p. 67 | Signs of the Times, Vol. 9, No. 6. (2/8/1883)

Earlier text: Remarks on the Second Chapter of Joel

Early Apostasy in the Church.

By John Nevins Andrews

THE early apostasy of the professed church is a fact which rests upon the authority of inspiration, not less than upon that of ecclesiastical history. "The mystery of iniquity," said Paul, "doth already work." We are constrained to marvel that so large a portion of the people of God were so soon removed from the grace of God unto another gospel.

What shall be said of those who go to this period of church history, and even to later times, to correct their Bibles? Paul said that men would rise in the very midst of the elders of the apostolic church, who would speak perverse things, and that men would turn away their ears from the truth, and would be turned unto fables. Are the traditions of this period of sufficient importance to make void God's word? The learned historian of the popes, Archibald Bower, uses the following emphatic language:—

"To avoid being imposed upon, we ought to treat tradition as we do a notorious and known liar, to whom we give no credit, unless what he says is confirmed to us by some person of undoubted veracity. . . . False and lying traditions are of an early date, and the greatest men have, out of a pious credulity, suffered themselves to be imposed upon by them."

Mr. Dowling bears a similar testimony:—

"The Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants!' Nor is it of any account in the estimation of the genuine Protestant how early a doctrine originated, if it is not found in the Bible. He learns from the New Testament itself that there were errors in the time of the apostles, and that their pens were frequently employed in combating those errors. Hence, if a doctrine be propounded for his acceptance, he asks, is it to be found in the inspired word? Was it taught by the Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles? . . . More than this, we will add, that though Cyprian, or Jerome, or Augustine, or even the Fathers of an earlier age, Tertullian, Ignatius, or Irenæus, could be plainly shown to teach the unscriptural doctrines and dogmas of Popery, which, however, by no means admitted, still the consistent Protestant would simply ask, Is the doctrine to be found in the Bible? Was it taught by Christ and his apostles? . . . He who receives a single doctrine upon the mere authority of tradition, let him be called by what name he will, by so doing steps down from the Protestant rock, passes over the line which separates Protestantism from Popery, and can give no valid reason why he should not receive all the earlier doctrines and ceremonies of Romanism upon the same authority."

Dr. Cumming of London thus speaks of the authority of the Fathers of the early church:—

"Some of these were distinguished for their genius, some for their eloquence, a few for their piety, and too many for their fanaticism and superstition. It is recorded by Dr. Delahogue (who was Professor in the Roman Catholic College of Maynooth), on the authority of Eusebius, that the Fathers who were really most fitted to be the luminaries of the age in which they lived, were too busy in preparing their flocks for martyrdom to commit anything to writing; and, therefore, by the admission of this Roman Catholic divine, we have not the full and fair exponent of the views of all the Fathers of the earlier centuries, but only of those who were most ambitious of literary distinction, and least attentive to their charges. . . . The most devoted and pious of the Fathers were busy teaching their flocks; the more vain and ambitious occupied their time in preparing treatises. If all the Fathers who signalized the age had committed their sentiments to writing, we might have had a fair representation of the theology of the church of the Fathers; but as only a few have done so (many even of their writings being mutilated or lost), and these not the most devoted and spiritually minded, I contend that it is as unjust to judge of the theology of the early centuries by the writings of the few Fathers who are its only surviving representatives, as it would be to judge of the theology of the nineteenth century by the sermons of Mr. Newman, the speeches of Dr. Candlish, or the various productions of the late Edward Irving."

Dr. Adam Clarke bears the following decisive testimony on the same subject:—

"But of these we may safely state that there is not a truth in the most orthodox creed that cannot be proved by their authority; nor a heresy that has disgraced the Romish church, that may not challenge them as its abettors. In points of doctrine, their authority is, with me, nothing. The word of God alone contains my creed. On a number of points I can go to the Greek and Latin Fathers of the church to know what they believed; and what the people of their respective communions believed: but after all this, I must return to God's word to know what he would have me to believe."

