The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1894-06-18

of the 9Th inst. you have noticed my Sc
cession from the Church of England. and
in so doing have fallen into an inaccu-
racy which you will permit me to correct.
You say that 81 have detected TO the
Seventh Day Adventists;" this is not the
case, though the mistake is very nat
ural one for it was the embracing of two
points advocated by them that compelled
me to leave the Church of England.
They have my earnest sympathy in so
much else OF their teaching that very
probably when / have had the opportu-
nifty of studying their doctrine and prac-
tice more closely, / shall count it priv
ilege TO be enrolled among this despised
but remarkable people, whose covenant
is Ito keep the commandments of God
and the faith of Jesus"
If i may trespass further on your space
1 should welcome this opportunity to ex-
plain publicly what has driven me to
adopt conclusions fatal to my continu-
ance in the Church of England.
AS an Evangelical Protestant have
ever sought to rest upon the word OF God
as my only authoritative guide of faith
and practice, believing his principle. viz:
the divine authority of the bible, TO be
the on safeguard against the two Chi
religious dangers of the day, the Scylia
of RitualiSm on the one hand, and the
Charybds of Rationalism on the other
Within the last six months L have come
to see that the Church of Eng and,
in two important points, depends upon
tradition and not upon Scripture. and
therefore to be true to principle, am
compelled to leave her. My reasons are
as follows:
/. The adoption of Sunday as the So
called christian Sabbath" has no war
rant in Scripture. This anyone can
easily verify for himself. The bible does
not record that Christ or His Apostles
substituted First Day Sabbath in honor
of the Resurrection for the Sabbath OF the
fourth commandment. Nor could any
thing but a positive direct command
from God abolish or alter His own law:
this has confessedly not been given. and
the presence of the fourth commandment
in our Liturgy and inscribed on the walls
of our churches bears witness chat We
accept it as part of the moral law and
binding still.
History reveals how the change took
place, viz: gradually, and by the sub>ti-
tuition of an ordinance of man for the
command of God.
The question between Saturday and
Sunday may seem a trivial one, but it is
not one of days merely; its Importance
consists in the underlying difference of
principle, viz. Scripture VS.. Tradition,
difference which is as fundamental and
far-reaching in its consequences today
as in the days when our Lord rebuked
the Pharisees for setting aside the COM
mands of God by their traditions.
2. The practice of infant baptism also,
with it's corrollary of the regeneration of
the infant in that sacrament. I now reject
as inconsistent with Scripture.
The New Testament neither commands
nor prohibits the practice; on the other
hand it teaches that we become the
children of God by faith in Christ Jesus
living faith which involves repentance.
| Baptism, ON mans side, is or shou d be
the outward sign of such repentance and
the confession of such faith in Christ; it
| is, therefore, inapplicable to infants,
who, in the nature of the case, are in
| capable of either, as the Cate hism &C.
kuowledges. The appointment of spon-
sors is mere human de, ice (unauthor-
lied by Scripture) to cover this manifest
diff ulty; and further opportunity has
| to be sought In Confirmation to supply
that which was lacking at the child's
baptism, viz. its own profession of re-
pentance and faith To administer bap-
tism to infants, and to assert their re-
| generation thereby, is, l believe, to
becloud the fundamental truth of the
Gospel that none becomes a Christi m
| except By personal reception of Christ
| by faith; it is to confuse the new dis
pensation which is elective with the old.
| which was hereditary; and it is to de-
| prive the child of the only Christ ven
| means of voluntarily declaring itself to
the world a believer IN Him, ami Of rest
ing in Gods own seal and pledge o. the
new birth granted to its faith.
/ Its practical effect has been most mis-.
chievous for long centuiss it has
| swamped the churches with hereditary
Christianity, and has all but obliterated
the Hae of demarcation between the
| Church aud the world had hitherto
accepted it because L believed it to be
permissible from the inferences of Scrip
ture, and that il might be safely taught to
be an anticipatory pledge to the child OF
salvation To be granted to lis faith sc
soon as it should exercise that faith; bu,
have come to see that this latter con-
ditional view is not fair interpre, alton
of the words of the baptismal service
and catechism. l now, therefore. am
compelled to reject the Church of Eng.
land doctrine and practice in this matter
as part of the great apostacy from the
truth which began even before the death
of the apostles themselves, and culmin
ated in the system OF the Papacy.
The Reformation was, as We know, ar
attempt to purge the Church from the
corruptions OF that apostacy, and to re-
sire Apostolic simplicity and purity o
doctrine. Unhappily, the Reformation
principles were not carried in the Church
OF England TO their logica issue. This
1t IS that enables an enemy In her very
bosom to attempt TO undo the work fol
which our Protestant forefathers sci fereC
and died.
As clergyman of the Church of Eng
land, have rejoiced TO call myself q
Protestant; but when it became cleal
that, TO be consistent, must decide be-