Earlier text: The Ten Kingdoms in the Dark AgesProphecy and the Sunday Movement.
By J.
LAST week we noticed the special efforts at the enforcement of Sunday laws, now being made simultaneously in different places all over the country; and not only in our own country but also in England and France. We have at different times lately called attention to the tendency in this direction, in both Europe and America. The tendency has now become the fact. The enforcement of Sunday laws and prosecutions for Sunday work, becoming so general, and being engaged in by so many different classes from the highest to the lowest,—from preachers to saloon-keepers, from religionists to Socialists,—is forcing the attention of all to the truth that this is fast becoming the leading question not only in the Nation but in the world. The papers, secular as well as religious, but more especially the religious, are discussing it. It is especially remarkable how everything is bent to the recognition of Sunday. The whole tide of human events seems to be set in that direction, and every element is going with the current. Even the Jews who, as a people, have stood for ages the bitterest persecution for their religion's sake, are in this readily yielding, and, now willing to go with the multitude to do evil, are deserting the truth of God as to the Sabbath of the Lord, and are going over to the Sunday. The New York Observer says that "it is proposed to form a World's Day of Rest League, and a convention of representative Jews is advocated, which will endeavor to secure the transfer of the Jewish Sabbath to the first day of the week. It is urged that this uniformity would add greatly to the influence of the principle of resting one day in seven." We have no doubt that it will. We wish some influence could be brought to bear that would greatly revive the old-fashioned principle of obedience to God. God gave a commandment that men shall rest on the Sabbath of the Lord. He gave this commandment that there might be uniformity. In the commandment he plainly declared that the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God—not the "Jewish Sabbath"—and that in it—the seventh day—thou shalt not do any work. Yet in spite of that commandment, the world sets about to form a World's Day of Rest League, to secure the world's worldly observance of the first day of the week, and to get the Jews to transfer the Jewish Sabbath to the first day of the week. Before these men of the world get their World's League formed, and have by it secured the world's uniformity in the observance of the first day of the week, it would be well for them to remember the word of God that says: "Know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." It is one of the clearest possible proofs of the lack of real godliness in the professed church of Christ, that all this ready favor of the world it mistakes as the manifest favor of God, while the word of God declares that it is enmity with God. There could be no better evidence that Sunday is not of God, than is furnished in this, that Spiritualists, Socialists, Labor Unions, Catholics, and all such, so heartily unite in favor of it. "For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness! and what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel? . . . Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord." No interest that makes for righteousness can be promoted by the favor of such elements as are now swiftly rallying to the support of the Sunday institution. This consideration alone demonstrates the unrighteousness of the Sunday cause. And yet we are not the least surprised that these things are so. We are not surprised that even the professed church of Christ should stoop to an alliance with the world to maintain by civil power the influence which she deems her right, but which through her own worldliness and lack of self-respect she has lost. We are not at all surprised that the church should endeavor to maintain by civil power the position before the world which she has lost by her own lack of the power of godliness. And that she has so lost her position, no stronger proof is needed than is shown in her willingness and even anxiety to ally herself with the world, that she, re-enforced by the non-religious elements of the world, may wield the power of the world. We say we are not surprised at any of these things for we have for years expected to see the very things that are now seen throughout the so-called Christian world. For years we have not only expected to see an alliance between the church and the world by which the civil power would be wielded by the church in her own behalf, but we have expected to see the Sunday and its compulsory observance made the basis of the alliance. For years we have expected to see the Sunday, and controversy concerning it, become the leading question in this Nation. We have talked it and preached it, we have written it and printed it, when as yet the most strenuous advocates of the Sunday only accounted it as among the very least of the questions that