"I WANT THE REVIEW DISCONTINUED."
By James White
So says Bro. R. Miles of the Mannsville, N. Y., church, in a letter of the 12th inst. But why have the REVIEW discontinued? He says: "Bro. White has taken such a position about organizing churches, and also of making us a name, that I see no consistency in his former position. I do not wish to point out his former position, for all the brethren know what that was. I must say that a good many in this church have lost a great deal of interest in reading the REVIEW, as well as myself. I think that Bro. Arnold's exposition of making us a name is very good, that is, the Remnant. This name the Lord gave himself." The above plainly shows that Bro. M. is suffering from a confused and unhappy state of mind. What a pity that a few columns from our pen on the subject of organization should spoil the REVIEW for Bro. M., and, as he claims, for so many of his brethren. But should they all stop the REVIEW, it would be published the same; for the whole amount would be only about twice the daily increase of subscribers. We can spare a few hundred subscribers much better than they can do without the REVIEW. But we are happy to know that most of the Mannsville church are the real friends of the cause. Why leave the ship if she should shake a little? Is it not evidence that such have but little on board? Those who have put all on board will not be so ready to leave the ship. As to making us a name, we have only suggested the propriety of taking the name furnished in the word of God—"Feed the CHURCH OF GOD which he hath purchased with his own blood." Acts xx, 28. Again, if Bro. M. sees "no consistency in our former position," we hope he does in our present one. But Bro. M. may be mistaken in regard to our former position. It has not been Bro. White, but some body else, who has been writing and preaching against the judicial oath under any circumstances, collecting dues by law, organization, &c. Some of our remarks on Babylon may be bent that way, but it is well known that we have for the last eight years stood opposed to the extreme positions taken, and have urged the subject of order in the church to the great displeasure of many. Bro. M. is mistaken in the man. But what seems a little amusing is that Bro. M. agrees with Bro. Arnold, when it is evident that Bro. A. agrees with us on the one point upon which we have written, namely, holding church property legally. Bro. Arnold, in a letter of the 12th inst., speaking of a communication before sent which has not been received says: "The leading features of the article were (1.) Scripture reasons why we as a church should take upon us the name given us by inspiration, viz., 'The Remnant.' (2.) Reasons why we should as a church thus entitled avail ourselves of the privilege held out to us by the powers under which we live, and secure our pecuniary interests to the purposes intended. (3.) A coincidence with Bro. White as proposed in last Samaritan, and exactly agreeing with Bro. Andrews in Review No. 14, viz., a conference or conferences to prayerfully consider the matter. Your unworthy brother, desiring a part in the burdens and blessings of the Remnant Church." Now we affirm that we have not suggested from first to last any more than is contained in the above statement by Bro. A., or than is admitted to be necessary by Bro. R. F. C. Then why do certain ones feel as they do towards us? Answer. There was a class of minds like Bro. Miles, ready to be prejudiced against us by the articles of R. F. C. on making us a name. And although Bro. R. F. C. has changed his position, and now thinks it right to secure the Office legally, yet as he has not frankly acknowledged those articles wrong, certain ones are left in the confused, unhappy position in which we see Bro. M. Let it be fully understood that we have only suggested legal organization necessary to hold church property, and have recommended the simplest form possible. We have presented some of the necessities of the case. The question has not been just what should be done, but whether anything of the kind should be done. Here we stand. We can have nothing to say in regard to what shall be done until it be decided whether steps shall be taken so that the church shall hold their office of publication. Meanwhile we would advise those who are suffering under blind prejudice to seek relief in sober reflection, common sense, and humble prayer at the throne of divine mercy.
J. W.