Earlier text: Thoughts on Daniel1. PLEASE explain Heb. 6:4-6. Does it mean that all who have sinned after they have been converted will be lost? What is meant by falling away? R. B. S. It certainly does not mean that, or we might repeat the old question: "Who then can be saved?" Peter's calling as an apostle secured great privileges, and yet his sin, grievous as it was, did not shut him out from the grace of Christ. It is not to be supposed that the Lord approved the "sharp contention" which passed between Paul and Barnabas, Acts 13:2, 3; 15:36-40. But Paul afterward confessed that he was not perfect; and in this he was more modest and humble, and just so much more of a true Christian, than are some of this day. But we do think there is a limit to God's forbearance with the abuse of his gifts and grace. In the text quoted in the question, the apostle doubtless refers to high attainments in the things of God, and to great abuse of the gifts of his Spirit. And this is paralleled by the Saviour's words in Matt. 12, that there is no forgiveness to him who blasphemes the Holy Spirit. And again in Heb. 12:15-17, we are warned by the example of Esau, who could not inherit the blessing which he once despised and foolishly bartered away, even "though he sought it carefully with tears." This certainly teaches us that there is a limit beyond which it is fatal to go. We are very much in the position of the Presiding Elder, who, when he was accused of believing in falling from grace, replied that he did not believe in it at all, but believed in the possibility of it. "Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure; for if ye do these things ye shall never fall." 2 Peter 1:10. But the Lord has promised to heal the backslidings of those who return unto him: Jer. 3:22, etc. This must not be made a ground of presumption; for it is true that "He that being often reproved, hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy." Prov. 29:1. 2. Persons professing sanctification tell us that they have all on the altar (Christ), and are thereby sanctified, according to Matt. 23:19. Is Christ the altar? To prove this they quote Heb. 13:10. B. R. The text does not prove the position. There is no reason for thus confounding the sacrifice with the altar. See verses 11, 12. There is no doubt "the altar" is put for that which is on the altar, as "the cup" is put for the contents of the cup. But that no more makes the altar and the sacrifice identical, than the Saviour's words, in Luke 22:17, and Paul's words, in 1 Cor. 11:27, prove that "the cup" is identical with the "fruit of the vine" which the cup contained. In the expression it is made to stand for its contents, but it is not therefore identical with its contents. 3. How do you harmonize the expressions, "Sanctify them through thy truth," John 17:17, "Sanctified by faith that is in me," Acts 26:18, and "Sanctified by the Holy Ghost," Rom. 15:16? B. R. Each of these expressions is alike true, and we might quote another, "Ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth," 1 Peter 1:22, and then reply that the whole truth on the subject is contained in them all. We are indeed sanctified through the truth, but not without obedience to the truth. We are sanctified in obedience, but not without faith in Christ. We are sanctified by faith, but not without the Holy Spirit. We are sanctified by the Holy Spirit, but not without faith, and obedience to the truth. The difficulty with some—yes with many—is that they take one text and make a hobby of that, or construct their theory upon it, without seeking for all the truth, without any effort to harmonize all the words of the Holy Spirit. 4. What did Paul mean by saying, "I am carnal?" How is the carnal mind destroyed? B. R. Paul meant that carnality was in his nature; as he expressed in verse 18 of the same chapter, "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing." The destruction of the carnal mind is simply the person being brought in harmony with, or submission to, the will of God. "The carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God," Rom. 8:7. Of course when Paul said, "I am carnal," he referred to his nature, and not to his then present position, for at that time he declared he delighted in the law of God—he was no more opposed to it, no longer an enemy of God and of his will. The Entrance of Thy Word Giveth Light
“THE entrance of Thy word giveth light.” Sunday in Politics.
