p. 187 | Review and Herald, Vol. 39, No. 24. (5/28/1872)

Remarkable Mortality of Evergreens.

From Virginia to the Canadian shores, and from the eastern slope of the Rocky Mountains to the Atlantic, the evergreens are dead or dying. Millions of dollars' worth of hardy plants, that have for years withstood our northern winters, now show the ravages of the zero weather of the last season. Norway spruces, pines, arbor vitæ, junipers, rhododendrons, dwarf and standard roses in public parks and private gardens have “put on the sere and yellow leaf,” their symbols of decay.

Long Island has suffered severely. In the gardens at Astoria, where immense numbers of evergreens were growing for sale, the loss is estimated at hundreds of thousands of dollars. Rows of arbor vitæ, containing thousands of plants, are absolutely valueless. Prospect Park and the private gardens in Brooklyn have not been spared in the general disaster, and the gardeners at the Central Park, New York, pronounce the loss in those grounds almost irreparable. At Flatbush, L. I., and in Westchester County, the loss has been very great. Some of the nurserymen have lost their entire stock. In other places the effect has been peculiar. Plants of the same age and apparent health, growing in long rows, have been touched at intervals of a few feet. The first dozen in the row are dead, and the next half dozen are well and thrifty. In Brooklyn, the plants on the north and east side of the houses have suffered most.

In New Jersey, the horticulturists have noticed that plants which are shaded from the winter sun have escaped the worst effects of the season, and may be saved with much trouble and time.

The report from the vicinity of Boston and further east, confirm the sad tidings of what was only rumor a few weeks ago, and from the great nurseries at Rochester, the Ohio valley, and even further west, the words come to us, “Our evergreens are dead.” The causes assigned for this unexpected loss are various, but from among them the following may be taken as having in them most of probability: First, it is said that the warm days of February gave the plants an early start, as if the spring had really opened, and then when all were swelling with the new life, the weather changed again to hard winter, freezing with the cold, March winds.

Another view is, that the plants were killed very early in the winter. There was not a gradual diminution of the temperature as in former years, but the season came suddenly upon the plants before they were properly shielded, or prepared for it. Their color changed slightly, but not enough to cause alarm, and although the plants remained green, they were dead. Only when the warm weather of the last few weeks startled the other plants into general activity was the damage to the evergreens visible.

In support of the first theory, it is observed that in one place on the Hudson in a private garden there were several fine specimens of the golden-bark arbor vitæ. They had been covered nearly all of the winter. During the warm days of February they were exposed, and seemed remarkably vigorous. They have not been covered since, and are now dead.

Where the new supply will come from, is as yet a matter of conjecture. Nurserymen are afraid to purchase the few plants offered for sale until the season is more advanced. Many think they could save some of their stock by carefully nursing it for two or three years; but the ground is too valuable to be used for that purpose, and evergreens will be cut down and cast away. There are many sorrowful faces among the nurserymen, and some of them will be sorely tried in the effort to recover from the losses inflicted by the death of the evergreens.—Journal of Commerce.

UNKINDNESS

By Sel.

There is a little plant, whose leaves Touched by ungentle hand, As if endowed with feeling, shrink, And trembling seem to stand.

So there are gentle hearts, whose life Is made of tenderness; Whose tiny leaves will fold themselves When rougher hands oppress.

A careless word, small in itself, May grieve and trouble much; And pain is oft awakened by An inadvertent touch.

Then since it lies within our power A kindly heart to gain, O let us check the unkind word That gives another pain.

For could we see the bitter tear Shed by a heart refined When touched by rude or careless hand, We should not be unkind.

—Sel.

The Lost Opportunity.

In the winter of 1859, during a time of special religious interest in Boston and vicinity, a man in Cambridgeport was impressed with the duty of laboring to save those around him, and felt especially urged to go and visit an old friend who was not a Christian, and talk with him about his soul’s salvation.