In his life, he uses the following strong language:—

"We should take heed how we quote the Fathers in proof of the doctrines of the gospel; because he who knows them best, knows that on many of those subjects they blow hot and cold."

The following testimonies will in part explain the unreliable nature of the Fathers. Thus Ephraim Pagitt testifies:—

"The church of Rome having been conscious of their errors and corruptions, both in faith and manners, have sundry times pretended reformations; yet their great pride and infinite profit, arising from purgatory, pardons, and such like, hath hindered all such reformations. Therefore, to maintain their greatness, errors, and new articles of faith, 1. They have corrupted many of the ancient Fathers, and reprinting them, make them speak as they would have them. . . . 2. They have written many books in the names of these ancient writers, and forged many decrees, canons, and councils, to bear false witness to them."

And Wm. Reeves testifies to the same fact:—

"The church of Rome has had all the opportunities of time, place, and power, to establish the kingdom of darkness; and that in coining, clipping, and washing the primitive records to their own good liking, they have not been wanting to themselves, is notoriously evident."

The traditions of the early church are considered by many quite as reliable as the language of the Holy Scriptures. A single instance taken from the Bible will illustrate the character of tradition, and show the amount of reliance that can be placed upon it:—

"Then Peter, turning about, seeth the disciple whom Jesus loved, following (which also leaned on his breast at supper, and said, Lord, which is he that betrayeth thee?); Peter seeing him, saith to Jesus, Lord, and what shall this man do? Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me. Then went this saying abroad among the brethren, that that disciple should not die; yet Jesus said not unto him, He shall not die; but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?"

Here is the account of a tradition which actually originated in the very bosom of the apostolic church, which nevertheless handed down to the following generations an entire mistake. Observe how carefully the word of God corrects this error.

Two rules of faith really embrace the whole Christian world. One of these is the word of God alone; the other is the word of God and the traditions of the church. Here they are:—

I. THE RULE OF THE MAN OF GOD, THE BIBLE ALONE.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works."

II. THE RULE OF THE ROMANIST, THE BIBLE AND TRADITION.

"If we would have the whole rule of Christian faith and practice, we must not be content with those scriptures which Timothy knew from his infancy, that is, with the Old Testament alone; nor yet with the New Testament, without taking along with it the traditions of the apostles, and the interpretation of the church, to which the apostles delivered both the book and the true meaning of it."

It is certain that the first-day Sabbath cannot be sustained by the first of these rules; for the word of God says nothing respecting such an institution. The second of these rules is necessarily adopted by all those who advocate the sacredness of the first day of the week. For the writings of the Fathers and the traditions of the church furnish all the testimony which can be adduced in support of that day. To adopt the first rule is to condemn the first-day Sabbath as a human institution. To adopt the second is virtually to acknowledge that the Romanists are right; for it is by this rule that they are able to sustain their unscriptural dogmas. Mr. W. B. Taylor, an able anti-Sabbatarian writer, states this point with great clearness:—

"The triumph of the consistent Roman Catholic over all observers of Sunday, calling themselves Protestants, is indeed complete and unanswerable. . . . . . . It should present a subject of very grave reflection to Christians of the reformed and evangelical denominations, to find that no single argument or suggestion can be offered in favor of Sunday observance, that will not apply with equal force and to its fullest extent in sustaining the other ‘holy days’ appointed by the church."

Listen to the argument of a Roman Catholic:—

"The word of God commandeth the seventh day to be the Sabbath of our Lord, and to be kept holy: you [Protestants] without any precept of Scripture, change it to the first day of the week, only authorized by our traditions. Divers English Puritans oppose against this point, that the observation of the first day is proved out of Scripture, where it is said ‘the first day of the week.’ Have they not spun a fair thread in quoting these places? If we should produce no better for purgatory and prayers for the dead, invocation of the saints, and the like, they might have good cause indeed to laugh us to scorn; for where is it written that these were Sabbath days in which those meetings were kept? Or where is it ordained they should be always observed? Or, which is the sum of all, where is it decreed that the observation of the first day should abrogate or abolish the sanctifying of the seventh day, which God commanded everlastingly to be kept holy? Not one of those is expressed in the written word of God."