By Editor
KNOWING the interest that all our readers feel in the discussion of the Sunday Law, we give the following extract from the platform adopted by the State Democratic Convention at San Jose, last month, together with the discussion upon it:— "Resolved, That the Democratic party, inheriting the doctrine of Jefferson and Jackson, hereby declares its unqualified enmity to all sumptuary legislation, regarding all such exercise of the law-making power as against the just objects of free government, and that all laws intended to restrain or direct a free and full exercise by any citizen, of his own religious and political opinion, so long as he leaves others to enjoy their rights unmolested, are anti-Democratic and hostile to the principles and traditions of the party, create unnecessary antagonism, cannot be enforced, and are a violation of the spirit of Republican government, and we will oppose the enactment of all such laws, and demand the repeal of those now existing." "When the resolution relating to the Sunday-law repeal pledge was reached, O——, of Alameda, opposed the latter portion of that resolution, which pledged the party to the repeal of the Sunday Law. He said it was impolitic and fraught with danger to the party." "R——, of Mendocino, proposed an amendment to the resolution referred to, striking out the latter part which had reference to a repeal. He argued at some length in favor of his motion, and while acknowledging his adherence to the old tradition of the Democratic party against sumptuary laws, claimed that the plank referred to was a firebrand thrown into the party and would antagonize the church vote." "T——, of San Joaquin, was adverse to the motion, and said that he had been for twenty-five years. He deprecated the exercise of policy opposed to principle. The law was inoperative and foreign to the principles of the Democratic party, and, he believed, unconstitutional." "W——, of Sonoma, professed his enmity to sumptuary legislation, and admitted the injustice and unconstitutionality of the Sunday Law, but he believed that the question of repeal should be left to the people, to be settled by them in the choice of their legislators." "H——, of Los Angeles, advocated the motion, and said that his constituents were in favor of the Sunday Law, and many votes would be lost by the adoption of the plank in question." "B——, of Fresno, favored the passage of the resolution on the ground of both policy and principle. As District Attorney of his county he had conducted twenty prosecutions for violations of this law and only succeeded in one case, which was reversed by the Supreme Court on the ground that the Superior Court had no jurisdiction." "W——, of Los Angeles, opposed the motion." "O——, of San Joaquin, believed it was the duty of the Convention to assert the principles of the party with regard to this as well as all other issues, and he hoped that the plank would be unaltered." "M——, of Monterey, said that in Salinas City the Sunday Law was enforced, and that it would be inexpedient to advocate repeal." It was finally decided, by a vote of 280 to 167, to adopt the resolution advocating the repeal of the Sunday Law. It will be readily seen that the Sunday Law question will not be an unimportant matter in the fall election. Many voters are pledged to sustain it, regardless of party, and should a sufficient number adhere to this resolution, both parties would soon be brought to terms, as the main question with the politicians is, "Is it politic?" We shall watch further developments with interest. Was the First-Day Gradually Sanctified by the Apostles?
By John Nevins Andrews
[From Les Signes des Temps.] The sanctification of the first-day cannot be found in the first nineteen chapters of Acts. WE have sought in vain for the sanctification of the first-day by God at the resurrection of Christ. We have sought for the gradual sanctification of the day by Christ during the forty days which preceded his ascension, but have found that he did nothing of the kind, though he had abundant opportunity to sanctify the day by many successive acts. Having failed to find the sanctification of the day before the ascension of Christ, we have diligently sought for it in each of the first sixteen chapters of the Acts. We have found many events in the history of the apostles which imperatively demanded that something should be said concerning the sanctification of the day if the day were to be established as a memorial of the resurrection of Christ. We have found several important references to the Sabbath of the Lord, but have not yet found a single trace of the sanctification of the first day. We commence the search anew with Acts 17. Here we find Paul preaching in the synagogue at Thessalonica on three successive Sabbaths. It is even said that it was his manner to preach thus on the Sabbath. If we could find the declaration that it was his manner to preach on the first day, we should regard it as a strong testimonial to the sanctification of the day. It is said, however, that Paul preached concerning the death and the resurrection of Christ, but it is not said that he bade the people to observe the day on which Christ died, nor the day on which he arose. Acts 17:1-3. Next, Paul came to Berea and immediately began to preach in the synagogue. He found the Jews of this place willing to receive the gospel. It was therefore a good occasion to announce the