He delayed, hesitated, and neglected the oft-recurring admonitions of the Holy Spirit, for a considerable time; but he could not banish the subject from his mind, and at length one Saturday he started to do his errand.

He reached the house, entered and found his old friend in his coffin, dead, and soon to be buried; and he learned there that for some time before he died he had expressed a strong desire to see him and converse with him.

Alas, the opportunity was gone forever; the word in season was unspoken, and his aged friend had passed from mortal life.

We think sadly of such a lost opportunity, but are we not losing opportunities every day? Let us be watchful and diligent to do the Master’s will, and obey his every call, that we may be found of him in peace, without spot and blameless at last.—Christian.

The Eclipse of the Soul.

The Moon, in an eclipse, complained to the Sun:

“Why, O my dearest friend, dost thou not shine upon me as usual?”

“Do I not?” said the Sun; “I am sure I am shining as I always do; why do you not enjoy my light as usual?”

“Oh! I see,” said the Moon, “the earth has got between us.”

“Why, O Saviour,” says the backsliding Christian, “do I not, as in former days, walk in the light of thy countenance?”

“I am sure, troubled soul, I have not changed. The rays of my love are as warm and bright as ever; what can prevent them from reaching thee?”

It is the world, troubled Christian, that has got between thee and Christ.—Ex.

A Word to Young Converts.

BE not discouraged by varying frames of feeling. Do not compare your experience with that of others, as if yours must be like it to be genuine. Maintain calmness and steadiness of purpose. You must not count on singing joyful songs all the way to Heaven. Think not your hope a delusion, and your soul in the gall of bitterness if your song ceases. Keep up a stout heart. Look to Jesus, and not to frames of feeling as your surety. Keep in the beaten path of duty, listen not to doubt, seek not comfort in yourself, or in your works. When you have no sight, live by faith. When the stars are hidden, and the way is dark, when feeling is no longer satisfactory, look at the steady needle of principle, and go by that less inspiring, but more trusty, guide.

Little Sunbeams.

I HEARD a tiny snow-bird chirping the other day, and it seemed to carry me away back to the bright, glad summer-time—and I was listening again to the songs of bird-love that thrilled all those warm, sunny days, and to the clear sweet laughter of dimpled rills as they plashed over the stones. And then I thought how we all might bring a sunbeam from the warm, golden summer of our lives, and fling it where it would cast a bright gleam over some tired heart’s dark mid-winter, making it happy, just as that tiny bird sent a thrill of gladness all over my heart.

There are weary souls whose gushing rills of joy are all ice-bound by sorrow and neglect. Can we not send some warm, balmy breeze of kindness to melt all the snows away? Only a smile, or a loving word, and God will bless you, and the watching angels will be glad.

Living for Eternity.

By L. E. Milne

How thrilling the thought that some poor soul may be made an heir of eternal life through our instrumentality. On the other hand, how dreadful the thought that some one may fail of Heaven because of our failing to live for eternity. “We live in deeds, not years.” With the shores of the beautiful city of our God so near, what a powerful incentive to a holy life! Is not the prize worth striving for with all our redeemed powers? Blessed living for endless life in the kingdom of God! Immortality and eternal life are just before us. Shall we not be willing to sacrifice all worldly gain for the rich reward that awaits the overcomer?

“The sands of time are sinking, The dawn of Heaven breaks; The summer morn I’ve sighed for, The fair, sweet morn awakes. Dark, dark, has been the midnight, But dayspring is at hand, And glory—glory dwelleth In Immanuel’s land.”

L. E. MILNE.

Council Bluffs, May 13.

The Most Important Subject.