pertained to Christianity. Yet now these very men concede all that we have taught, and they themselves claim that upon the preservation of Sunday hangs the destiny of Christianity in this Nation, and that if it is to be preserved the religious element must be re-enforced by the non-religious, and even the Socialistic. For more than forty years, in public and in private, by speech and by print, Seventh-day Adventists have constantly taught that there would be the very condition of things which now is and is impending. And this upon the authority of the word of God. In fact from no other authority could such teaching have been derived, when it was as confidently urged so long before as it is now; when as yet there was apparently no probability of its coming to pass; and when even the supporters of Sunday themselves steadily refused to admit that there was any possibility, much less any probability, that it should come to pass. The word of God contains a solemn warning that must be given to the world. It is the Third Angel's Message of Revelation 14. That message says: "If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup776 of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb." Rev. 14:9, 10. In years past it was known among Protestants that the beast is the Papacy, "the man of sin," "the mystery of iniquity." Nowadays Protestants are not so ready to let it be known, yet it is the truth now as it has ever been. The "beast" represents the Papacy. The Sunday is the one grand institution which the Papacy sets forth as the sign of its authority. It is by the establishment of Sunday instead of the Sabbath of the Lord that the Papacy has thought to change the law of God. In thus changing the law of God, the Papacy has virtually declared independence of the Most High. In thus presuming to put away an institution—the Sabbath—which rests upon the authority of Jehovah, and putting in place of it an institution—the Sunday—which rests solely on its own authority, the Papacy has exalted itself above God. In demanding the observance of the Sunday, which rests upon its own authority, instead of the Sabbath, which rests upon the authority of God, the Papacy has usurped the place of God. In thus demanding obedience to its own authority instead of obedience to the authority of God, the Papacy has usurped the obedience, and in that the worship which is due to God. The commandment to keep Sunday holy is the first commandment of the church of Rome. To keep Sunday is to keep the commandment of Rome, for there is no other commandment for it. But there is mentioned the image to the beast. That which formed the beast of the prophecy was the union of Church and State—the union of Catholicism and the State. An image to the beast must be likewise a union of Church and State, but in this case a union of Protestantism and the State. This image to the beast is to be formed by the union of Protestantism and the State in the United States. But it is to enforce the worship of the beast, and the receiving of his mark—see Rev. 13:11-17. As the keeping of Sunday is to keep the commandment of Rome and to recognize her authority, so to compel people to keep Sunday is to compel them to keep the commandment and to recognize the authority of Rome. To compel men to keep Sunday, is exactly that for which the Protestant churches in the United States are now grasping for civil power and working up the Sunday laws and their enforcement. It is to compel men to observe Sunday that the Protestant churches in the United States invoke the re-enforcement of the non-religious and Socialistic elements of society. But to compel men to keep Sunday is to compel them to do homage to the Papacy, and the Papacy is the beast. To compel men to keep Sunday is to compel them to worship the beast. Therefore the Protestant churches in the United States are at present engaged in a movement to compel men to do what the word of God by the Third Angel's Message solemnly warns them not to do. The present movement of Protestantism in behalf of the Sunday is in the course of fulfillment of Rev. 13:11-17, and the Third Angel's Message (Rev. 14:9-12) is God's solemn warning to all men against it, and his call to come out from among them and be separate, and to "keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus." It is for this cause that all these years Seventh-day Adventists have been preaching and publishing that there would be in the United States exactly what now is here, and this is only the beginning. The fourth commandment of God says, "Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy. . . . The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God, in it thou shalt not do any work." The first commandment of the man of sin says: "Remember that thou keep holy the Sunday." Whose commandment are you going to keep? Whom will you worship? The Third Angel's Message is now the one thing of the greatest importance to the people of the United States and of the whole world, for the enforced worship of the beast is to be made universal. J. Educated Brutality.