sanctification of the first day, but he did not do it. Acts 17:10-14. Then Paul came to Athens and preached in the synagogue as he had done at Berea. These meetings were upon the Sabbath. He also disputed in the market daily, until the people invited him to address them in their highest assembly. He told them that the true God is the creator, and that he will judge the world by Jesus Christ whom he had raised from the dead. Verses 22-31. But he said not a word concerning the first day as the memorial of that resurrection. After this Paul came to Corinth, and preached Christ in the synagogue every Sabbath, persuading both Jews and Greeks, but labored on other days at tent making with Aquila and Priscilla. Acts 18:1-11. If it were said that he preached every first day, or if it were said that he bade the people observe the first day in honor of the resurrection, we should say that we have at last found the sanctification of the day, though not till twenty-three years after the resurrection of our Lord. But we find nothing of the kind. Next Paul came to Ephesus and preached in the synagogue, which must have been upon the Sabbath. After his departure, Apollos arrived at Ephesus and preached in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila had heard him, they expounded to him the gospel of Christ. This record like that in Acts 15:21, shows that the Christians were in the habit of attending worship in the synagogue on the Sabbath, when the Jews did not make opposition. Acts 18:19-28. But we find no trace of the sanctification of the first day in Acts 18. In Acts 19:1-8 we read that when Paul returned to Ephesus, he went into the synagogue and preached boldly for the space of three months. In this period were twelve Sabbaths. If Paul had ceased to observe the Sabbath, or if he taught the sanctification of the first day, to take the place of the seventh, he would not thus have been permitted to preach in the synagogue. The remainder of the chapter relates to the tumult at Ephesus. We find, therefore, no trace of the sanctification of the first day in Acts 19. The sanctification of the first-day cannot be found in Acts 20. When we come to Acts 20 we find the first and only mention of the first day in the book of Acts. It occurs twenty-eight years after the resurrection of Christ, and contains no allusion to that event. Verse 7. The disciples came together in the evening for they had many lights where they were assembled, and Paul preached till midnight, which would make his sermon four or five hours long, and the meeting actually continued till break of day. Every day, as measured in the Bible, begins and ends at evening, which is at sunset. Compare Gen. 1:5, 8, 13, 19, 23, 31; Lev. 23:32; Deut. 16:6; Lev. 22:6, 7; Deut. 23:11; 24:13, 15; Joshua 8:29; 10:26, 27; Judges 14:18; Mark 1:32. As this evening meeting at Troas was on the first day of the week, it must have been on what we call Saturday evening, for Sunday evening at sunset the first day terminates, and the second day of the week commences.308 The disciples therefore came together in the evening at the close of the Sabbath to celebrate the supper of the Lord, because Paul was to leave them in the morning never to return. And in the morning of the first day of the week he actually did set forth on foot for Assos, while his companions took the ship around the promontory to that city, where they took him in. Verses 13, 14. We have here, then, the most convincing proof that the first day of the week had not been sanctified as late as the year 59, for if it had been sanctified, St. Paul was either ignorant of that sanctification, or else guilty of profaning the day. But those who have not studied these facts, affirm that this passage proves that the first day had been constantly observed during the twenty-eight years that had elapsed between the time that Christ arose and this meeting at Troas. This is the argument:— 1. The church at Troas once had a meeting in the evening at the commencement of the first day of the week. 2. Therefore it must have been the custom of the church at Troas to meet regularly in the day-time of each first day of the week. 3. Therefore all the churches everywhere throughout the world met regularly for worship on the first day of the week. 4. Therefore the apostles from the time of the resurrection of Christ always met for worship on the first day of the week. 5. Therefore Christ must have met with his disciples on each of the six first-days during the forty days which preceded his ascension. 6. Therefore God sanctified the first day of the week when Christ arose from the dead. But the most diligent search has failed to find any fact corresponding to any one of the five conclusions above enumerated. On the contrary, we have found the most convincing evidence, that the observance of the first day was wholly unknown to the apostolic churches, and that each of these five conclusions is false. When Luke speaks of the Sabbath among certain Gentiles at Philippi, he says that that worship was customary. Acts 16:13. When he speaks of the preaching of Paul at Thessalonica, on the Sabbath in the synagogue, he says that this was his manner. Acts 17:2. When he speaks of Paul at Corinth, he says that he preached in the synagogue to the Jews and Greeks every Sabbath. Acts 18:4. But when he speaks of the first day at Troas, he does not say that meetings on that day were customary, nor that it was their manner to meet on that day, nor that they met every first-day for worship. Yet if such was their custom, and if their example was to be the model for the entire church of Christ, then it was infinitely more important that Luke should tell us that they did this every first-day, than that he should tell us what Paul did every Sabbath day. To this we add two facts, each of which forbids the idea that Luke intended to show that the church at Troas was following a custom derived from the apostles, or obeying an ordinance which they had established for the commemoration of the resurrection. 