Timely notices prepare the way: brother G. B. Hon is on his way for an excursion and an evangelizing tour in Georgia-Debuts for Union county. I may perhaps pass the winter in that mild climate, as consumption and dispeptic habits are hereditary with me, knowing that all things work together for the good of those who, with patience, do the will of God; in which I ever hope to be yours and all the saints, in the hope of life and immortality. JOHN B. HAYWARD. North Middletown, September 27th, 1839. You desire to know the number of churches in Bourbon county, their names, number, &c. &c There are eight churches located in the county, and two others immediately on the lines of Fayette and Harrison. About one half of each of the latter congregations live in our county, to wit: Leesburg, Harrison county, total 253, half Elders, Coppage and Wasson; Evangelist, John A. Gano. No officers. John A. Gano their preacher. 1. Coopers' Run, members Bourbon County. No officers. John A. Gano their preacher. 2. Paris, members Elders, Riggs and Bledsoe. A. Raines preacher. 3. "Mount Carmel, members · No officers. Joshua Irvine preacher 4. Cane Ridge, inembers Elders John Irvine and William P. Payne. Deacons, Hamilton Wilson and H. 5. Flat Run, members Elders, Parker and Morrow. 6. Millersburgh, members Elders, Joseph Irvine and preacher. 7. Clintonsville, members Deacons Bills and Taylor. A. Raines Deacons, H. Curtwright and J Crose. John Rogers preacher. Elders, John Rash, William Mason, and N, L Lindsay. Total number of members, Deacons, E. Darnall, 1435 in eight churches situated in the county, and including the half of two others located on the line-namely: Leesburg and Union, as above described. Seven of these congregations own the houses at which they meet The other three own but half a house, to wit: Leesburg, Union, and Millersburgh. Enclosed I send ten dollars, which credit as follows:--John Campbell, sen., James Houston, John Thomas, Elias Darnall, Devall Payne. By mistake this letter was not forwarded according to date at the head. N. L. LINDSAY. Louisville, Kentucky, October 9th, 1839. Brothers Morton, Pinkerton, Helen; and myself, have this day closed a meeting at Goose Creek, Jefferson county, 9 miles above us, where 27 souls were obedient to the Lord; many of whom were in the days of their youth,-and some of the most interesting young ladies in that region. We left others greatly wounded; and a most excellent im pression upon the neighborhood. Brother Pinkerton and myself leave in the morning at the call of the brethren in Madison, Indiana, to hold a protracted meeting. Through his blessing we hope to conquor some aliens, and unite them to our King's Dominions. The Lord be praised for his goodness. During the last 2 weeks there has been 5 immersed at New Albany, 1 at Jeffersonville, and 3 in this city. Brother Pinkerton immersed some 6 or 7 in other portions of this county during the same time. G W. ELLY. We have had a pleasant and refreshing visit from Brothers A. S. Haden, Dr. Robinson, of Cuyahoga, Ohio, and E. A. Smith, of Kentucky, who held meetings at Dutch Fork, Wellsburg, West Liberty, and Bethany. At those meetings fifty persons were baptized, and added to the Lord. There are now, within a circle of 8 miles from Bethany, five meeting houses, at which weekly meet about 500 disciples of Christ after the primitive and apostolic order. OBITUARY.-In cordial sympathy with surviving relatives, and in regret for their and our loss, we have to record the death of our much esteemed and beloved brethren, Chauncy Forward, Esq., one of the Elders of the church in Summerset, Pa, on the 9th October;-and on the same day, that of Elder Harvey Goodwine. These brethren died in the faith and hope of that gospel which, in this life they adorned. A. C. I PERCEIVE that a discussion has lately arisen respecting the name which we shall bear. This is doubtless an interesting question; and I consider it quite fortunate that we have not been deprived, by any officious sponsors, of the privilege of giving ourselves a name; but that now, having attained to years of discretion, we can please our own taste, and enjoy the pleasure of our own christening. It is not to be expected, however, that such a controversy as this will be brought to a speedy issue. On the contrary, as it relates to words, and words are wind, it is likely to be very wordy, or longwinded; for I presume it will hold good here, as well as elsewhere, that "what is born of wind is wind." It is, indeed, remarkable how words have the power of multiplying and magnifying themselves, so that the simplest and smallest term uttered in the breath of "silky soft Favonius," shall raise about our ears a very tempest of "words of learned length and thundering sound." Thus in Homer the favoring divinity to insure to Ulysses a prosperous voyage, gives to him the opposing winds which he had the art to enclose in little bags. But these were no sooner opened during the slumbers of Ulysses, by his curious companions, than they swelled out into a storm as broad as the sea and as high as the heavens. We shall doubtless have a sufficient illustration of this as we proceed. Already has the word "Disciple" enlisted a very respectable force; and, like the fairy pavillion which could be held in the hand when folded, but when opened would cover an immense army, the name "Christian" has enlarged itself to accommodate three large divisions marshalled under the banners of Patrial, Diminutive, and Patronymic-in themselves a host, and able, one would think, to put to rout a regiment of common militia. By the way, it is certainly quite fortunate for the unpretending word "Disciple" that the grenadier Patronymic has lately fallen away to the service of the Jesuits, who have, it seems by the last advices, with their accustomed ingenuity, quite converted him to the faith. But to the purpose: There are, it appears. three names already proposed. One suggests "Disciples of Christ," or elliptically "Disciples;" another urges the adoption of the name "Christians;” while a third would amalgamate both, and make peace by making of the twain one new name—“Christian Disciples." It is said of Sir Roger de Coverly, that, when pressed in argument, he was wont to end the matte by pleasantly observing, "Well, I see that much may be said upon both sides." Now, the matter is this: The question before us has already three sides as just stated, and I propose to add a fourth to it; for certainly if much may be said when there are but two sides, more may be urged when there are three, and most of all when we have four. In the first place, however, let us endeavor to see clearly what the question is. It is not, if I have understood it, What shall others call us? but, What shall