DANIEL WEBSTER on one occasion was spending an evening at the house of a friend, in a large company of invited guests. It was in his younger, purer days. His course had been criticised through the press, and that evening he appeared unusually silent, serious and profound. A little group hovered near, and one jocosely remarked that Mr. Webster was “doubtless busied again with his great thoughts.” Whereupon a lady asked the following rather puzzling question: “Mr. Webster, what is the most important thought you ever entertained?” All listened for the answer—the room grew still as death, and, with evident emotion, Webster replied, “The most important thought I ever had was my individual responsibility to God.” So let earth’s inhabitants be what they may, whether statesmen or slaves, princes or paupers, “every one of us must give an account of himself unto God.”

Four Names for Christians

By Fuller

The Scriptures give four names to Christians, taken from the four cardinal graces—saints for their holiness, believers for their faith, brethren for their love, and disciples for their knowledge.—Fuller.

The Formation of the Spirit.

In a search for testimony relative to the nature of man, with the purpose of ascertaining whether or not he is immortal, those texts first demand attention which are claimed as proof that he is above and beyond the power of death. Zech. 12: 1 is introduced as positive testimony on this side of the question: “The burden of the word of the Lord for Israel, saith the Lord, which stretcheth forth the heavens and layeth the foundations of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.”

With an immense flourish this text is introduced by Mr. Landis, p. 152; and with an air of triumph he adds that materialists are in the habit of passing it in silence. We think we can answer for them that they have seen in it nothing to answer, and hence have declined to spend their time beating the air. As to the nature of the spirit which God forms in man, its characteristics and attributes, this text affirms nothing. Above all, respecting the main inquiry, Is this spirit immortal? the text is entirely silent. Why then is it introduced? Because it contains the word spirit. But, as has been shown (No. 22), nothing is proved by the mere use of the words soul and spirit, till some affirmation can be found in the Scriptures that these terms signify an independent entity, which has the power of uninterrupted consciousness, and the endowment of immortality. For men to take these terms and give them definitions and clothe them with attributes which are the offspring of pagan philosophy, or figments of their own imagination, and then claim that because the Bible uses these terms it sustains their views, is to us, at least, a very unsatisfactory method of settling this question. But, from the persistency with which it is followed by those of the opposite view, one might conclude that it is the only way they have of sustaining their position.

God formeth the spirit of man within him. So the text asserts. The word, form, is in the Septuagint, plasso. The definition of this word as given by Liddell and Scott, is, “To form, mould, shape, Lat. fingere, strictly used of the artist who works in soft substances, such as earth, clay, wax.” The word, then, signifies giving shape and form to something already in existence; for the artist does not create his clay, wax, &c., but only changes its form. The second definition seems, however, to be more applicable to the case in hand. Thus “I, generally, to bring into shape or form, πλ. τὴν ψυχὴν, τὸ σῶμα, to mould and form the mind or body by care, diet, and exercise.” Thus God makes man the crown of creation by forming in him (through a superior organization of the brain) an intellectual or mental nature, and we can still further form or mould it, by care and cultivation. There is nothing here to favor the idea of the creation of a separate immaterial and immortal entity, and its insertion into the human frame.

This text is illustrated by Job 32: 8: “But there is a spirit in man; and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding,” not “giveth it [the spirit] understanding,” as we heard an immaterialist in debate not long since read it; but giveth them [the men] understanding. That is, men are endowed with a superior mental organization; and by means of that God gives them understanding.

Since, however, Zech. 12: 1 is used by immortalists, to prove that souls are specially created, it raises the question, which may as well be considered in this connection as any other, whence the spirit, whatever it is, is derived. In the text under consideration the present tense is evidently used for the past; and hence it might be read, “The burden of the word of the Lord . . . which stretched forth the heavens, and laid the foundations of the earth, and formed the spirit of man within him.” If now this means the creation of an immortal entity to be added to man, called his spirit, it applies only to the first man, the man formed at the creation of the world. The question then remains, How do all succeeding members of the human race, how do we, get an immortal spirit? Is it by a special act of creation on the part of God, or is it by generation from father to son? Has God, for every member of the human race since Adam, by special act created a soul or spirit? They who say he has, contradict Gen. 2: 2, which declares that all God’s work of creation, so far as it pertains to this world, was finished in the first week of time. If this testimony is true, it is certain that God has not been at work ever since creating human souls as fast as bodies were brought into existence to need them, the greater part of the time thousands of them every day.

