The Columbia herald. [volume] (Columbia, Tenn.) 18??-1935, 1901-07-26
Communion; or the Lords Supper.

! Brother Tyler says: "He (Pettle) is
| the best dodger | have ever run across"
7 his is a brotherly compliment, hich
| appreciate at its full value / suppose
my accomplishment as "dodger"
makes him d. sire to commune with me.
Digest, if you can, this argument 10 ia
vor of open communion
But my wor by brother is rather prod
| igal with compliments in his last arti
Gle. He says: "You came to Go umbia
with u theological chip on your shout
der and dared anyone to knock it off,
and were surprised that anyone dared to
do it." Perhaps this is another reason
why Brother Tyler so earnestly desires
to commune with me
Now, the fac 8 in the case are as fol-
lows: Certain peop'e are in the habit of
say ing unpleasant things about the Bap-
lists because of their practice in the OBJ
servance of the Lords Supper. Brother
| Tyler knows this is so. Would he deny
to Baptists the right of self defense?
Some members of my congt egation de-
sired to hear sermon on communion
"a statement of the reasons for our
practice. | preached the sermon, be-
lieving that in so doing, | was within
| OilC pOhhNto VI my IlNtC anu iVliE IOho
rights. Ia my sermon | asked for = of
fere a reward for-ore, only one p S.
sage of Scripture in favor of open com
munion Is there any criminality in
that? If open communion is Scriptural
would like to practice it. Is there
any wrong in SCI king for Scripture in
support of it? Am | to be charged
with carrying theological chip on my
shoulder merely because offer a reward
for passage of Scripture which | have
not been able to discover? | suspect
Brother Tyler would give a liberal le
ward for such text.
But Bro. Tyler complains because I
said he rushed into the columns of
the Herald. | desire to assure him
that | meant no harm. | didn't know
rush was bad word. If he PIE
fers some other word, it will suit me
just we'll But my reference to his
getting into the columns of the Herald
causes him to fire at me a charge of
four questions:
Il. Did you not offer publicly $50
for verse in the Bible in favor of
open communion | did, but the offer
did not bring the verse. True, you
did several times quote LET a man
examine himself. But why you
quoted 1T, do not know 1t is certain
you did not quote it to prove open
communion, for you have said II
am frank to confess that can not
give a verse in favor of open com
munion.
,. las you offered the $25, to the
people, was | not included in that
NUMBER Certainly. / wanted the
verse. Would thank you or any other
man to tell me where | can find it.
3. IF so, then did | not have the
right to replyY" OF course.
"A. Then, if had the right to reply
|. have | shown any want of minis
terial courtesy" Certainly not | am
not aware that / intimated such a
thing. Even if | was surprised that
any one dared to knock the chip from
my shoulder, | am very, very glad you
did it. You have done me great ser
vice. Your frank and manly admission
that you cannot give even one verse in
the whole Bible in favor of open COM
munion. must have its influence in
this community. IL ought to put an
end 10 open communion. Why should
| people practice in the name Of relig-
ion, that for which not even one verse
of scripture can be foundl | thank
YOU. my good brother. for the service
You have rendered the cause of truth.
But You ask me for one verse in IA
, vOr Of close communion. Why do this
| gave you several verses. some time
age You would not cOndescend 4
notice them. | called your attention
10 them. OF solicited your attention.
the second time. You would not no