writings of others than to take space for our own poor writings. But many have asked us to write more ourselves. Well, we will try to do that this year. Now, brethren and sisters, we need your co-operation to make the paper what we desire it to be. The way we are having to work in the office ourselves to get the paper out, it is impossible for us to get out among the brethren and ask them to subscribe for the paper. Our brethren can be a great help to us in this way. Will you please not forget to ask the brethren and friends where you go to subscribe for the paper? Will you offer to take the subscription and send to us? We will appreciate this, and you have no idea how much help it would be. At present we will have to continue getting the paper out only every other week. We do not make this as a permanent change; but it is at present only temporary, and is the very best we can promise to do. As soon as circumstances will admit, and as soon as we can do so, it is our desire to again send the paper out every week. Please do all you can to help to that end, and remember us in your prayers. C. H. C.

LOOKING BACKWARD

January 25, 1934

We suppose that when one begins to look backward he begins to go backward; he does things backward- begins at the wrong place and in the wrong way to get the thing done that he tries to do. So, here we begin this little article in the wrong way. It is all backward. Sometimes we wish we could never look backward. Then again we wish we could spend all our time looking backward. Jesus said, "No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God."-Lu 9:62. We have no desire to look back in that way. That is not the kind of looking back we sometimes desire to do. We do sometimes desire to look back and meditate upon some of the things we have experienced and some of the delightful seasons we have had in the journey through life. Many things we have experienced and many seasons we have passed through we wish we could forget. We have no desire to look back upon them or to meditate upon them. They bring sorrow and sadness to our poor heart. For about a year, or nearly a year, our wife has been wanting us to write a little article about the time and place when and where we made our first effort to speak in the name of the Master. We suppose we have to look back a little to do that. And we have made the start at last to comply with her request-and have begun backward-the wrong way. As evidence that we have begun in the wrong way we have given you evidence of how hard it is sometimes for her to get us to do what she wants us to do. Well, sometimes it just seems everything we go at is done in the wrong way. If you get nothing out of this, perhaps it will satisfy the good wife, who is always alert to look after our welfare, and who does everything in her power to help us along in our struggles. That is worth while-to give her satisfaction-if no other good comes from our little effort. She has our picture in this issue, made from a photograph which was taken when we were about eighteen years of age. We were eighteen years of age on June 1, 1889. If we are not mistaken the photograph was taken during the year 1889. Our first effort to speak in the name of the Lord was on Saturday night, January 4, 1890, at the home of an old Sister Morris, near Waynesboro, in Wayne County, Tenn. The ministers present were Elders S. F. Cayce, our sainted father, J. P. Pilkington, and M. L. Rhodes. Elder Pilkington is still living. At that time he lived near the home of the Sister Morris. We do not know what became of Elder Rhodes, but think he passed away several years ago. As most of our readers know, our dear father passed over the river in August, 1905. We believe there are very few living who were present there that night. In this paper is a picture of the old house where we made this first effort to preach. We stood in the corner of the room to the right. Notice the old-fashioned "porch." There is a hall between the two front rooms. Going into the hall, the service was held in the room to the right. We stood in the corner of the room between the window and the door into the hall. Notice in the picture the window near the shadow from the porch. We stood near that window. Our father and the other ministers were seated near that window. With great fear and trembling we arose to introduce the service and to try to speak. While we live and retain our memory we will not forget the song we selected and the text we tried to use. The song was a favorite with us then, and is yet. It was that good old song, which is always new, "Amazing Grace." The Scripture we read, and from which we tried to speak for a few minutes, was this: "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast."-Eph 2:8-9. The doctrine of salvation by grace was loved by us then, in our youth, and it is the doctrine we yet love. We realized and knew then that aside from salvation by grace there could be no salvation for us, and we yet know the same. We learned this in our youth-when about eight years of age; and, if not deceived, at about thirteen years of age, we were blessed with a good hope, through grace, that we would be enabled, prepared and permitted, by grace, to meet the dear Lord in peace beyond this life of sin and trouble. We were satisfied then with the doctrine of grace. We were satisfied with the goodness of God's house. We wanted nothing in the house of the Lord which He did not place there; and we wanted nothing left unused which He had placed there. We were satisfied with the church and her principles and practices then; and we are satisfied with them yet. There is a brother now living, who is a deacon indeed -a precious brother to us; a faithful and devoted member of Fuller's Chapel, in North Little Rock, a church we have been trying, to serve for several years-who was present at the home where and when we made this first effort. It is Brother G. L. Pilkington, a son of Elder J. P. Pilkington. He heard this first poor effort. He has heard us many times since at the little church in North Little Rock. When we made that first effort we thought we had ruined everything, and that we would never try again. We felt that this was not only our first, but that it was also our last. But we could find no peace or satisfaction without trying again. Much against our will in the matter the church at Greenfield, Tenn., liberated us on Saturday before the second Sunday in October, 1890, to exercise our gift at any place where God, in His providence, might cast our lot. If we remember correctly the motion was made by Brother J. W. Tillman (Uncle Joe, as he was familiarly called). He was a faithful and true man of God, and a faithful deacon. Brother F. M. Campbell was clerk of the church. We do not remember whether he had been ordained to the office of deacon at that time or not; but he has been a true Primitive Baptist, we think, and has filled the office of deacon well. Brother Tillman has long since gone to his long eternal home. Brother Campbell is still living and is still a member of the same old church. Not many who were living and members then are living now. Most of them are gone to a better country. Brother Campbell, we know you are older now than you were then. We are both getting old now. It will not be long until the battles and struggles and trials and conflicts will all be over. You will soon enjoy that sweet and eternal rest for which you have been hoping through all these years. We still love you, and you will have a warm place in our heart while this life lasts. May the good Lord manifest His sweet presence to you in your last days, is our humble prayer. We often think of the sweet delights we had in those days of the long ago. Sometimes there are a few of those days we wish we could live over again. Much of our life has been in sadness and trouble. We have no desire to live over that part of it. Well, we have written what we have written. If you get any good from it, you are welcome to it. May heaven's richest blessings rest upon each of you, is our humble prayer. The day is far spent. Will you all please remember us in your prayers? Pray the Lord to help us to remain true to the principles that characterized His church as being different from and not of the world when we made our first effort to speak in His precious and glorious name, and which have been the same in all ages of the world. C. H. C.