Has God thus made himself the servant of the human race, to wait upon their will, caprice, and passions; for how many of the inhabitants of this earth are the offspring of the foulest iniquity and the most unbridled lust! Does God hold himself in readiness to create souls which must come from his hand immaculate and pure, to be thrust into such vile tenements, at the bidding of godless lust? The reader will pardon the irreverence of the question, for the sake of an exposure of the absurdity of that theory which prompts it.

But if we say that the soul is transmitted with the body, then what becomes of its incorruptibility and immortality; for “that which is born of the flesh is flesh.” John 3: 6. And Peter says (1 Pet. 1: 23–25): “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth forever. For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth and the flower thereof falleth away; but the word of the Lord endureth forever.”

There could hardly be a plainer testimony that man as a whole is mortal and perishable. He is born of corruptible seed. But more than this, it is added, “All flesh is as grass.” Should it be said that this means simply the body, we reply that the term flesh is frequently used in the New Testament to signify the whole man. Thus, Rom. 3: 20: “By the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified.” Paul does not here talk about the justification of bones, sinews, nerves and muscles; he refers to the whole responsible man. In the same sense the term is used in many other passages. But Peter himself, in the passage just quoted, cuts off its application exclusively to the body; for after saying that “all flesh is as grass,” he continues, “and all the glory of man as the flower of grass.” The glory of man must include all that there is noble and exalted about his nature. If the soul is the highest and most godlike part of man, it is included in this glory; but lo! it is all like the flower of the grass, transitory and perishable.

The word mortal, which means liable to death, occurs five times in our English version, and in every instance is used to describe the nature of the real man. Rom. 6: 12; 8: 11; 1 Cor. 15: 53, 54; 2 Cor. 4: 11. It occurs in the original in one other instance (2 Cor. 5: 4) where it is rendered “mortality.”

The text usually relied on to prove that souls are immediately created are Eccl. 12: 7; Isa. 57: 16; Zech. 12: 1. The first of these was examined last week. The word translated “form” in the last of these passages, as shown in this present article, is not a word which signifies to create, but only to put into form, mould, and fashion. Isa. 57: 16 speaks of the souls which God has made. But there are numerous other texts, as Job 10: 8–11; Isa. 44: 2; 64: 8; Jer. 1: 5, &c., which speak in the same manner of the body. But if such expressions can be used with respect to the body, produced by the natural process of generation, the same expression with reference to the soul contains no proof that that is not also transmitted with the body.

God said to our first parents, and the commission was repeated to Noah after the flood, “Be fruitful and multiply.” Multiply what? Themselves, of course. Did that mean that they should multiply bodies, and God would multiply souls to fit them? Nothing of the kind; but they were to multiply beings having all the characteristics, endowments, and attributes of themselves. So Adam, Gen. 5: 3, “begat a son in his own likeness after his image, and called his name Seth.” This son was like Adam in all respects, having all the natures that Adam possessed; and that which was begotten by Adam was called Seth. But according to the doctrine of creationism, Adam begat only a body and God created a soul, which is the real man, and called his name Seth and put it into that body. Neither this text nor any other gives countenance to any such absurdity.

Some prominent theologians both ancient and modern have adopted the doctrine of traduction as opposed to that of creationism, believing the latter to be contrary to philosophy and revelation but the former to be in harmony with both. In Wesley’s Journal, vol. v., p. 10, is found the following entry:— “I read and abridged an old work on the origin of the soul. I never before saw anything on the subject so satisfactory. I think the author proves to a demonstration that God has enabled man, as all other creatures, to propagate his whole species, consisting of soul and body.”