1. This was a meeting in the night, not of an ordinary, but of an extraordinary character. 2. The object for which they met was to break bread; but the breaking of bread commemorates not the resurrection of Christ, but his death. 1 Cor. 11:26. We know, therefore, that this meeting was occasioned by the departure of Paul, and not by an ordinance of the apostles requiring the churches to commemorate the resurrection of Christ by the breaking of bread on the first day of the week. We know also that the first day of the week had not been sanctified at the time of this meeting at Troas, or Paul would not have set out on his journey on the morning of that day. The sanctification of the first-day cannot be found in the book of Acts. The remainder of this chapter contains the farewell address of St. Paul, at Miletus, but makes no allusion to the sanctification of the first day of the week. In Acts 21 we read of the voyage of the apostle to Cæsarea, and his ascent to Jerusalem. When he arrived there he was told that there were accusations against him concerning circumcision (verse 21), but not one of his enemies at Jerusalem charged him with teaching the sanctification of the first day in place of the seventh. We are therefore certain that as late as the close of Acts 21, Paul had never taught the sanctification of the first day of the week. In Acts 22, we have the defense of Paul before the multitude at Jerusalem, but he has no occasion to defend himself with respect to the sanctification of a new day, for he is not even accused of having made any change in this respect. In Acts 23, Paul appears before the council at Jerusalem, and is sent by the Romans to Cæsarea. The chapter contains no allusion to the sanctification of the first day. In Acts 24, we have the defense of Paul before Felix, but like all the chapters which precede, this chapter contains no reference to the sanctification of the day of the resurrection of Christ. In Acts 25, Paul defends himself before Festus, and declares in verse 8, that the Jews had no occasion to accuse him even with respect to the law. It is certain that thus far no one could say that he had taught the sanctification of the first day in the place of the seventh. In Acts 26, Paul makes his defense before Agrippa, and states the causes of the enmity of the Jews toward him. But the sanctification of a new day was not one of these causes. Verses 19-21. In Acts 27, we have the voyage and shipwreck of Paul. In Acts 28, we have the account of his arrival at Rome, and also a record of his conference with the Jews of that city. But there is no accusation made against him that he had taught the sanctification of the first day in the place of the seventh, nor was the subject mentioned by him or them. We know, therefore, that the first day was never sanctified by the apostles, neither by a single act in which all united, nor by a series of acts which gradually accomplished the sanctification of the day, nor even by any means whatever. J. N. A. Healdsburg School.
By Editor
THE School Board spent several days last week in Healdsburg, looking after the interests of our school there. Some improvements are being made on the building, but fortunately it was so well planned that very few improvements can be made upon it; the cost of those being made is quite inconsiderable. The citizens of Healdsburg have expressed themselves decidedly against the name we had selected for the school—Healdsburg Academy. We were aware that there are too many institutions called colleges in this western country. The number is greater than can be well sustained, and consequently they can hardly rise to a high place among the colleges of America. We therefore concluded to make a departure, and make ours a first-class school under the name of Academy. But it is objected that an Academy is looked upon as a school lower or less meritorious than a College, and that, of course, if that is called an Academy it will be considered inferior to the Colleges of this Coast. But such we have no intention that it shall be. And the objection is well-considered and has much weight. In view of this fact, and to place our institution in a proper light before the world, it was decided by a unanimous vote to give it the name of "Healdsburg College," and to incorporate under that name. It was all the time considered a necessity to have a good boarding-house in connection with the school. Already the necessity is pressing heavily upon us, and it was decided to take immediate steps for the erection of a building. A splendid lot of five acres has been secured at a moderate cost, and if we succeed in getting the money which has recently been promised for the purpose, the work will be pushed on vigorously. If this be done it may be necessary to put up a temporary house for the students, and