ANOTHER ARTICLE

In the same issue of the paper with the foregoing article was another article written by Brother G. L. Pilkington, who was then a deacon in Fuller's Chapel, North Little Rock, under the same heading. Wife had told him about the above article, and asked him to write some in connection with it, as he was present and heard our first discourse. Since January, 1934, Brother Pilkington has been ordained to the work of the ministry. Wife wishes his article to be in this book, following the above article; so we insert it here. C. H. C.

THE ARTICLE

Elder C. H. Cayce:

My Precious Brother-Looking back over my life I sometimes wonder that I have not been consumed with its cares; and then I can truthfully say, as did one of old that "surely goodness and mercy hath followed me all the days of my life." I will not take up space in this letter to try to tell you of my travels from nature's night and darkness into the marvelous light of the children of God-if indeed I have ever traveled that road; but will say that there came a time in my life when I felt to be a poor lost and justly condemned sinner in the sight of God; felt that I had sinned away my day of grace, and that there was no hope in heaven and immortal glory for me. But, to my great joy, there also came a time in my life when this burden of sin was rolled away, and, if not deceived in the whole matter, Jesus was revealed to me as my personal Saviour, and I was enabled to rejoice in a Saviour's love. Since that time my hope has seemed so small at times that I would think of laying it aside and not claim it any more. But about the time I would get ready to cast it aside my mind would go back to the spot where I first felt that God, for Christ's sake, had pardoned my sins, and I would again be enabled to rejoice in the love of God my Saviour. So I have been first in the valley, then on the hilltop; in the valley, and on the hilltop all these years. But I would not exchange the sweet hope I have, which reaches beyond the grave, for all the wealth of this world. Looking backward I so well remember that while laboring under this great load of sin I heard you preach your first gospel sermon, to the joy of the children of God assembled for worship. No doubt you had preached in your mind before this. I know you remember the occasion better than I; but it was at the home of old "Grandma" (Polly) Morris, in Wayne County, Tenn., on Saturday night, January 4, 1890. Three Primitive Baptist preachers were present-your sainted father. Elder S. F. Cayce; my father, Elder J. P. Pilkington; and Elder M. L. Rhodes. I remember while you were so sweetly preaching Jesus how the tears of joy were running down the cheeks of those there assembled; and I remember thinking, "Oh, if I was as good as that boy.'' Dear brother, I can say something just here that no other living person can say-I heard your first sermon, and I heard your last, to date, which was Sunday, January 21, 1934, and you preached the same doctrine in your last sermon that you preached in your first, giving God all the power and all the glory for the eternal salvation of poor sinners, and admonishing those who are thus eternally saved to walk in humble obedience to the commands of their Lord and Master, thereby missing many pitfalls in this life. And by the power of those glorious truths you have preached, by the power of that God you have been proclaiming for over forty-four years, we will be brought from the grave, and be wafted on the wings of God's eternal love to that home where there will be no more sad partings. And when you have preached your last sermon, and prayed your last prayer, I know you can say, as did Paul, "I have finished my course; I have fought a good fight; I have kept the faith. Henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day." I could write on and on, but will close by saying, may the Lord spare you many more years to speak, from pulpit and press, comfortably to Jerusalem; "cry unto her that her warfare is accomplished, that her iniquity is pardoned, and that she hath received at the Lord's hand double for all her sins." Written with a feeling of weakness and unworthiness, by one who dearly loves you for the truth's sake. Give our love to Sister Cayce and the children, and the brethren and sisters at Thornton. In humble hope, G. L. Pilkington. 1510 Chandler St., North Little Rock, Ark.

GOING TO THE "BOWWOWS"

January 25, 1934

When you hear an Old Baptist preacher talking as if he thinks the old church is going to the "bowwows," you can put it down in your book that he is getting ready to go somewhere himself. Such men usually "go to the dogs" themselves. Remember the case of Strickland, Hackleman, Todd, and the Kirklands. They went to the Missionaries. C. H. C.