The testimony of Richard Watson (Institutes pp. 362–3) is equally explicit. He says:— “A question as to the transmission of this corruption of nature from parents to children has been debated among those who, nevertheless, admit the fact; some contending that the soul is ex traduce; others that it is by immediate creation. It is certain that, as to the metaphysical part of this question, we can come to no satisfactory conclusion. The Scriptures, however, appear to be more in favor of traduction. ‘Adam begat a son in his own likeness.’ ‘That which is born of the flesh is flesh,’ which refers certainly to the soul as well as to the body. . . . The tenet of the soul’s descent appears to have most countenance from the language of Scripture, and it is no small confirmation of it, that when God designed to incarnate his own Son, he stepped out of the ordinary course and formed a sinless human nature immediately by the power of the Holy Ghost.”

The evidence is thus rendered conclusive from both reason and Scripture, that the soul is transmitted through the process of generation with the body. What then, we ask again, becomes of its immortality? For “that which is born of the flesh is flesh,” and mortality cannot generate itself to a higher plane and beget immortality. This is not saying that mind is matter; for the results of organization are not to be confounded with the matter of which the organization is composed.

Mormonism on Sunday-Keeping.

One of the clearest evidences that the whole system of Mormonism is only a human device, is that on the important subjects of the nature and destiny of man, and the day to be observed as the Sabbath of the Lord, its revelations follow the false teachings of popular theology, instead of the true teachings of the Bible.

It has been denied that the revelations of Mormonism sustained Sunday-keeping; but that denial is overthrown by their “Doctrines and Covenants.” A friend has sent us a copy of “The True Latter Day Saints’ Herald” (we believe we have it all) in which a writer argues for Sunday-keeping, and enforces it upon all good Mormons in the following manner:—

“And we further see, that Sunday, ‘the first day of the week,’ the day upon which our Saviour was resurrected, was unanimously called by the early Christians, ‘the Lord’s day.’

“This last fact is of especial importance to the Latter Day Saints, for they have a commandment given to them making it obligatory upon them to keep the Lord’s ‘holy day,’ as their rest day, and for the celebration of public worship.

“This revelation was given in Zion, Missouri, on Sunday, August 7th, 1831, as we learn by an examination of church history. It reads:

“‘And that thou mayest more fully keep thyself unspotted from the world, thou shalt go to the house of prayer and offer up thy sacrament upon my holy day; for verily, this is a day appointed unto you to rest from your labors, and to pay thy devotions unto the Most High; nevertheless thy vows shall be offered up in righteousness on all days, and at all times; but remember that on this, the Lord’s day, thou shalt offer thine oblations, and thy sacraments unto the Most High, confessing thy sins unto thy brethren, and before the Lord. And on this day thou shalt do none other things, only let thy food be prepared with singleness of heart, that thy fasting may be perfect, or in other words, that thy joy may be full.’—Doc. & Cov. 59, [19]: 2.

“Here is the commandment. ‘The Lord’s day,’ is the one the saints are directed to keep. That the saints knew which was the Lord’s day, is evident from the command itself, for the Lord would not command them to do what they did not know how to do. That Sunday was the day intended by the Lord, is understood at once, for Sunday is and always has been called ‘the Lord’s day,’ by all enlightened, or Christian nations.

“And as a further, and conclusive evidence that Sunday was intended by the command, we quote D. & C. 1: 5.

“‘These commandments are of me [God] and were given unto my servants in their weakness, after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding: and inasmuch as they erred, it might be made known.’

“‘From this we learn that the revelations in the Doctrine and Covenants, were given unto the ministry ‘after the manner of their language, that they might come to understanding.’ Now, the ‘manner of their language’ was such, that it pointed to Sunday as ‘the Lord’s day,’ and this day they kept. They understood, in common with nearly all professed Christians, that Sunday was ‘the Lord’s day.’ This was the “understanding” they had of the matter, as seen both by their precepts and practice. The revelations were given to point out such errors as they might have in doctrine or practice, and we see that the revelation on keeping the Lord’s day confirmed them in keeping Sunday; so that if keeping Sunday is an error, then they were confirmed in that error instead of having the error made known, as promised. So we see, the New Testament, history, and the Doctrine and Covenants favors keeping Sunday, but they furnish nothing in the least against it.”

