The Magnolia gazette. [volume] (Magnolia, Miss.) 1872-current, 1899-09-02

Il
than the one he has abandoned
What Memo said was a review
he made of Bro. Lanes card
This card asserted that in pres.
ence of a large religious audience
Bro. Lane said, ~ want all who
belong to the church and dom
believe they are saved to come
give me their hands, and the ma
jority of that large audience came
and said IL have any religion
don't know anything about it. ; 2
What a terrible declaration com
ing from members Of a church
that asserts it only receives con-
verted peoplel Nowin reviewing
this statement. Memo wrote the
following:
From the general absence OF
all religious conversation among
church members, the same belief
honeycombs all our memberships
and we live protesting faith we
know not of. and live day by day
expecting our union with the
church, and attention to her or
dinances. will in the end procure
salvation. Here Memo uses the
words I'VE" and "ours'' and
does not specify preachers, and
Bro. s. makes no remarks upon
the paragraph.
Memo continues: "The average
preacher is satisfied with this
mere Introductory form that re-
ligion assumes among US. Our
preachers seem to desire no high
attainments in grace. no upward
mountings in spiritual life, no re-
quirements for a closer walk with
God. Their memberships thus
deprived of all incentives to
higher life, set down upon the or
dinances and do nothing, and
soon lose all sensibility on the
matter OF religion. -
Now the above are the remarks
made and no issue was exhibited
and no unkind epithets used or
felt. Bro. S. has alone made up
an issue that ] never made, and
here disavow.
In his last article Bro. S. gives
his case away, puts himself out
of court and places himself HoRs
DE COMBAT by falling like Saul
on his own sword. He says, "As
to having our work reviewed by
laymen we are perfectly willing
to that. = Now as Memo has only
lightly reviewed general work and
Bro. S. expresses himself willingI
to that, what then is he quarrel
ing at?
But this giving up the right of |
laymen to review ministerial work |
is not the lowest depth found in
the lower, deep into which our
brother has fallen. He goes on
here and makes a cave far more
Mammoth than that cavern in
Kentucky is, for after accusing
Memo of asserting that the
preachers were inefficient (aterm
Memo never used) he turns
around himself and asserts. Now
listen at his convictions. "More-
over | am free to admit that there
are among us poor preachers and
inefficient pastors. - Here Bro. |
). accuses the poor preachers
and the poor pastors of incfficien- I
~. Here he acknowledges the
nefficiency. He does not say
Who these are, or how many there +
ire Of them.
Bro. Schilling did very wrong
o enter this argument with such /
flousish of trnmpets and then
lestroy all the force OF his OWE
by admitting his
preachers and pastors We're poor
md inefficient. Possibly manyl
people concur withlhim in this be-
ief who are all too polite and too
to assert it. Possibly
ne anti holiness gun, either end
# which he uses on cranks and
razes, may have gone off this
ime at the wrong end and slew
lis own friends.
Bro. S. should stick to his pull
ut for he is monarch there, but {
Ie should not undertake an ante
nortem examination of newspa- /
'er correspondents simply be- (
ause he is a minister. Bro. Ii
'chilling should stick to his Bible
nd hymn book, even if there is I,
ONE poetry in the latter, and not J
ose as the censor general of |
ress review.
Bro. s. has not written in a q
pirit of Christian kindness. His ]
ings at holiness, and those I
gainst poetry and Latin phrases 9
Iere very badly out of place. We r
III will most roa dsfxY nxnnra D.