for the use of the workmen on the permanent building. Healdsburg is not a large place, and already the vacant houses, and every available place is being taken by those who are moving there to enjoy the benefits of the school. We found Professor Brownsberger in good health and fine spirits. He enters enthusiastically into his work, and is well pleased with the location of the school and the prospect before it. Professor Grainger will enter as a teacher at the commencement of the coming term, and steps have already been taken to secure other help as may be needed. The purchase of the excellent building and the fine lot on which it stands, on such favorable terms, was a most fortunate circumstance for our school enterprise. It has enabled us to do much more than was considered possible to do this year when the vote was taken by the State Conference last fall to start a school. We shall endeavor to move cautiously and prudently, but to do all that can be done to place the College on such a footing, that it shall meet the most sanguine expectations of its friends. We predict its success, and ask its friends not to forget its wants or their pledges in its behalf. The Intercession of Christ.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
A BROTHER residing in the eastern part of the State, writes concerning a man in that place, professedly a Seventh-day Adventist, who has been making known some of his peculiar views. He thinks that this people are all right except wherein they differ with him. He has, he says, talked with several of our leading ministers, but has received no satisfaction. The brother writes in behalf of the church in that place, that they may know what credence to give to this man's theory. The theory in question, as given to us, is this:— "He thinks that the death of Christ was all that is necessary on Christ's part to secure man's redemption. No necessity for intercession in Heaven. That it belittles the character of God to suppose that he could be influenced to change his decision by the intercession of Christ. If a man has lived conscientiously in this life, God, who made him and can measure his motives, and sympathize with his weakness, will render unto him his just deserts anyway; and consequently Christ's intercession becomes at least a very puerile and unnecessary thing. . . . He does not believe that God can be angry in any degree, for that element would be contrary to the attributes of his nature. 'Anger resteth in the bosom of fools.'" We have here an example of the way some men will get an idea from a single text of Scripture, and then, mounting their hobby, will fly off regardless of a thousand other texts on the same subject. It has been well said that the peculiarity of the hobby horse is that when a man is once astride of it he cannot get off; and this is doubtless the reason why the man failed to receive any satisfaction from those ministers with whom he talked. If only the single individual were concerned, there would generally be but little use to try to answer him; but unfortunately the carrying capacity of a hobby is unlimited, and the rider is always anxious to share his seat with his friends. In the first place, if we can believe the Bible, "God is angry with the wicked every day." Ps. 7:11. He himself says, "I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me; and showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments." Ex. 20:5, 6. In many places in the Old Testament we read of his anger being kindled against the Israelites, and threatenings of anger if they should disobey him. David says, "He will not always chide; neither will he keep his anger forever." Ps. 103:9. Jeremiah, speaking in prophetic vision, says, "I beheld, and lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the Lord, and by his fierce anger." Jer. 4:26. Again, "Therefore thus saith the Lord God: Behold, mine anger and my fury shall be poured out upon this place, upon man, and upon beast, and upon the trees of the field, and upon the fruit of the ground; and it shall burn, and shall not be quenched." Jer. 7:20. "Behold, a whirlwind of the Lord is gone forth in fury, even a grievous whirlwind; it shall fall grievously upon the head of the wicked. The anger of the Lord shall not return until he have executed, and until he have performed the thoughts of his heart; in the latter days ye shall consider it perfectly." Chap. 23:19, 20. Read also Jeremiah 25:15-38. Nahum says: "Who can stand before his indignation? and who can abide in the fierceness of his anger?" Chap. 1:6. Again we read: "The great day of the Lord is near; it is near, and hasteth greatly, even the voice of the Lord; the mighty man shall cry there bitterly. That day is a day of wrath, a day of trouble and distress, a day of wasteness and desolation, a day of darkness and gloominess, a day of clouds and thick darkness. . . . And I will bring distress upon men, that they shall walk like blind men, because they have sinned against the Lord; . . . Neither their silver nor their gold shall be able to deliver them in the day of the Lord's wrath; but the whole land shall be devoured by the fire of his jealousy." Zeph. 1:14-18. And then the exhortation is given: "Seek ye the Lord, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment; seek righteousness, seek meekness; it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the Lord's anger." Chap. 2:3. See also Chap. 