This is enough. Mormonism is a system that follows the traditions of men instead of the word of God.

The Approaching Camp-Meetings.

By George I. Butler

As these meetings draw near, it seems important that all should estimate them at their real value, and show it by their actions. It has been very generally admitted that the camp-meetings have been a very great blessing to the cause, since they were started among us; and many who have attended them have expressed themselves very thankful they were permitted to do so. And it is generally the case that those even who have expressed doubts whether they could leave home to attend such meetings, after they have felt their influence upon their hearts, have confessed their joy that they did leave home, and make an effort to serve God. From remarks dropped in different places, I have feared many of our people would not attend the camp-meetings this year, and that with some at least their importance is not properly appreciated.

Let us consider the design of these meetings. They are intended to meet a general want which exists among our people. It is a well known fact that we have comparatively little preaching among our churches, some of them not oftener than once in six months or a year, and we have many scattered Sabbath-keepers in all the Northern States, who rarely have a chance to attend at all.

We are living in a bustling, hurrying age. There are all kinds of schemes to take up the minds of the people. The world, the world, the world, is the grand theme of all classes and conditions. Real or fancied wants of a temporal nature are the ones that absorb the attention of all. We may depend upon it, the great mass of those who are lost, will discover the cause of their ruin to be love of the world. The book of God sets the sinfulness of this before us. “If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.” “Ye cannot serve God and mammon,” that is, earthly riches; and there are many other texts of like import.

We all know that a constant strain in one direction, will stamp its impress upon the mind,

giving it a bias and coloring not easily effaced. To counteract this constant danger, God has taught his people in his word the duty of meeting “together to exhort one another,” and the apostle significantly adds, in view of the perilous nature of the last days, “and so much the more as ye see the day approaching.” Our common prayer and social meetings are invaluable to accomplish this object. But when common gifts meet once or twice every week year after year, there is quite likely to be a sort of sameness in the general exercises. Those who thus meet are busily engaged in physical labor most of the time, and the mind is in danger of being dwarfed and cramped, while the mental faculties are measurably unused. Secular things come to appear important, while there is much danger of sacred truth not being appreciated at its proper value. And in many places when there is preaching it is not of that character to rouse and inspire the mind enough to bring it out of the rut in which it has gone so long.

Our prosperity as a people depends upon the spiritual condition of our members very much. When that suffers nothing else can supply the lack. Money, talent, or theory, will not do it. To meet this want our large camp-meetings are appointed, and the best available talent among us to do the work is called in. As we look over the meetings of this kind, which have been held in the past, our experience teaches us they were invaluable. We fear not to say that those who have attended them with a will to work for God, and place themselves in a position where God could consistently bless them, have made far greater spiritual growth, than those who remained at home.

Is there not a crying need of growth among our people? Shall the very means which God has ordained to accomplish the object be neglected, and our people suffer for lack of the light they need because they cannot spend time to attend? Will they allow the few dollars it would cost them to go, to stand in the way of their receiving the very blessing they need? Shall our people toil year in and year out for the things that perish, and not be able to spend a week or two in God's service?

In ancient times ancient Israel must appear at least three times before the Lord, every male among their tribes, and many of them had to go long distances to do so. Is it too much now when we are looking for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the destruction of all earthly wealth, to appear once before him to renew our vows of consecration, and get a deeper draught from the wells of salvation? Some seem to think so; and I understand there are whole churches in some places who think they can't afford it. Poor souls: may God pity them and alarm them; for this view of the subject shows that they themselves are in desperate need of this very help.