Whoever therefore enters the lists in behalf of the first-day Sabbath, must of necessity do this—though perhaps not aware of the fact—under the banner of the church of Rome.

J. N. A.

Which Is It?

By Eld. R. F. Cottrell

BY ELD. R. F. COTTRELL.

Is THE book of Revelation a hidden mystery, or a revelation? Is its meaning "concealed under the apostle's words?" or are these words used by the Spirit of God "to show to his servants" that which was to come to pass in the future? The following extracts are taken from notes and comments in a family Bible. After stating some views that have been given by expositors on the seals and trumpets of the book of Revelation, the author speaks of chapters 10 and 11 in this way: "On comparing the affair of the book with Dan. 8 and 9, and Eze. 2 and 3, several things appear to be similar in both, but no exposition can be given of their meaning." Then he says:—

"The remainder of the book has been, and continues to be, the source of controversy; and questions have been raised upon it that have distracted the Christian

world. Into these we shall not enter, because we hold it to be quite impossible that mortal man can explain the mystery concealed under the apostle's words."

Now compare this idea of a "mystery concealed", under inexplicable words, of which "no exposition can be given of their meaning," with the declarations of the Spirit itself concerning the nature and design of the book—"The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass. . . . Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein."

What the Spirit of God calls a revelation, that is, something revealed, men call an unexplainable mystery; and that which "God gave" to show to the servants of Jesus Christ future events, they hold to be a "mystery concealed," something of which "no exposition can be given of its meaning." If this be so, the reader is not "blessed," for he does not understand it, and cannot; it is in vain to try. And he cannot "keep those things which are written therein," for he does not know what they are. The fearful warning and threatening of unmingled wrath against those who shall worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark, he cannot heed, because it is impossible for him to know what is meant by these terms; and the commandments of the message (Rev. 14:9-12) he cannot keep, not knowing what they are. And he may, with apparent modesty and reverence, conclude, with our author, that, as the commandments of God have been, and still are, a "source of controversy," questions having been raised upon them "that have distracted the Christian world," it is better not to enter into these, it being quite impossible for mortal man to understand what God requires.

Look at it. High Heaven has sent us a letter, and has pronounced a special blessing upon those who read it and heed its behests. But the receiver says he cannot read it, it is impossible to understand it, and therefore he will not be to blame if he does not heed its injunctions. If this position is true, of course he is not to blame. But is this the way to treat a communication from God? Did you ever receive a letter from a dear friend, pronounce it impossible to read it, and so not try? I never gave up in that way. And can we not take the time, and make the effort, to read the last great prophecy of the book of God, especially as he has pronounced his special blessing upon the effort? Oh, that men professing godliness would cease to insult the Majesty of Heaven, by treating what he has communicated to us for our good, even for our eternal salvation, as an incomprehensible mystery!

Time of Christ's Resurrection.

By Ellet Joseph Waggoner

A FRIEND in Oregon questions the correctness of a statement incidentally made in the Sabbath-school department of the SIGNS a few weeks ago, to the effect that Christ rested in the tomb on the Sabbath day, and rose on the morning of the first day of the week; and he asks, "Is there any Scriptural evidence to prove that our Lord rose from the grave on the first day of the week?" To this we reply that we think there is. It is true that we are not told in so many words when the resurrection took place, but the evidence seems to be clear nevertheless. Jesus told his disciples several times that he would be crucified and rise again the third day. Matt. 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Mark 9:31; Luke 9:22, etc. Christ was crucified on Friday. This fact is plainly stated by Luke, who closes the account of the crucifixion and burial of Christ with these words: "And that day was the preparation, and the Sabbath drew on." Luke 23:54. Then he still further identifies the time by saying that the women who saw the burial, "returned, and prepared spices and ointments, and rested the Sabbath day according to the commandment." Verse 56. Now it does not require any mathematical skill to determine that "the third day" could not by any possibility be earlier than the first day of the week following, and that it was not later, we know from the record. Therefore the first day of the week must have been the resurrection day.