we call ourselves? "If we miscall ourselves,” you remark, "the sin is ours; it is theirs [our neighbors'] if they do t." We cannot, indeed, expect any thing else but that others will miscall us, for "the world knoweth us not;" and if men do not know who and what we are, it would be strange if they should name us right. Bst as we ourselves are, or ought to be, duly apprized of all this, it will most assuredly be our own fault if we do not give ourselves a good name. Nevertheless, I am not sure that the debaters have really addressed themselves to this business, for they seem to me to look over the question, What shall we call ourselves? to the first one, What shall others call us? and to approve or reject according as others are supposed to feel and judge. Hence one name is disapproved because others will consider it too indefinite; another is objected to because others will associate with it sentiments which we disavow, and the object would appear to be to choose one by which others may designate us as a religious denomination. This I conceive to be a matter of small concern, compared with the adoption of a name by which we shall be known to one another and to ourselves. People are too fond of calling as names, to yield the privilege to us, and they will no doubt continue to please in this respect their own fancy. But it is very important that we should choose for ourselves a name so significant and appropriate, that we shall always know exactly who we are, and what we are. We will thus be free from any danger of confounding ourselves with others; or of being mistaken in our own identity; and being thus reduced to the dilemma of the "sleeper awakened," who had to call upon an attendant to bite his finger to convince him that he did not merely dream of being the Sultan; and afterwards again was obliged to be severely bastinadoed before he would confess that he was nothing but plain Abon Hassan. But before I suggest the name which I deem most suitable, allow me to make a remark or two upon those already proposed. The name "Christian" is urged as of divine authority. Of this there is no proof. It is well known that this name was given at first to the ancient disciples in reproach, and by their enemies. The name of Christ was execrated by their persecutors, who made it the criterion of apostacy to blaspheme it. Peter exhorts the believers to rejoice when they were reproached for, or with, the name of Christ. It was to them a cause and a part of their persecution to be called Christians; and however they may have suffered themselves to be so called, there is no evidence that they adopted the title. That it is not of divine authority may be inferred 1 think with certainty from the fact, that the writer who states that the disciples were called Christians at Antioch (it would rather have been at Jerusalem had it been divine) does not afterwards so call them, but continues to use the word "disciple." Now it is worthy of remark, that when the names of Sarah and Abram are changed by divine authority, the writer who records the circumstance does always afterwards use the new names Sarah and Abraham. Were there the same divine warrant for the change of Disciple to Christian, the sacred historian Luke would have been guided by the same inspiration to the same consistency. It is a strong objection to the adoption of the name "Christian," that it does not at all express the same idea now which it did anciently. It then simply denoted a follower of Christ; one who acknowledged Christ as his leader, without any special reference to character; although this, when brought into question, was supposed to be abominable by the idolators, who regarded the disciples as atheists and haters of mankind. Now, on the contrary, this term is used almost exclusively in reference to character, and denotes one who has attained to the highest moral and religious eminence. It was formerly a reproach, but it is now an honor. Hence to assume it at present is to bestow upon each other the highest compliment and encomium; and to claim from others a degree of consideration and respect for a mere title, which they have been accustomed to pay only to character. The name "Disciples of Christ" is liable to this objection also, though I grant that if every body understood Latin they would see a redeeming virtue in the humility implied by the word disciple or learner. It is undeniable that this name is used first of all, and very frequently in the New Testament. But it is now understood in a different sense; and, like the name "Christian," means too much to suit the case so well, I think, as the one I am about to mention. Upon the whole, however, if it were allowable for us to have two or three names, and I do not see why we should not have four or five—a thing which, by the bye, is not unfashionable in modern times, I would willingly adopt "Disciples" as one of them. But inasmuch as we are now in search of the best name, I take the liberty to suggest "Brethren," or "Brother" in the singular, as the most suitable. This, I think, will appear from a few considerations: 1st. While it is used interchangeably in the scriptures with the word "disciple" so as to have equal authority, it occurs much more frequently. 2d. It was used by Christ and the Apostles as a designation. “Ye are all brethren"-"Holy brethren"-"If any one called a brother," &c. 3d. Being derived from a natural relation which is immutable, it expresses the same idea now as formerly, which is not true of the others. 4th. It is most free from any appearance of assumption or arrogance. 5th. It is much more applicable. And here it is that I wish to be more particular, as in this consists the chief merit of a name. There are two things conspicuous among brethren-affection and familiarity. Every one expects brethren to have fraternal affection, and every body knows that brethren can take the greatest liberties with one another. I would not say that where there is the greatest familiarity there is the greatest affection. The reverse of this I believe to be true. But among many brethren we shall find some conspicuous for affection, and others for a disposition to use freedoms. This is so both in the natural and spiritual relation, and it is most evidently true of us as a religious community. Here is one, for instance, who, desiring to have the preeminence, and preferring the praise of men to the praise of God, seeks every opportunity to plume himself with the well-earned reputation of his brother. In all the phraseology of affection, and with th greatest politeness in the world, he takes the liberty to charge upon his very dear brother, and that too publicly and in print, usurpation injustice, plagiarism, falsehood, profanity. Presuming upon the near |