When A. Campbell, by reason of the infirmity of advanced age, retired from the ownership and control of the Millennial Harbinger, it was logical that these should it come into the hands of Prof. W. K. Pendleton. A. Campbell had for several years written but little for his cherished monthly, although his name had been retained as editor; Professor Pendleton had during this time been its virtual editor, and had been for many years one of its co-editors. He was, therefore, because of his long experience, and his other eminent qualifications, best fitted to take charge of the Millennial Harbinger.

      There was a general feeling expressed at this time, among the brotherhood, that this journal, which had since 1830, in the hands of A. Campbell and his co-laborers, been the powerful directing journalistic organ of our Reformation, should continue to live. It had done a mighty work in the past, and its numerous friends cherished its name and its visits with peculiar affection. Only those yet abiding among us who lived fifty years ago, and more, know what the Millennial Harbinger was to our people in those days.

      It required a good deal of faith and courage to continue the publication of this famous monthly when the once so strong hand of its founder finally laid down the staff of his office as editor in 1865. The Civil War, which had not yet ended, had cut off for four years the support of the Millennial Harbinger in most of the Southern States. Besides this, Mr. Campbell's inability to write much for it for several years had weakened its power and influence among the people.

      In spite of all these discouragements, Professor Pendleton determined that the Millennial Harbinger should still continue to do its good work for the cause of Christ. This was the result of many counsels we held together. It was a brave act on his part, for he knew very well that it would not be an enterprise of pecuniary profit, but of loss.

      He selected as his particular associates Isaac Errett and myself--my name appearing as co-editor, since I lived at Bethany. We all went to work with energy and a strong purpose to do our best to make the Millennial Harbinger not altogether unworthy of its history, and worthy of the cause it advanced and the people who read it. [537]

      Isaac Errett during these years wrote some admirable articles, that foreshadowed his remarkable ability as a writer. Dr. Richardson, also, from time to time, enriched the pages of our monthly with the products of his pen; and whatever this gifted man wrote was valuable, and classic in its substance and form. Professor Pendleton's writings were always on important subjects, and rich and mature in thought and scholarly in style.

      But the time had come when religious monthlies were no longer in the order of things. Weeklies took their place. These able and widely circulated papers that have gained such a power among the people, represent much better the popular journalistic literature demanded in these times than would the monthlies of our earlier days.

      I confess, however, that I am often impressed with the inferiority of much of our journalistic literature today, in weight, maturity and sobriety of thought, when compared with many of the writings of the classic period of our past.

CHAS. LOUIS LOOS.      

Source:

Charles Louis Loos. First publication of the essay. See Benjamin Lyon Smith's "Preface," p. iii.

[MHA2 537-538]