GETTING MIXED

February 8, 1934

It seems to us that some brethren are getting some things rather mixed over east of the Mississippi River. It seems that nearly a year ago Elder W. A. Bishop introduced some practices into his church in Jackson, Tenn., which Primitive Baptists have never endorsed and have not been accustomed to, which resulted in his withdrawal, with some others, who met at Elder Bishop's home and organized a church on a more "liberal" plan. Some of the things objected to were the use of a Campbellite song book and a Sunday school. Of course, Elder Bishop and those with him did not call it a Sunday school. They never call the thing that when they first introduce it. It is usually called a Bible class, or some other name thought to be less offensive; but it always turns out to be the same fox. It appears from a clipping from the Weakley County Press, Martin, Tenn., of March 17, 1933, that Elder Cayce Pentecost, of Dresden, assisted in the organization of this church. A statement from Elder Bishop in a Jackson paper of March 20, 1933, says: The minority of the members that attended church brought certain charges against the majority and demanded that certain practices must be stopped and removed. The objections were set out as practicing Bible study at the church on each Lord's Day, singing religious hymns from a little song book called "Wonderful Songs," and passing the collection plates, when receiving the Lord's Day offerings. We were not satisfied to separate ourselves from these practices and rather than be in confusion and continue strife in the church we asked for letters of dismissal in order that we might organize ourselves into a church where we could worship our Lord according to the dictates of our own conscience and in the light of God's revealed word. This shows, of itself, what brought their trouble and the division. All people who know anything about Primitive Baptists know that they do not have Sunday schools, and that they are opposed to them. They are foreign to God's word, and the thing is an invention of men. The first Sunday school was instituted by Robert Raikes, in Gloucester, England, as all historians know, for the purpose of teaching the children of the poor to read and write. Some years later it was adopted by the churches of the world as a nursery for the church, and to teach and train children so that they might be made children of God-to bring them into a higher order of life by training and teaching. Some have claimed that they may be so taught from their infancy that they may never become sinners, but be saved without the necessity of regeneration on account of such training and teachings. The introduction of such a thing in the church is clearly a flagrant departure from the principles and practices of the Primitive Baptists. Well, from another Tennessee paper we see under date of August 1, that "Elder Harry Todd, the noted Dresden preacher, is preaching for the Primitive Baptist meeting at Greenfield. Also Elders Cayce Pentecost and A. B. Ross are to be present. Large crowds and fine interest." This item is dated from Brock's Chapel, August 1. We also have a clipping from a Tennessee paper stating that a Primtive Baptist revival will begin in Dresden, it seems, "on the fourth Sunday in August, and Elder Harry A. Todd, well known and popular evangelist, will assist the pastor." Another clipping, headed "Meeting at Palmersville," says that "the days of meeting at the Palmersville Primitive Baptist Church will begin the third Sunday in August. Elder Bishop, of Jackson, will assist the pastor, Elder Miller." Before we left Tennessee this church was not recognized as being an orderly Primitive Baptist Church-if this is the same church which was there when we left there, and we have not heard of it going down or being moved or getting in line with the churches in that section. That church was in line with the Kirklands in their departures from Primitive Baptist doctrine and practice. The Elder Todd is the noted Elder Todd who went to the Missionaries several years ago, along with the Kirklands, Strickland, Hackleman, and others. Instead of being restored where he lost his identity he was received by South College Street Church, Nashville, Tenn., and that church has been dropped from the roll of churches in the Cumberland Association on this account. We understand that Elder Harry has a son who was also with the Missionaries, and that he was also received by that church in Nashville. Wonder if he has been ordained yet? We understand that he is also a preacher. Elder Todd stayed with the Missionaries a long time. Wonder if he is satisfied now with the old doctrine and order of the Primitive Baptists. We see, also, that one of our exchanges still has the name of Elder Bishop on the editorial staff. Wonder if the editor approves of such a mixture as this? It seems to us that it is about time for somebody to call a halt. The Primitive Baptists, long ago, spoke out against these progressive measures. Such things are a departure from the order of God's house. If allowed to spread they will only cause the more trouble. It is strange to us that preachers will try to introduce such departures in the Old Baptist Church. If a man endorses such things it would be commendable for him to leave the Old Baptists and go where they are, and where they are endorsed, and then stay there, and let the Old Baptists alone. Why trouble them with such "progressive" measures? Why introduce such things among them as they have never practiced, and which they have always condemned? We wish the brethren would let such things alone, and let the old church go on in peace. Remember that when there is a division in the church that the party who is responsible for the division is the party who has the things that caused the division. Progressive measures and things foreign to the original doctrine and practice of the church being introduced by Wm. Carey and Andrew Fuller caused a division then, and from those measures sprang the Fullerites, commonly called Missionary Baptists. Such will always bring strife, confusion and division in the church. If you do not want a division, and do not want to be responsible for one, then let those things severely alone which the church has always rejected. May the good Lord help us all to continue in "the good old way," to "ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein," is our humble prayer. We have not written this with any feeling or degree of malice or with a view to strife, but from a feeling sense of duty to give the cry of alarm, and to utter a note of warning. C. H. C.