Matt. 28:1 is quoted as proof that Christ rose on the Sabbath; but the statement here is simply (according to our version) that the women came to the sepulcher "in the end of the Sabbath." But the original of this passage allows perfect harmony with Mark 16:1, which says that it was "when the Sabbath was past." These scriptures have to do simply with the coming of the women to the tomb. They came very early on the first day of the week and found the grave empty; but the argument given above is, we think, conclusive as proving that the resurrection did not take place before the beginning of that first day.

"But," some will say, "this gives a strong argument to the believers in Sunday sacredness." Not at all. The fact that Christ rose on the first day of the week has no more to do with the Sabbath question than with the doctrine of the temporal millennium. There is no commandment for the observance of the resurrection day; not even an intimation that that day was henceforth to be the Sabbath. From the time of the crucifixion onward, the disciples observed the Sabbath the same as before.

Whoever tries to prove that Christ did not rise on the first day of the week, wastes his time, and strengthens those who are keeping Sunday in their determination to do so. Better far to admit at once that Christ rose on the first day of the week, and then show that Sabbath sacredness is not affected in the least by that fact. E. J. W.

Memorizing Scripture.

It has been noticed often in recent years at the examinations in our theological seminaries, that very few of our candidates for the ministry are able to quote Scripture with any great facility. A distinguished professor of systematic theology in one of our leading seminaries, no great while ago, was much mortified that his class, though able to answer the most difficult questions on all other points, could not give accurately the Scripture texts in proof of even the most important doctrines of the faith. It is to be apprehended that this is a growing defect among the young people in all our congregations and Sabbath-schools. They are taught everything about the word of God, without learning much of the word of God itself. The defect is a serious one, and is poorly compensated for by any amount of brilliant declamation or discussion on the part of the teacher, which leaves the pupil ignorant, after all, of the Bible’s own inspired words and doctrines.

What is most needed is that the young mind, while the memory is still quick, strong, retentive, and unoccupied as to other things, shall be filled with an accurate and extended knowledge of the very words of Scripture. To what better use can the mind of a child be put than to the task, which most children find easy and pleasant, of committing to memory selected portions of the New Testament? In all literature there are no words so beautiful and so precious as the words of Jesus and his divinely inspired apostles. In all history and philosophy there are no truths so important for a young mind to learn, and so salutary in training it, as these sublime and beautiful lessons of the word of God. No theory of Christian education can ever be complete without them, nor can any young mind be properly developed in the absence of these divine lessons of love, of truth, of moral virtue, contained in the word of God.

Now all experience proves that the only true and effectual process by which this indispensable part of education can be fully secured, is found in the old-time method of committing the words of Scripture to memory. With all our new devices and appliances, there is absolutely nothing, in our judgment, which can take the place of actually memorizing the book of God. No young person is likely to know much about the doctrines and precepts of the Bible who does not commit its words to memory. There may, indeed, be some desultory acquaintance with its facts, but as to anything more, the knowledge will be, at best, superficial, uncertain, and defective. David could say, "I have hidden thy word in my heart that I might not sin against thee." What all students of the Bible, whether old or young, need to do, is to store the mind, the memory, the heart, with the very words which the Holy Ghost did inspire, and which God has accordingly spoken in the Scriptures.