3:8. We believe that God understands his own attributes better than any man; and it will not do to presume upon the mercy of God, when he plainly says that his anger will be poured out on those who persist in their rebellion against him. Finite man cannot judge an infinite God. The threatenings contained in the Bible should serve to make men "tremble at his word." Paul says, "Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men." 2 Cor. 5:11. But the objector quotes: "Anger resteth in the bosom of fools." Very true. It remains there, constantly springing into activity at every provocation, or no provocation at all. He harbors it in his heart, and cherishes it. But David says of the Lord: "For his anger endureth but a moment." Ps. 30:5. The Lord, speaking through the prophet Isaiah, of the punishment of the wicked, says: "For yet a very little while, and the indignation shall cease, and mine anger in their destruction." Isa. 10:25. To compare the petty anger and malice which dwells in the human heart, and which so many glory in, with the just indignation of a long-offended God, is irreverent, to say the least. The idea that Christ does not intercede for man is of the same nature. It is a plain contradiction of the Bible. However confident others may be of their power to stand and plead their own case before God, we are glad for the promise that if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous." 1 John 2:1. Read also the following: "For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." 1 Tim. 2:5. "For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into Heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." Heb. 9:24. "Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is ever at the right-hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us." Rom. 8:34. "Wherefore he is able to save to the uttermost them that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." Heb. 7:25. These texts plainly teach that man has an advocate; that that advocate is Christ; and that he is now making intercession for us. To call his intercession puerile and unnecessary is simply blasphemy. Let such a one read and consider Heb. 10:28, 29. The fact that a man is represented at court by an advocate does not prove that the judge is unjust, or disinclined to listen to the man's case; but it does prove that the man is unable to properly present his own case. There is nothing in man that would recommend him to God, for he has forfeited all claim upon his mercy. God cannot look upon sin with any allowance. It is exceedingly repugnant to him. When man was pure and innocent he could talk face to face with God; but when he fell, God hid his face from him. A just God could not endure a sinful being in his presence, even to beg for mercy. Therefore we now have to come to God through the intercession of Christ. Christ says: "No man cometh unto the Father but by me." John 14:6. Christ is the sinner's only hope. If a man were in danger of drowning and a rope were thrown to him, he would not stop to criticise the rope, or the man who threw it. If he were wise he would seize it at once. He would not cavil, and wonder why those seeking to save him did not use some other means; nor would he hesitate, for fear that the rope would not hold him; neither would he, unless he were blind, say that no rope had been thrown; nor, unless he were insane or hopelessly conceited, would he assert that he could climb into the ship without the aid of any rope. Should he do any of these things, the tide would carry the rope beyond his reach, and he would be left to drown. So the one who carps at the plan which God has chosen by which to save men, is in danger of losing the benefit of the offer which is held out to him. Perhaps God might have devised some other means of salvation, if it had pleased him to do so, but since he did not, it ill becomes us to question his wisdom. To those whose ears are assailed with such false theories we would quote the language of Paul: "Be not carried about with divers and strange doctrines. For it is a good thing that the heart be established with grace." In other words: Beware of the man with a hobby. E. J. W. Minnesota Camp-Meeting.
By C. W. Stone
THIS meeting, held at Minneapolis, closed June 27. The attendance was quite large, some seventy-five tents being pitched on the ground. On Sunday a large and intelligent audience of people from the city listened to discourses upon some of the main features of our faith, that given at 4 P. M., by Eld. G. C. Tenney, of Wisconsin, being wholly upon temperance. In many respects the results of this camp-meeting are very encouraging. A spirit of tenderness and harmony came into our midst, increased, and prevailed. Many were aroused to a deeper sense of the lukewarm condition of the people of God, and the danger of the times in which we live, and resolved to devote themselves renewedly to the service of God. Measures were taken to secure a greater circulation of our reading matter. The work of canvassing received special attention, and several proposed to engage in the work. Some fourteen order-books for "Thoughts on Daniel and the Revelation" were taken. To the testimonies which were freely read from the desk is attributable in a great degree the good results of the meeting. "Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts." Zech. 4:6. Parker, Dakota, June 28. C. W. STONE. California to Europe.