PERVERSE RULERS

February 22, 1934

For quite awhile we have felt that it was our duty to make some reference to the new publication appearing from Birmingham, Ala., called The Independent Primitive Baptist, and some few things contained in the copies we have seen. The sheet is being sent out by Elder N. P. Vandiver, who is excluded from Beulah Church, in the Birmingham district. Elder Z. C. Hull has been connected with the paper, but we have the information that he has severed his connection with it and also severed his connection with Elder Vandiver. It is painful to us to refer to these matters, but it seems to us that the cause demands that we make mention of the same. We have before us a copy of this paper of September 15, 1933. On page 3 is an article from Elder J. H. Veach, from which we wish to make a quotation, as follows: I was born and reared by Old Baptist parents, but "tradition and custom,'' together, caused by unruly and ungodly men and women caused my mother and father many days and years of deep sorrow and grief; and that being the history of most true, honest people among the Old School or Primitive Baptists, I have come to a complete halt between two opinions; if the Lord be God, serve Him! if Baal be God, serve him. My experience with the Primitive Baptists in the six states where I have been connected with them in a church way, is that they are and will be ruled by men of perverse minds, who have risen up in our own ranks (Primitive Baptist). The main leaders are men of supposed pre-eminence, and I have come to this conclusion, that there is no use to try to reform the church back to the apostolic doctrine and practice under such leadership. There are several charges in this little space above which we wish to notice and to call attention to. 1. The deep sorrow and grief brought to the father and mother by the traditions and customs among the Primitive Baptists. 2. These traditions and customs were caused or brought by unruly and ungodly men and women. 3. Hence, the traditions and customs among the Primitive Baptists are ungodly, as coming from ungodly men and women. Their customs are not of God, and are unauthorized by the Scriptures. This follows as a conclusion and result of the charges made by Brother Veach. Next: The above is the history of most true and honest people among the Primitive Baptists. This necessarily means that not many people among the Primitive Baptists are true and honest; and that most of those who are true and honest are not satisfied, but are grieved and in deep sorrow on account of the conditions which prevail with the church and in the church as a whole. It is true that untrue and unfaithful men creep in. It is true that some come in to"spy out our liberty."It is true that some get among us who are not satisfied with"the good old way,'' and bring trouble and distress among us. But such men are not the body as a whole. "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which He hath purchased with His own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them."-Ac 20:28-30. Brother Veach, will you let us kindly admonish you to take heed to the admonition and instruction given in this by the inspired apostle? Will you take heed? This quotation from the apostle tells us that men of our own selves will arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. They draw away disciples from the church. But the church stays on the same old "traditions and customs." The unruly and ungodly men are not the church. They are the few who creep in and destroy the peace and fellowship of the brotherhood, as much as is in their power. But Brother Veach charges that his experience with the Primitive Baptists in six states is that they are ruled by men of perverse minds. We beg to differ. The Primitive Baptists ARE NOT RULED BY MEN OF PERVERSE MINDS. Occasionally some men of perverse minds get among us and TRY TO RULE; but they fail. Their disposition is to rule or ruin. As it is impossible for any man or set of men to rule the church of God, then they try to ruin. They usually succeed in drawing away some disciples after them. When they succeed in doing that, then the church is left in peace for a season-until another man of like character gets among them and begins his nefarious work. Elder Veach says the main leaders are men of supposed pre-eminence. We wonder if he did not get mixed on his words in that expression. Perhaps he meant to say "men of supposed prominence." We may have some good and true men among us who are men of prominence-and we do have them. But we do not have men of pre-eminence. That word means "superiority in rank, position, excellence, etc.; distinction above others in quality, rank, etc." We do not have any among us who are above others in rank. "All ye are brethren."-Mt 23:8. Primitive Baptists acknowledge only one as having the pre-eminence. "And He is the head of the body, the church: who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead; that in all things He might have the pre-eminence."-Col 1:18. Diotrephes would love to have the pre-eminence. {3Jo 14} Diotrephes prated against the apostles and brethren with malicious words. Be careful, Brother Veach, about the words you have used and that you may use. We think you have overstepped the matter somewhat. We trust you will retract. But Brother Veach says there "is no use to try to reform the church back to the apostolic doctrine and practice." This is a charge that the church has departed from the apostolic doctrine and practice. If she has, pray tell us where the church is to be found today? That is the doctrine of the Campbellites and Mormons-that the church departed. Joseph Smith claimed to restore primitive Christianity. Alexander Campbell set out to restore the ancient order of things- to restore primitive Christianity. Now, Brother Veach, do you want to restore the church to the primitive order of things? If the church has departed, and the whole thing is gone, so far as the Primitive Baptists are concerned, should we not leave them alone-not bring disturbance among them-but go to the people who practice the primitive order in doctrine and practice? From time to time some men have risen up among us who have tried to reform the old church. But they undertake an impossible task. The good Lord will reserve to Himself, always, a few that He will not suffer to be deceived and led astray. To reform the old church would be to draw her away from the original doctrine and practice as given by her Head and Founder. "She shall not be moved." There may sometimes be only a few who will contend for the true order of God's house and the ancient order of things, the same old "traditions and customs," but there will always be enough for the truth of God to be maintained in the earth. Brother Veach, we have not written this because we do not have Christian love for you; but your writing was public and demanded public exposure. Will you reconsider and retract, and make amends? May the Lord help us all to contend for the "good old way." C. H. C.

CHANGED TO SEMI-MONTHLY

March 1, 1934

Since the first of October, as our readers know, we have been sending The Primitive Baptist out only twice a month-or, rather, every other week. We had hoped that this was only a temporary matter. Finances were such that we were not able to get the paper out every week. The readers will remember that we had to let all our helpers in the office lay off on October 5. The code business was such that we could not meet the requirements, which were to reduce the working hours and also increase the pay of the employees. This at a time when our subscription list was falling off instead of increasing; and we had been taking subscriptions at any price the subscribers felt they could pay. Many of the subscribers during the past year or two have been given credit for a whole year when they paid not more than one-fourth of the regular price, and many were having their names dropped from the list. Of course we could not continue to send the paper out every week under such conditions as these. There was nothing left to do but to let the employees all off and have the type set in another place on a machine. Having to go to the other town for the type when it was set up involved a lot of trouble and loss of time. We and our companion had this extra work to do. Well, as we say, we had hoped that this would be only temporary and for a short time. We have now managed to get arrangements made to have the type set in our own office, and this will eliminate the making of trips to another place to get the type. Outside of that we and our wife will still do the work we had others to do-only that we cannot do enough work to get the paper out more than twice a month. We will have to use the same type we were using before we had the type set on a machine. This will give more reading matter than the machine-set type. But now the postoffice department requires us to resume the sending of the paper out weekly or to change the publication to conform to the way we are sending it out. To change so as to make it semi-monthly requires a re-entry as second-class matter, and this requires a payment of $10. There was no entry fee until the present administration of affairs. It costs $10 now to make a change; but we have to make the change. We cannot get The Primitive Baptist out every week under the present conditions. Our publication days will be the first and third Thursday in each month. Usually papers published twice a month are dated the first and fifteenth, but the first and third Thursday will divide the work up better for us, and will give the same number of papers for each month and for the year. If conditions ever admit of it we will go back to a Weekly again. If you want a weekly it is up to the subscribers-or up to the brethren, sisters and friends. 'Having your name dropped from the list will not help to put the paper out weekly, nor will it help us in any way. If you want The Primitive Baptist to come to you weekly, go to work and get new subscribers for it- persons who are not now taking the paper. The list of subscribers is smaller now than it has been for perhaps twenty years. Last month we dropped a hundred more names from the list than were added to it. What are you going to do about it? Are you going to go to work to help stop this decrease, and to help make it increase instead of decrease? Do you have enough interest in the cause The Primitive Baptist advocates and stands for to arouse you to put forth some extra effort now in this time of special need? Or, will you just think or say, "I am in sympathy with this cause, and greatly deplore the condition the paper is in?" Sympathy is all right, and we appreciate it; but for the paper to continue to go forth in defense of the cause we love, it is necessary for us to put forth some effort right now. As we have had to reduce the frequency of the issues of the paper, we have also reduced the regular price of same to $1.50 a year. Now, let us repeat what we have frequently said before, that the object in the publishing of The Primitive Baptist is not to make money. That was not the object of our father before us, and it has never been our object. The object and desire has been, all along, to publish the truth as it is taught us in the Holy Bible; to comfort and benefit the Lord's humble poor; to advance His cause and kingdom in the world; to honor and glorify His precious name. The effort all along has been to give as much reading matter as possible for the money. That is still our desire. Will you help us? Read our special offer in this issue, and then please respond to it at once; and, above all, will you please remember us in your prayers? C. H. C.