Admirable in spirit and perfect in all disciplinary methods as are many of our best conducted Sunday-schools, with their beautiful libraries and self-devoted bands of teachers, we never enter one of them without feeling that there is a sad defect in that practical ignoring of the word of God, which has resulted from setting aside the requirement to have the weekly lesson committed to memory. The loss to the child for life by reason of this omission is incalculable. Our deliberate opinion, confirmed by experience and long observation, is that no one thing could be learned in the Sabbath-school, so important in all its influences and results, as this one thing which is now universally omitted. That the Scripture lesson could be easily committed to memory if required, is demonstrated not only by the fact that it was once universally so done, but by the other fact that in many schools, even now, the Shorter Catechism is so memorized—a thing immensely harder to the child than the memorizing of any equal portion of the word of God, except, perhaps, its genealogical tables.—Interior.

Reward of Missionary Effort.

By Editor

THE following excellent article was written by the California Superintendent of Baptist Missions. We commend it to every missionary worker among our people; and especially do we desire it to be read by every one who is not already a missionary worker, for they need it still more:—

One who has written much on the subject of Home and Foreign Missions, has said: "For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labor of love, which ye have showed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister." Another who has done more for missions than Paul, or any of us, has said: "Give and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give unto your bosom. For with the same measure that ye meet withal, it shall be measured to you again." The gifts of God to us are without measure. His gifts are limited only by his love. That is, without limit. But it finds expression in every gift. He so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son to be our Saviour.

So also his love for us finds expression in what he requires of us. If he requires us to deny ourselves, it is that we may be more like Christ, and so be loved more of our heavenly Father.

If he requires us to give, it is that he may give back the more to us. If he requires work, it is that we may rest in Christ. So in all his requirements, "Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of the least of these, ye did it unto me." He will not forget our works of love.

These two principles should underlie all our work in missions. Our efforts, in time and thought bestowed upon the work, in gifts made to it, or sacrifices for it, should be the expression of our love. We love Christ, we love souls for whom he died, we love the "saints" to whom we "minister," we find an inward satisfaction in anything we may do to supply the destitute fields, and this finds expression in our readiness to respond to oft-repeated calls with a glad heart.

Then again, efforts thus put forth, and gifts made in such a spirit, are not subtracted from our capital. It is rather capital invested, upon which we are to receive a large dividend. "Give and it shall be given you" is not the promise of a being whose ability is limited and whose treasury may be absorbed or lost, but it is made by one whose thousand hills are covered by his cattle, and whose mines are never exhausted. And he will bring it to pass, that he will not forget our works and labor of love, in that we have ministered to the saints and do minister.

Brethren, let us cultivate this spirit, forgetting the things that are behind and pressing forward to the things that are before! There are open fields and white for occupation; there are calls which seem to come from the scattered sheep who are perishing, and not more possibly for want of ability to help them, than for want of this mind and spirit of Christ which would soon develop all our resources and gladden all our hearts, causing us to shout the praises of Him who hath called us with an heavenly calling, that we might sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus.

Do Everything Well.

It is the result of practical every-day experience that steady attention to matters of detail lies at the root of human progress, and that diligence, above all, is the mother of good luck. Accuracy also is of much importance, and an invariable mark of good training in a man—accuracy in observation, accuracy in speech, accuracy in the transaction of affairs. What is done in business must be well done, for it is better to accomplish perfectly a small amount of work than to half do ten times as much. Yet, in business affairs, it is the manner in which even small matters are transacted that often decide men for or against you. With virtue, capability, and good conduct in other respects, the person who is habitually inaccurate cannot be trusted; his work has to be gone over again, and he thus causes endless annoyance, vexation and trouble.

INCIDENT FROM DR. HACKETT.

By W. Lamson, D. D.

