The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1894-02-08

the next day dawned without a sign {
the mill ennium.
vi closer interest to advocates of orig
lnA New Testament ordor is the agita
ton of the subject of union betwee
Baptlsts and Disciples. Dispatches il
our eastern papers tell of an announce
ment by DR.. Kerr, Upper. of Denver
and Dr. ID. r. Lucas, of Indianapolis
that these two bodies of the Lord
people are about to unite under tn
name "Christian." DR.. Lucus is repre-
sented as saying. "The question o
unlflcation is the most serious and alb
sorbing of all topics that are being dis
cussed by Christians and Baptists to
day. Many conferences have been hel(
OF late looking to the fusion Of the two
denominations. [ am now confidem
that the proposed union which means
so much to all religions will be effected
before very long. There is not much
essential difference between the Baptist
and Christian beliefs, and the two de-
nominations could easily harmonize'
This is good, but DR.. w. F. Taylor, who
is represented as the leading Baptist
clergyman of Indiana, is reported as
saying that ''the assertion that the union
will come soon is merely hgnent of DR..
Tupper's brain, and was uttered in order
that he might raise himself into promi-
nence."
The baltimore brethren seem in the
dark about this movement One SAYS:
| personally. am in favor Of, the union.
by that l mean to say that if the Chris
tian Church of the West teach the same
| doctrine in the East of the same denom-
ination, l would be willing to unite with
them the Baptist churches of the world.
But unless | am grossly Misinformed,
the christian churches of the West do
not preach the same doctrine as their
sister churches in the East. / believe
the Baptist Church stands ready to
unite upon the standards laid down in
the New Testament Scriptures" This
is Dr. E. Mullins, He should take Hor-
ace Greelsy's advice to young men. Two
other Baltimore brethren have spoken
in favor of the union. DR.. p. Mills. per-
haps the leading Baptist preacher of
the city, would like to see it accomplish
ed, but thinks there is badly sufficient
sentiment in favor of it at present $50
far as our forms of church government
are concerned and our views as to the
ordinances of baptism there are prob
ably few obstacles in the way of such a
union, but there are obstacles in the
form of other doctrinal points. / hardly
think the teachingias to the divinity of
Christ is as clear among the Disciples as
we teach, however their ministers differ
among themselves as to this. Again,
do MT think they recognize as distinctly
as we do the personal agency of the Holy
Spirit in conversion, but rely more
upon the Word, the Bible, than upon
the Spirit Where has Dr. Ellis been
living for the last fifty years? G. K. Mar
shall is going to preach next Sunday
morning and evening on .The True
Sacrifice" and The Divinity of Christi
DR.. A. G. Barron-I do not think ga.
c." here stand for Alexandria Campbell
says: II have long felt there ought
to be union of all imlnersionists. So
the Baptist and Christian or Disciple
churches in Maryland might not come
together as one. There really appears
to be no difference in the teachings of
these chuches here. Still 1 do not think
the present prospect for such union is at
all good, for their are still too many per-
sons living who remember that battle
for separation which was led about
forty years ago by Alexander Campbell;
who left the Baptist church"
Such is the testimony of the Baltimore
brethren. The wave has not yet reach
ed our slow-going capital. The Rich
mond papers reported the dispatches,
and would have liked to ask DR.. Dick
inson's views on the subject, but while
he attended our Disciples rally, he left
before communion, and had no oppor-
tunity to greet him. Cleveland has
heard of it, and here is a delightful SER
mon by J. q. Tyler, published in full in
the Neaos and Herald of the 18th, in
which he shows wherein the Baptist and
Disciples agree, instead of showing, as
is so oftnen done, wherein they differ.
He deals candidly and clearly, also with
the differences, and closes in this elo>
quent and Christian way:
"Ought these Differences to keep Bap>
lists and Disciples apart? Are they of
sufficient Importance to justify the con-
tinuance of the middle wall of partition
between these two bodiesl Would a
union between the two involve the sac
rifice of any cardinal principle Would
it not be a gain in every way to cast
aside UNCONVENTIONAL distinctions and to
stand united before the world, wearing
no other names than those given to the
children of God and to the churches in
Apostolic times, observing the ordinances
as they were in the beginning? For my
SELF | would hail with unutterable joy
union of these churches upon that
simple basis upon which churches were
united in New Testament times. be.
believe that such a movement would be
gigantic stride in the return of all be-
levers to the lost unity of the church.
But much as we may desire such a
union. it can not take place all at once.
Each local church among both Disci.
Piles and Baptists is an independent Or
ganization There is no central body in
either denomination that is empowered
to act in such matters for the local
churches. The union must be brought
about by the cultivation of fraternal
spirit, by the increase of mutual &C
quaintance, by the co operation in works
of common interest, and by conference
of leading men on both sides. 1mpor-
| tant changes have taken place and mod
flied influences are still at work in both
| bodies. and we have reason to cherish
the hope that the influence already at
work will bring them into more intimate
fellowship until every middle wall of par
tition shall be broken down, and out of
| al cl, lyoo