GOD THE CAUSE OF SIN

April 5, 1934

In order that our readers may see for themselves what Absoluters advocate and contend for, we copy the following from Sovereign Grace and Pilgrim, a magazine published occasionally, and edited by W. J. Berry. The Lone (some) Pilgrim was consolidated with this magazine sometime ago, and' that is where the name Pilgrim comes in on the paper. Here is what the writer says: Limited predestination is also foolish; for limited predestination surely leads directly to limited foreknowledge. How could anyone who presumes to believe in God possibly charge Him with limited knowledge! Yet some say that God's foreknowledge is unlimited, but predestination is. Such an argument will not even stand in the light of human logic. I like to think of the subject in this way: We find in a modern factory an intricate machine which is fed raw material at one end and ejects a finished part at the other end. This machine is made up of hundreds of working parts. Each part of it is put in for a definite purpose. The engineer who built the machine did not incorporate a single part that was not needed, nor did he omit a single necessary part. Each part of the whole does the work for which it was intended. For a given length of time the machine works perfectly, every part performs the function for which it was intended. We can say that the machine works perfectly because each part is doing exactly what it was predestinated to do by the engineer. The machine working perfectly represents the predestinated events of the world. Now suppose while the machine is running smoothly we were to throw in a handful of sand (unpredestinated events). How long would the machine continue to do its work? Only a few moments would be required for the machine to be wrecked. Is it not the same with the world? How long would God's machine continue to do what He intended, if He had not planned and provided ALL things. God is the first cause. {Ex 20:11} I believe He is the first cause of sin as well as the first cause of good. {Isa 45:7} Am I wrong? tell me. If I sin, it is not a surprise to God. Sin is as much a part of the eternal plan as anything else. God had and has a purpose for sin. {Ac 4:26-28} It is one of the parts that make up the complete structure of His creation. To say that God foresaw but did not predestinate sin, is to say that He foresaw something that He did not create; but the Scriptures teach that there is only one creator. {Col 1:16} I cannot understand the mystery, but I believe God causes all things. I have not been able to accept the word "permit" as expressing God's attitude toward anything. Moreover, I cannot find any logic in time salvation. If the Bible teaches the doctrine of second blessings, that is, that we are blessed FOR good works as well as in them, it also teaches a second curse-that we are cursed here in a time-state FOR our evil deeds as well as IN them. {De 28} Who would find any comfort in such? If my works are not good enough to earn me eternal blessedness, how can I think that I can merit time-blessedness? The very facts of life and history will not support the idea of second-blessing. Who are the people who seem to enjoy the most time-blessedness? Are they not those who have been willing to lay honor, charity, and brotherly love away? Are they not those who have trampled their fellow-men in the dust? The very men who live comfortably and are honored by the world are, for the most part, men who have no good works to have earned them time salvation. On the other hand God's chosen few are, and always have been poor and dishonored. The history of the church of God is written in blood. The children of God walking in good works have always been trampled under foot, while the evil men have triumphed in this world. Where, oh, where is the second blessing? The above is signed by R. C. Bumb. As he asks the editor to tell him if he is wrong, and we find no comment from the editor, we take it for granted that the editor indorses the sentiment expressed and contended for. On another page in the same paper we find this statement over the signature of W. J. Hocutt, of Berry, Ala.: "When I joined the Old Baptists over fifty years ago this conditional salvation was not known among them, and it has caused much strife and division among them.'' This refers to what is termed by some as "conditional time salvation," though we seldom hear that expression used among our people today.' Fifty years ago would take us back to 1883. Time salvation is not a new term among the Primitive Baptists. In another column in this paper is an article copied from the Zion's Advocate of May 15, 1858. It was written by M. Hodges, of Fountain Head, Tenn., March 11, 1858. In that article he says, "there is a time salvation to be enjoyed in obedience only. * * * As before hinted, our own salvation here mentioned is a time salvation, and we must work it out or go without it.'' This was written long before Brother Hocutt joined the church, and was generally believed and advocated by the Primitive Baptists then. True, then as now, there were a few who did not believe it, and who advocated the same things that the Absoluters advocate now. Elder Beebe introduced the term "absolute predestination of all things" among the Primitive Baptists, and that doctrine was, and is, a departure from the original Baptist doctrine-just as much so as Arminianism. Limited predestination does not lead to limited foreknowledge. Take the case of the parable of the talents; Mt 25:14-30. The Lord gave to the servants according to their ability. To one He gave five talents; to another He gave two talents; to another He gave one talent. He gave to each according to his ability. The one who received five talents had ability to improve five talents; the one who received two talents had ability to improve the two; and they used the ability which they had. The one who received one talent had the ability to improve the one talent. The Lord said so; to each was given according to his ability. The Lord gave them the ability which they had. Ability means "quality or state of being able; power to perform, whether physical, moral, intellectual, conventional, or legal; capacity; skill or competence in doing; sufficiency of strength, skill, resources, etc."-Webster. A man can do what he has the ability to do. Hence, the servants could improve the talents, for they had the ability. The Lord knew that they could improve their talents, and He also knew that one would not do so. To say they had to do what they did do because the Lord knew they would do that way is to deny the foreknowledge of God and to say that He knew only one side of the question. These Absoluters thus deny the foreknowledge of God while charging us with doing that very thing. But the writer of the above makes the whole affair the matter of a machine, and that God made the machine, and has it running just as He made it to run. According to that, as some of the race are running into hell, God made them for them to run there. This is not the old doctrine of the Baptists. The old London Confession of Faith, Chap. III, Sec. 3, says: "By the decree of God, for the manifestation of His glory, some men and angels are predestinated or foreordained to eternal life, through Jesus Christ, to the praise of His glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation to the praise of His glorious justice." These Old Baptists did not believe that God worked wicked men and devils, but that they were LEFT to