"Give me something better to stand on, and I'll step off." Many years ago, while I was a pastor at Brooklyn, I took a seat in the cars one morning for Boston by the side of Professor Hackett. I always felt that such a position was a providential privilege to be improved. Soon, therefore, I drew my learned friend into conversation, by mentioning a skeptical work I had lately read, remarking that some of the infidel objections in the work were new to me, and seemed very strong. "Strong, strong?" said he in his nervous way. "I see stronger difficulties than any which infidelity ever presented, but give me something better than Christianity to stand on, and I'll step off. Till that better something is presented, I stand and shall stand where I am." The remark, like many another from the good Professor's lips, has abode with me and done me good. When some new skeptic comes forward to try his hand at demolishing Christianity, I ask, Can you offer anything firmer and better? If not, spare your pains and leave the believer the one standing-place to which he clings, and on which millions are reposing. Amid the troubled sea of life there floats this one ark of refuge. If you know a stronger and safer one, do for humanity's sake point it out, and guide me and struggling souls everywhere to its rest.—W. Lamson, D. D.

Woodland and Arbuckle.

By William Miller Healey

WE closed our meetings in Woodland January 29, having held them over two weeks; the interest seemed to be good to the very last. Two adults took a decided stand for the truth, and one of them united with the church. Several others are deeply interested, and I think will unite with us.

This church has some devoted souls that are trying to live up to the light; but how many there are who do not sense the greatness of this work, but find pleasure in the same ways and works which they formerly did! May the Lord help us to see that this message separates us from the world; and if our hearts are set on the one they will not hold to the other.

At Arbuckle there are only a few of our people, but they keep up regular Sabbath meetings. I have given two discourses, and had quite a good hearing from the outside. May God help, that good be done.

We go from here to Nevada City.

W. M. HEALEY. Arbuckle, February 2, 1883.

California T. and M. Society.

By Alice Morrison

REPORT FOR QUARTER ENDING JANUARY 1, 1883.

Districts.	No. of Members.	No. Reports Returned	No. of Members Added	No. of Families Visited	No. of Letters Written	No. Signs taken in Clubs	New Subscribers Obtained. Review	New Subscribers Obtained. SIGNS	New Subscribers Obtained. Good Health	New Subscribers Obtained. Instructor	New Subscribers Obtained. Other Periodicals
No. 1	132	37	26	610	67	340	8	15	15
“ 2	92	40	8	21	85	198		44		1
“ 3	84	42	6	39	119	163		5
“ 4	17	15		2	32	14
“ 5	94	46	2	36	95	160		1	1		2
“ 6	15	9		8	4	28		1
“ 7	126	49	7	91	131	520	1	7	17	5	36
“ 8	89	46	2	542	83	177		1	2		2
“ 9	20	15		6	7	9			1
Minst. Ships		7		252	16		1	29	11	34	2
Total	669	306	51	1934	639	1659	10	104	47	77	42

Districts.	No. of Pages of Reading Matter Distributed	Periodicals Distributed	Annuals Sold and given away	Donations to Tract Fund and for Membership	Cash Received. Sales	Cash Received. Periodicals	Cash Received. Total
No. 1	38100	4993	22	$105 73	10 80	$166 75	$283 28
“ 2	2344	1100		12 22	75	18 80	31 77
“ 3	11394	1781		20 25	8 15	82 20	110 60
“ 4	1010	759
“ 5	15752	2900		12 90	11 50	105 65	130 05
“ 6	13856	392		3 10		5 00	8 10
“ 7	18568	6555		51 25		118 00	169 25
“ 8	55460	71129		49 60	25 00	17 75	92 35
“ 9	3146	213	100
Minst’r Ships	4580	230
Total	234,250	93,099	323	306 15	101 20	514 15	921 50

ALICE MORRISON, Secretary.

John Wesley's Liberality.

A writer of Mr. Wesley's Life, from whom some observations respecting his general character have been taken, has observed: "Perhaps the most charitable man in England was Mr. Wesley. His liberality to the poor knew no bounds but an empty pocket. He gave away not merely a certain part of his income, but all that he had; his own wants provided for, he devoted all the rest to the necessities of others. He entered upon this good work at a very early period. We are told that, 'when he had thirty pounds a year, he lived on twenty-eight, and gave away forty shillings. The next year, receiving sixty pounds, he still lived on twenty-eight, and gave away two and thirty. The third year he received ninety pounds, and gave away sixty-two. The fourth year he received one hundred and twenty pounds. Still he lived on twenty-eight, and to the poor ninety-two.' In this ratio he proceeded during the rest of his life; and, in the course of fifty years, it has been supposed, he gave away between twenty and thirty thousand pounds (money chiefly arising from the constant and large sale of his writings); a great part of which, most other men would have put out at interest, upon good security.