By James W. Gardner
AFTER regretful adieus to friends in California, we sped on our way eastward, and in ten days were cheered by those near and dear in Battle Creek. We were compelled to bring our visit quickly to a close, and hastened on to New York, spending two days with our family in Toledo. In answer to call from New England, we then went to South Lancaster. The New England school was about to open; the book depository and news depot was also nearly ready, and all was activity in preparing for reception of students and providing for contingencies. We were specially interested with the undoubted evidence of the Spirit of God manifested in this place, and the perfect harmony existing between all. Bro. Haskell indeed has faithful helpers in his native place, whose confidence in his plans is unbounded. I wish the readers might have been present at the opening exercises of the school, to see the spirit manifested by the students. If the Lord is not in the work as started we are much deceived. The spirit of manhood and womanhood as shown by the actions of the students in resolutions and remarks was of a touchingly gratifying nature. Bro. Haskell's labors were so severe, and his duties so many as to render it impossible to leave for some time after the day first decided upon, and it was finally thought best that we should return to New York and complete arrangements for our passage to Europe and secure, one week later, passage for Bro. Haskell. After visiting the various lines of transatlantic steamers, with most of which we had, in former years, been familiar, we finally decided on the Monarch Line, whose passenger steamers have been running but a few years, but a line having freight vessels in every part of the globe. The agent, we found very kind and obliging. He gave us passes to visit the ship about to sail from New Jersey, the Lydian Monarch, in which we found all that could be desired. These ships are nearly all alike, about 400 feet in length, and 4,700 tons' burden. They are quite new, steel vessels, with iron masts, powerful engines, and specially adapted to rough weather. They are unusually wide, consequently, the state-rooms are larger than on any other line, and they are finely fitted up. The state-rooms, saloon, and promenade decks, are situated amid-ships and forward of engines, a very essential point, and one which will be appreciated by all sea travelers, especially those subject to sea-sickness, which terrible malady is increased by jar of engines and propeller, smell of oil, cooking, etc., all of which is avoided on these ships. We have sailed in many ships on many seas, but never have we experienced a pleasanter trip. The construction of these ships is such as to render them remarkably steady in heavy weather. Of the usual routine of sea life we will say nothing, except to state that Captain Nuggett, and officers and stewards, in whom so much of our comfort depends, were exceptionally kind and thoughtful. My wife, being sick much of the time, was kindly inquired after by each, several times every day, with solicitations for her welfare; and everything possible for kind hands to do, was done for her comfort. We would make special mention of one, to whom we became much attached. Miss Lloyd, the stewardess, was a friend indeed, and a superior woman. Seeing my wife so sick, she gave up her state-room, which was inside, and, consequently, a trifle steadier than ours in rough weather, so that we had the two rooms, one in which we would stay when the sea was calm and the port could be opened, and the other as a retreat in heavy weather. She also kept us supplied with ice, which was the most acceptable thing we could take, and with any preparation capricious fancy might suggest. She was a God-fearing woman, one who lived her faith; and we shall endeavor to return by the steamer bearing Miss Lloyd. The voyage was enlivened by excellent music, we having several professional musicians on board, and a good piano. After a prosperous passage, we landed safely in London, with feelings of gratitude to God for guiding us among so worthy a company, and on so comfortable a ship; and we most heartily recommend the Monarch Line to all our friends and people. The time quickly passed in London before Elder Haskell arrived off the Scilly Islands, from whence his ship was telegraphed, having in tow a large German steamer in distress, which they had towed nearly 1,200 miles. Thinking he would leave ship before reaching London, we anticipated him by leaving for Southampton. Passing a lovely country en route, we came, in two hours, to our largest English mission, where we found Elder Loughborough and friends, with whom we chatted a couple of hours, when who should drive up but our beloved and anxiously looked-for brother, Elder Haskell, just in from Falmouth, sunburned, and looking as though he had not suffered much from his experience in participating in the relief of the distressed on the sea's highway. The green hills and dales of Old England, and the kindness received from her sturdy sons, have been much appreciated, and we feel we can indeed love her, and feel proud of our ancestry. President Garfield's long lingering in agony, and his sad death, called forth from England her heartfelt sympathies, and the two nations have been brought in close communion. We feel much encouraged with the spread of truth here, and feel assured that the blessing of God will still further open the way, and believe results will be seen, ere long, which may surprise many. After an absence of several years, we rejoice again to be on British soil, and hear with patriotic feeling, "God save the Queen," and pray he will continue to still further bless these shores, over which his blessing has so long hovered. J. W. GARDNER. North Pacific Conference.
By Charles L. Boyd
PORTLAND.—Six years ago a series of meetings was held at this place in the tent by Brn. Van Horn and —. Of those who then embraced the Sabbath, three remain here and are faithful; others have been added to their number, some by immigration and others by conversion. In company with Bro. Snashall, I held meetings with this company last Sabbath and first-day, and organized a church. Three were baptized in the Willamette River. A precious season was enjoyed in the celebration of the holy supper, in which several took part for the first time. A weekly meeting and Sabbath-school are sustained. May this company be, in this large and wicked city, like a light through whose shining many precious souls shall speedily be drawn to the blessed Saviour, and a saving knowledge of his present truth.
Chas. L. Boyd.
Portland, June 28, 1882.