act in their sin. God did not act them-they acted. A machine is not active. It is acted upon by another. If the machine goes to pieces by a "handful of sand being thrown in," the machine is not blameworthy. What sensible man would think of such a thing as punishing the machine on account of the "blow up?" The machine is not responsible. If a man is slain with an ax, the ax is not responsible. The responsible party, the party that is to blame, is the person who wields the ax. According to such reasoning and logic, the men who are guilty of all the crime that has been committed, and that is being committed, in the world, such as robbery, theft, murder, rape, seduction, incest, and every crime that men are guilty of and that Satan can invent,-are not responsible and are not to blame, and are not to be punished for their crimes, in this world nor in the world to come. God is the maker of the whole machine, and He is running it just as He designed it to run. Men nor devils have not been able to, nor can they ever, do a thing that is displeasing to God. They are a part of the machine-and God is running it as He pleases for it to run! This is worse blasphemy than to say that Jesus cast out devils by the prince of devils. The above writer says he believes God is the first cause of sin, as well as the first cause of good. Again, he is not a Primitive Baptist. The old order of Baptists said, in the London Confession of Faith, Chapter V, Section 4, "the sinfulness of their acts proceedeth only from the creatures, and not from God, who, being most holy and righteous, neither is, nor can be, the author or approver of sin." If God is running the whole universe, and every act and transaction is run by Him, then He approves of all the wickedness and crime that is committed. When a wicked brute ruins and rapes an innocent girl, according to this blasphemer, God is the cause of it. When those negroes raped and killed that innocent girl near--------, a year or two ago, they did what God caused them to do-according to this blasphemous doctrine. How any man who is not a wicked devil himself can charge such as this to the good and merciful and holy and righteous God, is beyond us-it is something we cannot understand. One who makes such a charge is terribly wrong somewhere-either in the head or in the heart. Our Bible teaches no such blasphemous heresy. Elder Hassell says, in a footnote on page 415 of his history, "The Mohammedan principle, says Neander, derived sin and holiness alike from the Divine causality, and denied the distinction between a permission and an actual efficiency on the part of God. It is Mohammedanism, and not Christianity; it is the most wretched perversion of Scripture and the most awful imaginable blasphemy, to identify God with Satan, the source of holiness with the source of sin; to maintain that the Holy, Holy, Holy Lord of hosts, the Holy One of Israel, He whose nature is holy and reverend, who is of purer eyes than to behold evil, and cannot look on iniquity, who is the Father of lights, and in whom is no darkness at all, who does not tempt or seek to seduce any man, to maintain that the Holy Spirit, who is God, inspires sinful thoughts or purposes in any of His creatures. He foreknows, and permits, and controls all things, not instigating, but bending the wickedness of men and devils into that channel that shall enhance His own glory and His people's good. The Divine Spirit is the author of all holiness, and not the author of any unholi-ness. No Baptist, no Christian, believes that God is the cause or author of sin." Elder Hassell says that no Baptist, no Christian, believes that God is the cause or author of sin, and we are inclined to agree with him. What do you Absoluters say, now, who have been denying all the time that you believed such damnable heresy? Your names, some of you, are on the editorial staff of the paper sending out and teaching that heresy. What do you elders say about it now? Will you stay on the editorial staff of such a paper and still claim that this is not your doctrine and that you are a Primitive Baptist? If you do not indorse and believe it, then prove it by coming out from it. There is no way for a man to show his faith only by his works. We have before us a copy of Backus' History, volume 1. The author wrote his preface to that volume and dated the same July 9,1777. On page 97 he quotes from Hubbard, page 343, as follows: "Nicholas Easton * * * used to preach at Newport. * * * He maintained that man had no power nor will in himself, but as he was acted by God; and seeing that God filled all things, nothing could be or move but by Him, and so must needs be the author of sin, and that a Christian is united to the essence of God. Being shewed what blasphemous consequences would follow therefrom, they seemed to abhor the consequences, but still defended the position. * * * Mr. Coddington, Mr. Coggshall, and some others, joined with Nicholas Easton in those delusions; but their minister, Mr. Clarke, and Mr. Lenthal, and Mr. Harding, with some others, dissented and publicly opposed; whereby it grew to such a heat of contention that it made a schism amongst them.'' The advocating of such a blasphemous doctrine always has and always will bring division among true Baptists. On the same page the author says that "Mr. Coddington and Mr. Easton afterward joined the Quakers. Mr. Clark and his friends formed the first Baptist Church on Rhode Island." On page 125 Mr. Backus gives the probable date of the formation of this church as 1644, and possibly as early as 1638. On page 526 Hassell gives the probable date as 1638. The first Baptist Church formed in the United States and its founder rejected such teaching as blasphemous, and true Primitive Baptists do the same today. The teachers of such doctrine are not in line with the first Baptists of the United States, nor are they in line with the inspired writers of the Bible. David, the sweet singer of Israel, and a man after God's own heart, said, Ps 69:4 "They that hate me without a cause are more than the hairs of mine head: they that would destroy me, being mine enemies wrongfully, are mighty: then I restored that which I took not away." In Joh 15:25 the Saviour said, "But this cometh to pass, that the word might be fulfilled that is written in their law, They hated me without a cause." The prophecy of David was concerning the Lord, and the Saviour tells us the same was fulfilled. If the Lord is the cause of all things that come to pass, including sin and wickedness, as these Absoluters contend, then the Lord was the cause of them hating Him, and they did not hate Him without a cause. But the Lord said they hated Him without a cause. Therefore, the Lord was not the cause of this. These Absoluters deny the plain statement of David, the inspired man of God, and they deny the plain statement of the Son of God Himself. It is no better than rank infidelity. The writer in the above article denies that any are punished for their wrong doing. Hear the word of the Lord concerning that matter. Eze 33:13 "When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousness shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it." Here the Lord says "he shall die for it." These Absoluters say it is not true. "Let God be true, and every man a liar." We have no fellowship for their doctrine. It is not the doctrine of God our Saviour. May He deliver us from such, and help us all to teach such things as are an honor to His glorious name. C. H. C.