"In the distribution of his money, Mr. Wesley was as disinterested as he was charitable. He had no regard to family connections, nor even to the wants of the preachers who labored with him, in preference to strangers. He knew that these had some friends; and he thought that the poor destitute stranger might have none, and therefore had the first claim on his liberality. When a trifling legacy has been paid him, he has been known to dispose of it in some charitable way before he slept, that it might not remain his own property for one night. He often declared that his friends should be his executors; and that he would save all he could by his publications, and spend all he could, not wasting so much as a sheet of paper, but giving all he could, he was preserved from laying up treasures upon earth."—Life of Wesley.

The Men God Uses.

God uses not the most capable, but those nearest at hand and most willing. Those who are watching at the gates and waiting at the posts of the doors are first to receive his orders, and to be advanced to power and influence. Israel was watching and waiting at the sea when God spoke to them to "Go forward," and the sea divided for them to pass through. They were at Pentecost to be endued with power from on high, and then went forth to reap the glorious Pentecostal harvests. Prophets were "holy men," who lived near to God, and he used them to declare his purpose to men. John, at Patmos, was in the Spirit on the Lord's day; was near to God when he received that most glorious revelation ever given to mortal. Paul was up in the third Heavens when he had the vision too glorious for human language to describe. Joshua and Gideon and Luther and Judson were not more capable than some other men, but they were at hand, ready and willing, and God used them for accomplishing a glorious work.

Why All Smokers Do Not Die of Tobacco Poisoning.

It is often objected that while chemistry and scientific experiments seem to prove that tobacco is a powerful poison, the experience of thousands of persons disproves the theory of its poisonous character, since if it were so intense a poison as described, cases of death from tobacco poisoning would be much more frequent.

To this objection we answer:—

1. One reason why so few persons are reputed to die of nicotine, or tobacco poisoning, is the wonderful faculty the system possesses of accommodating itself to circumstances. Through this means the worst poisons may by degrees be tolerated, until enormous doses can be taken without immediately fatal effects. Corrosive sublimate, strychnia, belladonna, and many other poisons, may be thus tolerated.

2. In our opinion the majority of tobacco-users do die of tobacco poisoning. Death as surely results, ultimately, from chronic as from acute poisoning, though the full effects are delayed, it may be for years. A man who dies five or ten years sooner than he should, in consequence of tobacco-using, is killed by the poison just as truly as though he died instantly from an overdose.—Good Health.

Temperance.

By Editor

"Selfish Brutes."

THE New York Tribune thus characterizes those who persist in smoking in public places, to the annoyance of decent people. We heartily wish that other influential journals were as outspoken in regard to this evil as the Tribune is, and that there were a Justice Morgan in every town in the land. Here is the item of good news:—

"The rights of non-smokers were very properly vindicated by the arrest of two disorderly passengers who persisted in smoking in a One Hundred and Twenty-fifth Street cross-town car, on Monday night. From this, some encouragement can be derived by our wayfaring citizens, their wives and daughters, and the strangers within our gates. It is one of the serious annoyances of street-car travel, that selfish brutes insist upon smoking where smoking is not allowed, or upon carrying lighted cigars, and cigarettes, whose offensive fumes rapidly convert the atmosphere into that of a smoking-room. The management of the elevated roads took a step worthy of commendation in forbidding passengers to carry reeking cigar stubs, and still more offensive cigarettes in their cars. The officers of the surface roads should promulgate the same rule, and they should see to the enforcement of their present regulations against smoking, which are often disregarded, especially at night. If all police justices act as promptly as Justice Morgan, who on Tuesday fined these two fellows $10 each, and required them to find $300 surety for good behavior for six months, smokers will show a more general regard for the rights of others."

