It should be remembered that during this time he was connected with the Northern Indiana Eldership; but as this was a body already separated from the old Eldership because of their purpose to keep on the Scriptural basis, he really believed that this body was the true church, for that was its claim. Thus he was really out of sectism in heart and was associated with a body claiming to be the church of God. During the last year (1880) of the Herald of Gospel Freedom, when it was fully under his editorial charge, its columns, while teaching holiness, breathed the principles of the one true church. One of its stated objects was "the union of all true believers in the Spirit of God and upon the inspired Word." Because of insufficient light on the governmental aspect of the true church, he was slow to discover that even the new Eldership was only a body ruled by men. As light came on the Holy Spirit government, he looked upon the man rule elements in the Eldership as inconsistencies that needed removal. It was human machinery that he thought needed to be dispensed with. We must concede, therefore, that in the meantime he was, to all intents and purposes, out of sects. We speak of this period as the crisis because he took such a bold, uncompromising stand against sects and taught holiness and the principles of the church with such thoroughness that it seemed to awaken every satanic element that had been slumbering under the guise of false profession. People had either to accept the truth or go into darkness. To him it meant the break-up of old relations, the drawing of new lines of fellowship, exposure to persecution, and everything that might befall the career of a reformer. As the teaching of the resurrection and the repudiation of circumcision constituted the offence of the cross in Paul's day, so the preaching of the Bible standard of holiness and the renouncement of all sects became the offence of the cross at this time. We shall give several selections from the earlier issues of the Trumpet that are representative of its teaching. In the issue of Mar. 1, 1881, we have the following: BRANCHES Where in the Bible do we find the idea of sects being branches, as people talk about? "What branch of the church do you belong to?" is a common expression in these times of antiscriptural language and practise. Why do not people read their Bibles better and learn that every individual believer is a branch in Christ--John 15? If a whole sect is a branch, then the individual must be a sub-branch; but this would make each one dependent upon the sect for his union with, and life from, Christ. This would be second-hand salvation. We should not like to risk the coupling--I prefer a direct union with Christ.