WHAT SHALL WE DO?

April 19, 1934

Frequently when we warn against departures from the principles and practices that have characterized the Primitive Baptists as a separate and distinct people from the world, there are some who are displeased. They sometimes have us stop sending the paper to them because we speak out against such departures. A few days ago we received a letter from a brother who told us in the letter that a number said they were going to have their paper stopped because of the way we had written recently about some things that are being advocated and practiced. Some brethren have written us highly commending what we said. But what some may say is not so much concern to us as the question as to what the Lord would have us do. What some of the brethren may do does not concern us as much as what is pleasing in the sight of God. What does the Lord require of us? That is the question we desire to have answered. In meditating over these things our mind has been called to what the Lord said in Eze 33:1-11. Here is what the Lord said: Again the word of the Lord came upon me, saying, Son of man, speak to the children of thy people, and say unto them, When I bring the sword upon a land, if the people of the land take a man of their coasts, and set him for their watchman: if when he see the sword come upon the land, he blow the trumpet, and warn the people; then whosoever heareth the sound of the trumpet, and taketh not warning; if the sword come, and take him away, his blood shall be upon his own head. He heard the sound of the trumpet, and took not warning; his blood shall be upon him. But he that taketh warning shall deliver his soul. But if the watchman see the sword come, and blow not the trumpet, and the people be not warned; if the sword come, and take any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at the watchman's hand. So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore thou shalt hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me. When I say unto the wicked, O wicked man, thou shalt surely die; if thou dost not speak to warn the wicked from his way, that wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way to turn from it; if he do not turn from his way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. Therefore, O thou son of man, speak unto the house of Israel; Thus ye speak, saying, If our transgressions and our sins be upon us, and we pine away in them, how should we then live? Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel? Here we have it plainly and clearly taught that the Lord requires His servants to warn Israel against every false way. The Lord has made it his indispensable duty to give warning of every approach of error and every false way. No man can be a true and faithful servant of God and fail to do that. He must warn against every innovation. He must warn against every departure from the way the Lord has marked out in His blessed Book. The Book teaches everything that the Lord's people should believe or practice religiously. It teaches that they should sing spiritual songs. They cannot sing spiritual songs and sing songs that contain false sentiment, or false doctrine. Unsound sentiment is not spiritual but fleshly, of the world, worldly. Thus, when they sing songs containing Arminian sentiment, they are violating the command of God. They are disregarding what the Lord has taught in His blessed Book, and which Book is given to thoroughly furnish them unto all good works. The Lord does not instruct, in His Book, that His people in His worship and service, are to use an organ, or any man-made instrument. He made the organ which He requires them to use in His worship-the vocal organs. To use any other organ than what He made and authorizes to be used in His worship, is an affront to Him. It is a disregarding of His teaching, and is treating His teaching with contempt. Do we know better how we should serve and worship God than He does? If we say yes, then we are guilty of the sin of presumption. If we say no, then let us leave alone everything which He has not commanded-leave everything severely alone for which we do not find precept or example. Do we find any precept or example in the Book for a Sunday school? If it is there it must be in the twenty-third chapter of Revelation. See if you can find it. It is not to be found between the first verse of the first chapter of Genesis and the last verse of the twenty-second chapter of Revelation. It is outside the Book. Then why organize such a thing? Why practice it? Is it to be like the world? "Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because they are many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the Lord."-Isa 31:1. The Sunday school is a thing of the world. It is an institution of the world. If the Primitive Baptists practice such, they are only going down to Egypt for help; they are not trusting in the Lord. But someone may ask, Is it wrong to meet together on Sunday, or the Sabbath day, and study the Bible? Is it wrong to have classes in Bible study? We answer by asking, Is it wrong to organize a ladies' aid society, a junior league, a senior league, a Christian endeavor society, a Baptist Young People's Union, or any other of the numerous societies the world has? That is the same argument the Burnamites made when they introduced the thing years ago. Usually when the thing is started it is not called a Sunday school. The Old Baptists would "catch on" to the "racket" at once, and spurn the thing. Every time that little brat is born into an Old Baptist Church it is called a Bible class, or a Bible study, Bible hour-or some such little "no harm" name. And it usually catches the fancy of some. The little imp makes its appearance at first in some such unpretentious way. Beware! Such things are a departure from the original Baptist principles and practice. If you do not want trouble, quit your departures. Let the whole brood of Arminian inventions alone. Stay out of the mire of Arminian doctrine and practices on the one hand, and stay away from the icebergs of "can't-help-it-ism" on the other hand. Stand fast and faithful and firm and true for the original doctrine and order of God's house; then the Lord will bless and prosper Zion, and peace and happiness will be enjoyed by her inhabitants. By the help of the Lord we expect to try to contend for the truth and for the original and old-time practice of the church, if every subscriber we have quits. Will you quit on that account? Will you do that, or will you lend a helping hand? We are willing to trust the Lord, and try to be true to Him. May the Lord help us. C. H. C.