Instead of a falling off, the attendance ought to be more and more general. The apostle says, “and so much the more as ye see the day approaching.” It would seem that some do not see the day approaching, or are not willing to heed the language of the word of God. The cost of these meetings to the cause is no small item. The importance of this labor bestowed should be taken into serious consideration. The prominent laborers in the past who have given their whole summer's work to them, have of course been kept from other very important labor. If the people do not appreciate them enough to generally attend, then the great object will be lost, and much valuable labor be spent in vain.

There is great danger that many will take a narrow, contracted view of the great work in which we are engaged, and be contented to have their mental vision circumscribed within narrow limits, and lose sight of the fearful responsibilities that rest upon us as a people. Brethren and sisters, this is the closing work of God for the world. This is the last message of mercy. This work is to prepare a people for the coming of Christ; and if you and I are not faithful to it, God will give the crowns we might have to others, and we shall be called unfaithful stewards. Let us place ourselves where we can be imbued with the spirit of the work. If all our friends could realize the cost the labor and the burden that falls upon the servants of God in laboring for the good of the people in these meetings, they would feel the importance of attending, and sharing in the blessing.

We expect Bro. and sister White will meet with us the coming season. But very few realize their worn condition; and it is their anxiety to benefit the people, alone, that causes them to go forth in such physical weakness to labor in word and doctrine. Will our people manifest indifference to their own well being, when others manifest such interest for them? If they do, they will surely suffer a very great loss. How many we think of who owe to these meetings the hope they now have; who there found Christ to the joy of their souls; and how many more there are who might be benefited in like manner, if all who love the truth would stand in the light, and be minute men to bring their friends and their children in reach of the means God has instituted for their salvation. And how will a neglect of this plain duty appear when we are called to the bar of God to answer for the responsibilities and the light that has been given us as individuals and as a people? Let us not be weary in well doing for we shall reap in due season if we faint not. Have any been sorry as they returned from a good meeting that they had given time and labor to be present? Shall we be sorry for any such effort when we see the grave yawning before us, or the Son of Man coming in the clouds of Heaven? In them we have value tested. When men are brought to such times they will be sensible. Why not then act as we shall wish we had then. This would be truly wise.

GEO. I. BUTLER.

Mt. Pleasant, Iowa, May 15, 1872.

Try It at Home.

By J. H. W.

We frequently see parents try to control their children and keep them within reasonable bounds in meeting, and make an entire failure. Every such effort and failure is a great annoyance to the congregation, and a cause of mortification to the parents. And in all such instances the children plainly show that they are not accustomed to respect the wishes or the authority of the parents. In every such case the parents are making a great, and, it is to be feared, fatal mistake. If children are not trained to obedience at home, they will not obey in meeting. But if they are trained to proper obedience at home, they will show it in their proper deportment at meeting, and by their regard for the word of the parent everywhere. It will not do to excuse it by saying we live in a bad age, &c. That would only prove that you must put forth greater effort to control them. But I fear that some of our people are especially remiss in their duty in this respect.

Because we are subjected to the inconvenience of holding our meetings in school-houses, and very often in private houses, many lose that feeling of reverence that they formerly had when going to the well-furnished meeting-house, and the children very soon feel the influence of it. I regret to say I have sometimes preached where it was extremely difficult to be heard, on account of the noise of the children; and the great effort to keep them quiet put forth by the mortified parents, only added to the confusion. It is of no use to try—it cannot be done. If you have no discipline at home, you cannot make them obey you in meeting.

Many seem to think it makes no matter how their children act at home. They can bear it, and there is nobody but themselves to be disturbed by them. But the welfare of the children depends on their training; and many little ones grow up as rebellious in spirit as Satan could desire to see them. Shame and ruin are ahead, and now is the time to avert them. Prov. 22:6; 29:15. J. H. W.

Men and Things.

By Dudley Marvin Canright

METEORS—FALLING STARS.