By Editor
It is becoming more and more apparent that the principal aim of the university athletic clubs is by organization to promote brutality. In some recent notes from a certain university we read of the re-organization of the foot-ball club, and it was said that new men will take the places of those who have "preferred to retire on account of disabilities resulting from the double series of last year's games." Not long since while on a railroad train we heard some college students talking of their contests, and one of them told how he went on a certain occasion with a loaded cane, expecting to have a part in a college "rush," but for some reason he did not have an opportunity to use his murderous weapon. The following from the Independent will give some idea of the point to which college athletics have now come. Its outspoken condemnation is just, and is richly deserved. "Eleven big animals from Yale University and eleven big animals from Princeton College expressed their gratitude to God on Thanksgiving day for his mercies during the year, by such a beastly fight as ought to be prohibited by law and punished as the fights of the prize ring are punished. This is plain language, but it is none too strong. Let it be understood that we do not have the least objection to manly sport. We believe in it and would encourage it. But this is nothing of that sort. There is a game of foot-ball, or was, which was manly and healthful. It was a game of pluck and skill. The game as now conducted is only organized brutality. First there was a quarrel as to where the game should be played. This preliminary quarrel was so prolonged and bitter that it prepared the way for a contest which should not be a game but a fight full of animosity. "Under the Rugby rules the ball is hardly kicked from the beginning to the end of the game, but is seized and carried, and the effort of the players is by all possible violence to take the ball from the player who holds it. He can be caught and pounded with the fists, thrown on the ground and stamped on with all one's fury. At Princeton on last Thanksgiving day it was well understood that there would be no mercy shown. The game, so called, was a slugging match. The brutes pounded and kicked each other, and that they did not kill each other was through no restraint, but by the mercy of God. One of the players was severely injured and had to be carried off the ground. It was an unmanly, degrading, beastly exhibition of malice and cruelty. "Then after the contest the fights were continued whenever Yale and Princeton men came together in a drinking saloon or at a hotel bar. At one public room the proprietor had to turn off the gas to stop a fight. Of course there was gambling over the result. It is not foot-ball we object to, but such foot-ball; not games, but gambling; not contests, but drunkenness. Such games as this of last Thanksgiving day should be strictly forbidden by our colleges. They are a disgrace to a Christian university, not to say to a Christian age, and they would not be permitted to disgrace even the dirty streets and dens of Five Points. Shame on all those who participate in such at Princeton." Bible Answers to Bible Questions Concerning Man
By J.
Bible Answers to Bible Questions Concerning Man.—No. 5.
OUR last question under this heading was, “If a man die, shall he live again?” Job 14:14. And we presented the direct Bible answer by Isaiah: “Thy dead men shall live.” (Isa. 26:19); and by the Lord Jesus, “The dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live.” John 5:25. We presented abundant Scripture proof that it is at the second coming of the Lord that the dead hear his voice, that the trumpet of God sounds, and that the dead are raised. We presented proofs of Holy Writ that the hope of the gospel is the resurrection of the dead; that this is the hope of the promise made of God unto the fathers; that in this hope they all lived; that in this hope they died; and that in this hope they still sleep in the dust, awaiting the glorious sound of the voice of the Son of God to call them from the dead to life and immortality. We proved by Paul’s repeated argument in 1 Cor. 15 and other places that in assurance of the resurrection of the dead, alone, lies the assurance of a future life; and that if there be no resurrection of the dead there is no future life for either righteous or wicked. In connection with this, there now comes in a question that has perplexed men for ages, and does yet perplex many; and although the Bible both asks and answers the question, there is yet much perplexity about it even among those who profess to believe the Bible. That question is, “How are the dead raised up?” 1 Cor. 15:35. The answer is, in substance, The dead are raised up by “the power of God.” Matt. 22:29. This is shown by the Saviour’s words to the Sadducees. The Sadducees, who “say that there is no resurrection,” once came to Jesus and in favor of their unbelief presented what they deemed an irreparable objection to the idea of there being such a thing as a resurrection of the dead. They said: “Master, Moses said, If a man die, having no children, his brother shall marry his wife, and raise up seed unto his brother. Now there were with us seven brethren; and the first, when he had married a wife, deceased, and, having no issue, left his wife unto his brother; likewise the second also, and the third, unto the seventh. And last of all the woman died also. Therefore in the resurrection whose wife shall she be of the seven? for they all had her. Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God.” All the difficulty that has ever arisen in men’s minds upon this question, “How are the dead raised up?” has been from these causes. At the foundation of all the difficulty lies the lack of knowledge of the Scriptures, and the accompanying, if not the consequent, lack of knowledge of the power of God. Without the Scriptures we can know nothing about the resurrection of the dead; and without the power of God there can be no resurrection of the dead; and so to leave out either consideration, is only to be at sea on the question before us—not only at sea, but at sea with neither rudder nor compass nor pole-star. It was only giving expression to this same thought of the Saviour’s when Paul, speaking of this hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers, appealed to Agrippa in these earnest and thrilling words: “Why should it be thought a thing incredible with you, that God should raise the dead?” Acts 26:8. Sure enough! Why should it be thought a thing incredible with any one that God should raise the dead? God made a man once from the dust of the ground; he states in his word that many have arisen from the dead, and he has given us the most abundant testimony that he raised up the Lord Jesus from the dead, and that he was seen of witnesses chosen before—witnesses, too, to the number of above five hundred at once. Most, if not all of these witnesses were acquainted with him both before his death and after his resurrection. Some of them ate with him, talked with him, and handled him, after they had seen him dead and buried and risen again. And yet if men leave out the Scriptures and the power of God, to them it still remains incredible that God should raise the dead. Even in this our day, and amongst those who profess to firmly believe the Scriptures and the power of God, there are those to whom it is incredible that God should raise the dead. Nor is this confined to what are sometimes called the “ignorant multitudes.” It is found, and in fact is prevalent, amongst the “divines,” the “great scholars,” and the “leaders of thought.” But yet in all this the difficulty lies in the fact shown by the Saviour that they “do err, not knowing the Scriptures.” For the one thing which logically and reasonably leads these eminent scholars, as well as others, to doubt the resurrection of the dead, is their fixed belief in the doctrine of the immortality of the soul. Than the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, there is nothing more destructive of belief in the resurrection of the dead, and nothing more subversive of the Bible doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. In fact the two doctrines cannot possibly be consistently held in the same mind. Now for the proof. The Scripture says: “That which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die.” 1 Cor. 15:36. This is spoken in answer to the question that is the subject of this article, and is therefore spoken with direct reference to the subject of how the dead are raised up. To quicken is “to make alive.” What Paul says therefore is, “That which thou sowest is not made alive except it die.” That this is spoken directly of man and his resurrection, is plain by verses 42-44. “It is sown a natural body,” etc. Now the doctrine of the immortality of the soul is, that the body properly has no life, that it is not the real man; but that the soul is the real, living, sentient man; that it is that about man which alone possesses real life. In other words, the body is only the house in which the real man lives; i. e., the real “I” dwells within the “me;” and death is simply the separation of the soul from the body. Death breaks down the house, and lets the real occupant free. According to this doctrine, there is no such thing as real death; because the body properly has no life, consequently it does not die; and the soul—the real man—is immortal and it cannot die; therefore there is in reality no such thing as death. If this be true, there is not only no such thing as death but there is, likewise, no such thing as a resurrection of the dead. For, upon the apostle’s premise that “That which thou sowest is not quickened [made alive] except it die,” it follows that, as the body, having no life, does not die, it cannot be quickened (raised from the dead); and as the soul does not die, it cannot be raised from the dead; consequently there is no such thing as a resurrection of the dead.9 Therefore it stands proved to a demonstration that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul is utterly subversive of the doctrine of the resurrection of the dead. But the resurrection of the dead is a Bible doctrine: it is the very truth of God. And it is because of the widespread belief of the doctrine of the immortality of the soul that there is so much doubt and misunderstanding of the Scripture on the subject of the resurrection of the dead. As we have already shown in these articles that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul is contrary to the Scriptures throughout; and as it is now shown that the doctrine of the immortality of the soul leads to disbelief in the resurrection of the dead, the Saviour's words are distinctly applicable to all who now doubt the resurrection. "Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God." To all with whom there is any difficulty in understanding the question, "How are the dead raised up?" we say, Get an understanding of the Scriptures as to the nature of man, and his condition in death, and all connected subjects, then allow the power of God a place, and all your doubts will be removed, and the subject will be all plain and easily understood. For a view of the actual process of bringing the dead from the graves to real living existence again, Ezekiel 37:1-14 may be read with profit. It is too long to copy here; we ask the reader to turn to that scripture at once and read it carefully, and as you read do so in view of the "power of God." J. Sin and Its Penalty.