One by One

ONE BY ONE.—It will be well for us to learn to speak to individuals, singly. A congregation of one may be large enough to call forth all our powers, in proclaiming the good news of salvation. Often we may save sinners one by one. If you had a bushel of bottles, and wanted to fill them with water, you would not think the quickest way would be to get a fire-engine and hose, and play over the heap—especially if the corks were all in; but you would be likely to take a single bottle by the neck, extract the cork, and then by means of a funnel turn in a little water at a time until it was filled: and then take another, and repeat the process. You would get more bottles filled that way, than with a hose and fire-engine playing upon them. So you may be able to accomplish more by working single-handed, than in crowds. You may preach the word by the wayside and by the fireside; for people need the same gospel in-doors as out.

Christian Intelligencer.

How Coffee Came to be Used.

It is somewhat singular to trace the manner in which arose the use of the common beverage of coffee. At the time Columbus discovered America, it had never been known or used. It grew only in Arabia and Upper Ethiopia. The discovery of its use is ascribed to the superior of a monastery in Arabia, who, desirous of preventing the monks from sleeping at their nocturnal service, made them drink the infusion of coffee upon the reports of shepherds, who observed that their flocks were more lively after browsing on the fruit of the plant. Its reputation spread through the adjacent countries, and in two hundred years it reached Paris. A single plant, brought here in 1714, became the parent stock of all French coffee plantations in the West Indies. The Dutch introduced it into Java and the East Indies. The extent of the consumption can scarcely be realized.

The United States alone annually consume it at the cost, at its landing, of from $15,000,000 to $16,000,000.

Maine Law Against Crime

LIQUOR dealers, and others interested in the liquor traffic, are making a great outcry against the “sumptuary laws,” as they call the prohibitory amendments. Dr. F. R. Lees, in reply to an inquirer, puts the case on a right footing. He says:

“A ‘sumptuary law’ is a law against “luxury,” but a Maine law is a law against crime. No law can accurately dictate or define what is ‘luxury’ in diet, dress, or furniture, and therefore it would be folly to attempt to put it down by law. But drink-selling, or public gambling, or dealing out poisons, is capable of strict definition and universal application—is, in fact, one of the many forms of wrong-doing, and therefore within the theoretic province and the practical jurisdiction of the law. Social liberty really consists in the exercise of our faculties under protection from all such wrong-doing; and we can not have true liberty, therefore, except by suppressing the causes which abridge our liberty, tax our labor, and endanger our life.”—Ex.

The Whisky Question

The whisky question is simply a question of fact. If the saloons of a State or city do more good than they do injury; if they build up more houses than they curse; if they make more honest voters than corrupt ones; if they make more honest men than criminals; more wealthy men than paupers, then the man is not honest, nor fair, nor manly, nor worthy to be a voter, if he refuses to continue the saloons. If a saloon is a blessing, a man is an enemy to the commonwealth and civilization if he opposes it or votes to destroy it. But if the reverse is true—if the saloon is an enemy to society; if it corrupts voters; if it fills prisons; if it crowds poor-houses; if it breaks warm hearts; if it beggars children, how can we vote for such a curse. A vote to place men in an office, or keep those in office who wink at the existence of saloons is simply a vote against law, against good order, and against morals. The whole question is—only this and nothing more.

Advice Against Tobacco

By Michigan Christian Herald

It is not often that the inscription is worth more than the gift. A Detroit tobacco manufacturing company gave a special prize last week to a promising boy exhibited at the baby show in Grand Rapids. It was a sealed box of tobacco on which was inscribed the first-class advice, "Never use tobacco until your mother breaks this seal." A striking feature of this sage council, given by parties who knew what they were talking about, is more than disinterestedness. If boys would let tobacco alone until their mothers opened the package the business would certainly perish.—Michigan Christian Herald.

Continue reading: Politeness Pays