Christ and the prophets have said that as a sign of the end the stars would fall. We claim that this was fulfilled in the wonderful meteoric shower of 1833. But it is objected that these were simply meteors, and not really stars, as the prophecy names. Though this objection has been refuted repeatedly, yet here is another high authority for the fact that these meteors are really falling stars. It is from the Christian Union of May 1, 1872:—

“The gold medal of the British Royal Astronomical Society was presented in February to Signor Schiaparelli, for his researches upon the nature and orbits of meteors, which have helped to demonstrate that these bodies belong to the stellar region, and are in fact falling stars.”

This is a good witness to an important fact. “The stars shall fall.” This is fulfilled.

THE NATIONS PREPARING FOR WAR.

Of the time of the end, the Revelator says, “And the nations were angry, and thy wrath is come, and the time of the dead that they should be judged,” &c. Rev. 11:18. This very condition of things is rapidly developing. The same paper, of the same date, says:—

“The military organization proposed for France sends every man into the army from the age of twenty to twenty-five, and into successive stages of the reserve for the three succeeding periods of five years. This is severer than the German conscription, which requires active service for only three years. It would be a terrible burden on the industry of the country, a deliberate devotion of the nation’s whole energy to a military career. The great Continental powers seem entering on a new competition, in organizing, by the highest arts of civilization, the most barbarous forces—national jealousies and hatreds.”

NO AUTHORITY FOR SUNDAY.

That Sunday has not been kept in other countries and other ages as it is now in our own country, is a fact of which the people are not generally informed. Relying largely on what the preacher has taught them without investigating for themselves, Americans have come to believe that Sunday is the same sacred day the world over as it is here, and that it has ever been such since the resurrection of Christ. Well-informed ministers certainly know better than this, and here and there they will let it out. Thus Mr. Beecher, in a recent sermon, made these concessions on this subject:—

“So far as the Christian Sunday, or Lord’s day, is concerned, we have no command in the New Testament as to the mode in which it is to be observed. We have scarcely more than the recognition that it was observed, in addition to the old Jewish Sabbath. We have neither from the primitive church, nor from the Scriptures, any hint, explicit and binding, as to the mode of observing it. . . . . . . .

“I do not think that we have received our Lord’s day on the ground of absolute command. Certainly the Jewish Sabbath is not ours. We cannot, therefore, divine from that Sabbath how this day ought to be kept. . . . . . . .

“This is a day peculiarly American. Not that it has not been observed in all countries, but that perhaps nowhere else, from the very founding of the colonies, has there been an institution which has been like the New England and the American Sunday—the day of rest—the one religious day. In other lands, it has been partly religious, or it has been a day of games and exhibitions and sports, with a little preliminary ruffle of church, and all the rest of the garment of anything; but it was in America that the Lord’s day dawned, as it were, with the light of the other world shining over its brow.”

“Our Lord’s day has come to us strained through the usages of the medieval age and church; but largely we have received it from the hands of our Puritan ancestors. Seeing the frivolity, the secular wastefulness which occurred on that day, they were, by stress of circumstances, I think, driven to the opposite extreme; and they made the day so exclusively a day of moral teaching and self-restraint that it comes down to us with bars and bolts which did not belong to the primitive Lord’s day, and which reason does not justify.”

“No command in the New Testament” for it, not received in the place of the old Sabbath, but is peculiarly an American institution made by the austerity of the Puritans; while “in other lands it has been partly religious, or it has been a day of games and exhibitions and sports.” These are important facts as far as they go, though they do not tell the whole truth. Ask your German, French, or Irish neighbor, how Sunday is observed in the old country, and he will tell you of a very different observance from what we see here. Hence it is that these foreigners are troubling our American Sunday-keepers so much about keeping that day. They want to keep it just as they always have in the old country, i. e., as a day of recreation and pleasure. The fact is, the farther we come, both in time and distance, from the origin of Sunday celebration, the more faith people have in it. Thus it always is with error.

D. M. CANRIGHT.

High Forest, Minn.

Continue reading: White Robes