By John Harvey Kellogg
WHAT is the penalty for sin? In the teachings of the Bible there is no uncertainty in this matter. They plainly inform us that "the wages of sin is death;" and that "Christ died for our sins." Rom. 6:23; 1 Cor. 15:3. As sin is the transgression of the law, death, the wages of sin, is its penalty; and as Christ died for our sin, the penalty was laid upon him for our sake. Now that "Christ died" is not only plainly declared in the Scriptures, but it is a fundamental truth in the gospel system; for it is easy to show that, if Christ did not die, there can be no atonement and no redemption. It appears evident, then, that those who assert that Christ did not suffer the penalty of the law do not so assert because the fact is not revealed in the Bible; but as before intimated, because of certain difficulties supposed to lie in the way of that fact. These difficulties are concerning the nature of the penalty, death. It is assumed that death, the penalty of transgression, is threefold in its nature, consisting of temporal, spiritual, and eternal death. If this assumption were true, I should at once give up the atonement as a thing impossible. Yet it has been advanced by men of eminence, and incorporated into works recognized as standard. Let us examine it. 1. The death of man is temporal only by reason of a resurrection. But the resurrection belongs to the work of Christ, and as his work was not necessary or a subject of promise till after the transgression, it cannot have any place in the announcement of the penalty. When death was threatened to Adam, it was not said that he should die temporally, spiritually, and eternally; nor that he should die a first or second death; nor the death that never dies; but that he should surely die. It was death—simply death. Had not a promise been given afterward, of "the seed" to bruise the serpent's head, it would necessarily have been eternal death. But Christ, introducing a resurrection for Adam and his race, causes it to be temporal. But since this time, this death, temporal, has not been the penalty for personal transgression. This is evident for two reasons: (1) Infants die who never have transgressed; and (2) in the Judgment, we stand to answer for our deeds, and the second death is inflicted for personal sin. But on those who are holy, "the second death hath no power;" the penalty does not reach them. So it appears the death we now die is occasioned by Adam's transgression, and is rendered temporal by the second Adam, and comes indiscriminately upon all classes and ages, thus precluding the idea that it is now a penalty, except as connected with that first transgression, in which we are involved only by representation. 2. Spiritual death cannot be a penalty at all. A penalty is an infliction to meet the ends of justice. But spiritual death is a state of sin, or absence of holiness; and to say that God inflicts unholiness upon man is not only absurd, but monstrous. That is confounding the crime with its punishment. God does not make man wicked or sinful as an infliction; but man makes himself wicked by his own actions, and God punishes him with death for his wickedness. Again, there will be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and the unjust; for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. Now if the penalty upon Adam included spiritual death, the resurrection through the second Adam would be to spiritual life, or holiness; and if all were restored to spiritual life through Christ, there would be none to fall under the second death; for it falls not on the "blessed and holy." 3. The wages of sin is death; and as the death of Adam became temporal by reason of a resurrection, so we may say that the infliction for personal sins, the second death, is eternal, because no resurrection will succeed it. Thus, it appears plain, that from the beginning death was the penalty of the law of God, circumstances determining the duration of it. This view, which is in strict harmony with the Bible, really removes all difficulty in regard to Christ's having suffered the penalty due to sin. But another difficulty is presented to us by giving an extraordinary definition to death; it is said to mean eternal misery. But on examination of this, the difficulty will be entirely on the side of those who present it. Though I am free to confess that if the definition is correct, there is an insurmountable difficulty, involving the whole doctrine of the atonement, and making it utterly impossible for God to be just, and also the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. First. I say, then, that if the signification of death is "eternal misery," Christ never died at all; and then all the scriptures that say he died are untrue; and thus the atonement would be proved impossible, and further consideration of it would be useless. But admitting the Scripture testimony, that the wages of sin is death, and that Christ died for sin, and we have the scriptural view of the term death, utterly forbidding such an unnatural and forced construction of a plain declaration. Secondly. If the correct definition of death is eternal misery, the relative terms, first and second, as applied to death before and after the resurrection, are used absurdly. For how can there be a first and second eternal misery? Sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and death passed upon all men. But the very fact that man may be resurrected, released from death, as the Scriptures teach, clearly proves that the Scripture use of the term death is entirely different from the "theological use," as given above. And, thirdly, if death means eternal misery, then that is the penalty of the law; but as Christ did