SHOULD BE TRUTHFUL

April 19, 1934

We are in receipt of a letter from a dear brother renewing his subscription. He tells us he has tried to get some subscribers for the paper, but has not been able to do so. He says: I have tried to get some more subscribers, but can't. I know several Old Baptists who take a daily paper that costs 20 cents a week, but say they are not able to take The Primitive Baptist. I hate to doubt an Old Baptist, but I doubt this statement. I want to take it as long as I am able, for many times I am about ready to give up. I get my paper and one article cheers me up and I am encouraged to press on. Many times I have some Scripture on my mind that I do not understand, and some brother or sister takes it up, and I am made to rejoice. So, dear brother, do the best you can in getting the paper out, and I will be satisfied, and will do all I can to send you some more subscribers. If any of your readers have a heart to pray, please pray for poor me. Well, dear brother, please tell us who can believe that a man is not able to pay $1.50 a year (a little less than three cents a week) for his church paper, or for a religious paper, when he is able to pay 20 cents a week for a newspaper? In the newspaper he will read about murder, theft, kidnapping, hijacking, bribery, robbery, bootlegging, highway robbery, and all other sorts of crime that Satan can invent. In The Primitive Baptist he may read the good news from the heavenly home of the Lord's humble poor. In this paper he may read about what the Lord has done for poor sinners, what He is doing, and what He has promised to do for them; and may read about what the Lord teaches in His word that His children should do in honor to His blessed name. But you know the blessed Master said, while He was here on earth, that "where your treasure is, there will be your heart also." May the good Lord bless you, dear brother, and keep you by His grace. C. H. C.

GOD THE CAUSE OF SIN

May 17, 1934

In our issue of April 5 we copied a lengthy quotation from an article written by R. C. Bumb and published in the Sovereign Grace and Pilgrim, by W. J. Berry, of California, and replied to the same. We did not say all that could be said in reply to the blasphemous doctrine R. C. Bumb advocated, and perhaps did not say all that should be said. We called attention to the fact that Bumb asked the editor to tell him if he was wrong, and that the editor offered no objection to the article or any sentiment therein, and we took it for granted that the editor indorsed the sentiment. Of course he believes and accepts the sentiment, for he advocates the same sentiment himself. On page 510 of the same issue of that paper the editor says: But if he will say that Christ indeed merits all praise for our eternal salvation, but that we are rewarded for our good works in time,-we deny it. The editor used this expression in referring to our people-true Primitive Baptists, or those who advocate what true Primitive Baptists have always advocated. What part of the statement does the editor mean to deny? Does he mean to deny that Christ merits all praise for our eternal salvation? Or, does he mean to deny the whole-both that Christ merits such praise and also that God's people are rewarded in time for their good works? Or, does he mean to deny only the latter part? It is the whole thing which he says he denies. But we will be liberal and lenient toward him, and grant that he does not really mean to deny that Christ merits all praise for the eternal salvation of all the redeemed, and that he really only means to deny that God's children are rewarded here in time for their good works. Of course we were and are aware of the fact that these advocaters of this doctrine of the "absolute and unconditional predestination of all things that come to pass" deny the truth of God. Let us see what God's word says about the matter: And ye shall eat it in every place, ye and your households: for it is your reward for your service in the tabernacle of the congregation.-Nu 18:31. Here it is plainly stated that this is a reward for the Lord's servant for his service rendered in the tabernacle of the congregation. God said this to Moses. This doctrine of reward in and for service rendered was true in ancient time. That was God's way and promise in the days of Moses. If God has not changed since then, the same doctrine is true now. What about it, Mr. Berry? Has God changed? Did Moses tell the truth when he put it on record that God said this? But let us now pass over a long period of time, and see how it was at a much later date: But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be called the children of the Highest: for He is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil.-Lu 6:35. Here the Saviour emphatically tells His disciples that their reward shall be great for doing the good things He here tells them to do. This was positively stated by the Saviour while He was here on earth tabernacling in the flesh. But these Absoluters do not believe it. They positively deny the plain language of the Son of God. But let us have another statement: Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye service, as men pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God: and whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ. But he that doeth wrong shall receive for the wrong which he hath done: and there is no respect of persons.-Col 3:22-25. In this place the inspired apostle, the apostle to the Gentiles, the eminent Paul, most positively affirms that they should, of the Lord, receive the reward of the inheritance. Paul clearly taught the Colossian brethren that they would receive a reward for right doing; and that they would receive a reward for wrong doing. Evidently the reward for right doing was a blessing and joy from the presence of the Lord manifested to them; and the reward for the wrong doing was a chastisement and punishment for their wrongs. Paul was inspired of God to teach this doctrine. But these Absoluters do not believe the inspired writings; they flatly deny this teaching and call it heresy. But let us have another statement: And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.- Re 22:12. Here is the promise of the Saviour that He comes quickly, and that His reward is with Him to give every man according as his work shall be. If his work is good, the reward is a blessing; if his work is bad, the reward is a curse, punishment for his evil doings. This is being fulfilled now, every day, every week, every month, every year. The sorrows and sufferings and dreadful state of affairs today in the nation and in the churches is nothing else than punishment for wickedness and wrong doing. Will you please get your Bible now and read the plain statements of God's word recorded in the following places: Pr 11:18; Ec 4:9; Mt 10:42; Mr 9:41; 1Co 3:8,14; De 32:41; 2Sa 3:39; Pr 25:21-22; Ho 4:9; Mt 6:3-4,6,17-18; 16:27; 2Ti 4:14; 2Sa 22:21; 2Ch 15:7; Jer 31:16. In all these places the doctrine is plainly taught that there is a blessed reward for those who lovingly and humbly obey the Lord and do His commandments. But these Absoluters absolutely cannot come to the Lord. They do not believe in Him. They do not believe His word. They do not believe that He is a rewarder. Hear what the inspired apostle says: But without faith it is impossible to please Him: for he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.-Heb 11:6. Here the Apostle Paul not only teaches that God is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him, but he also teaches that in order for one to come to God, to come to the Lord, one must not only believe that God is, but he must also believe that God is a rewarder of them