not suffer it, and the redeemed will not suffer it, so it follows that justice is never vindicated by the infliction of the penalty, either upon them or a substitute; and thus justice is suspended, not satisfied; and Christ's death (if it could with any reason be called so) is not truly vicarious. As I have before considered, justice demands the infliction of the penalty of a just law; and as God is unchangeable and infinitely just, the penalty will surely be inflicted upon the transgressor or his substitute. But the above view makes it impossible. According to that, mercy does not harmonize with justice, but supersedes it; and God's justice is not manifest in justifying the believer. The sum of the matter is this: that if the penalty be eternal misery, then all that have sinned must suffer it, and be eternally miserable, or else the demands of the law are never honored. But the first would result in universal damnation, and the other would degrade the government of God, and contradict both reason and Scripture. This definition of death has been adopted of necessity to conform to the popular idea of the inherent immortality of man; yet it involves a contradiction in those who hold it. For it is claimed that the wicked are immortal and cannot cease to exist, and therefore the death threatened in the Scriptures is something besides cessation of existence, namely, misery. But immortality signifies exemption from death; and if the scriptural meaning of death is misery, and the wicked are immortal, or exempt from death, they are, of course, exempt from misery! The advocates of this theory do not mean to be Universalists, but their position necessarily leads to that result. It was well said by that great Christian philosopher, John Locke, that "it seems a strange way of understanding law, which requires the plainest and most direct terms, that by death should be meant eternal life in misery." Life and death are opposites; the first is promised to the justified, the second is threatened and inflicted upon the unjust. But life and misery are not opposites; misery is a condition of life. In everything but "theology" such a perversion of language would not be tolerated, as to make eternal misery and death, or even misery and death, synonymous. Were I to report that a man was dead because I knew him to be suffering in much misery, it would be looked upon as trifling—solemn mockery. With a cessation of life every condition of life must cease. J. H. W. The Missionary.
By Stephen N. Haskell
Planting the Third Angel's Message in New Zealand.—No. 4.
SEVEN MONTHS' EXPERIENCE OF THE CHURCH AT KAEO.
FROM the previous articles, it will be seen that until Elder A. G. Daniells and wife, of Iowa, went to New Zealand, leaving San Francisco October 31, 1886, the writer was the only Seventh-day Adventist preacher who had ever visited that colony. The time spent there during both visits was about four months, and we left a church at Kaeo of sixteen members, and a company of five at Auckland, all of whom had signed the covenant. Besides these were quite a number of adults and also many children who took their stand the week following our departure. We have already given an account of the organization of the church at Kaeo, which has held regular meetings and Sabbath-school ever since. They at once commenced to lay aside weekly, as God had prospered them, to sustain a laborer when one should be sent to them. Besides this they have made Sabbath offerings in connection with the Sabbath-school, for the purchase of appliances useful in that department. Some weeks these Sabbath contributions have amounted to eight shillings, or nearly $2.00, while that for the support of a minister once reached as high as twelve pounds, or nearly $60 in one week. It is needless to state that their anxiety to have laborers sent among them after we left, was very great. To be left alone in the midst of an extensive interest, and much opposition, was not a very pleasant prospect to those who had but just accepted an unpopular truth, but there was no alternative, as I had purchased my ticket and secured my berth a month previous. This and other considerations seemed to make it necessary that I should leave them at this time.10 But they did not remain idle waiting for a minister to be sent them, but on finding themselves alone, at once organized systematic methods of labor, which have proven to be their life. The result of this labor has been the addition of others to their ranks, which has given new courage and zeal to the missionary spirit, until at present they have increased their club of the Bible Echo from fifty to one hundred copies. A gentleman who lived among the Maories, the original natives, embraced the Sabbath, and with others who first embraced the Sabbath, purchased Maori Bibles and began to hold Bible-readings with the natives. These natives are naturally intelligent, and religiously inclined. Those of this island, and the Samoan, or Navigators' Islands, appear to be of the same race. They are superior, mentally, morally, and physically, to those of the surrounding islands. They are portly in appearance, peaceable, if well treated, and kind-hearted. As a body, they nominally profess Christianity, as the result of the missions established among them by the Methodists and Lutherans. They lack, however, vital piety, and their religion consists in outward forms and the mere profession of faith in Christ. But they have considerable regard for the word of God, and the second coming of Christ is a precious doctrine to them. The Hare family have no little influence over these natives, their business relations having always been agreeable, while Mother Hare is a physician among them. Brother Edward Hare sought at one time to prepare himself to labor as a missionary among them. Thus any new ideas would be received by them from the Hare family as readily as from any one. During my stay upon the island, steps were taken to issue a four-page monthly sheet in their tongue. Cuts from the Youth's Instructor office have already been sent to Melbourne for this purpose, and it is probable that at no distant date this will be brought about. Judging from the letters received, and the various other means we have of determining their spiritual condition, there has been among our brethren in New Zealand a growth in grace corresponding with the missionary zeal and efforts which they have put forth. It is impossible for a missionary spirit to exist without a healthy spiritual interest. Christianity is a missionary work. Its author is our Lord Jesus Christ. He left the realms of glory, where he was worshiped and adored by all the holy angels, to come to this lost world, and save the one lost sheep of his Father's fold, that there might be one fold and one shepherd. The second mail after we left brought the following notice:— "We have a young man, whom you baptized before you left, who is earnest and devoted in the truth. He has not much means, but we think could he take a run through your college, he might be a help to the cause here in New Zealand. We do not see how we can spare him without loss to ourselves, but if you will sustain him in College while there, we will send him to you. We can recommend him as a worthy young man." We at once responded that it would be a privilege for our people to sustain him during his stay in the College. Accordingly Brother — sailed on the July boat and is now in Healdsburg attending the College. Some of the other brethren now contemplate visiting this country, bringing some of their older children to be placed under the care of our educational institutions. It is but an act of justice to state that the California Sabbath-school Association prefers to pay Brother — expenses at the College. It was the Sabbath-schools of California which made the first donations of their offerings for one quarter to carry the message to that distant land, and it is no marvel that they should crave the privilege of contributing to the education of one of the first converts from that country. The association has also donated $1,000 of its funds the present year to the establishment of a mission in South Africa. We can but feel that should they keep such objects before the children as that of planting the truth in foreign lands, and the education of missionaries for those fields, it will not only be a worthy object of itself, but that it will instill into their young minds the true missionary spirit. Such methods will be approved of the Master, who was himself a missionary to this world of sin, penniless and friendless, except for the angels of God, who had an interest in his mission. No individual can ask a higher or more honorable calling than to co-operate in such a work, even though it requires the sacrifice of home and friends, and every earthly pleasure and treasure. The work accomplished by the friends in New Zealand during the last seven months, may be summed up as follows:— They have now two young men in America, attending the Healdsburg College, one of whom has done acceptable work with a tent during the last summer. In the missionary work at Auckland, they have supplied with bound volumes of our periodicals and other reading matter, hundreds of vessels, going to the islands of the Pacific, and various other parts of the world, and also the boats which trade along the coast. Quite an extensive correspondence has already been worked up with the islands of the sea by Sister Edward Hare, who is also in correspondence with the secretary of the International Society. Regular weekly meetings are held in Auckland, and during the week they have Bible-readings nearly every evening. The company have had an addition of thirteen to their numbers as a result of these efforts. These have signed the covenant. Bible-readings are also being held among the native Maories. We do not know just the amount of money paid for Sabbath-school appliances, and the support of other branches of the work, but from what we have learned, not less than $75 has been sent to Australia, to help the cause there, and including what was paid as while there, $150 has been sent to aid the work in this country. Over 5,000 copies of the Bible Echo have been distributed, and more than 500 copies of Volume IV have been sold, besides many copies of "Daniel and the Revelation," "Home Hand Book," and other works published by our people, to the amount of about $1,000. We feel sure that God's providence has been over the work in New Zealand, and as we look back upon it, we can only praise God for the power he has given to his truth to affect the hearts of those who have taken a stand upon it, and cause them to manifest so great a desire to co-operate with the friends in America, who have sent it to them. They appreciate the efforts put forth by our people, and desire to do something to show their gratitude for the precious light that has shone in their pathway. The same spirit of persecution which exists in Europe and America has also been aroused in New Zealand. Two of the friends have been arrested for working on the first day of the week, but the case failed because the Sunday statute states that only those who work publicly violate the law, and these brethren were working on the inside of a house and those who accused them had to watch purposely to find them at work. But this has not in any way weakened their faith or daunted their courage. They talk as our brethren do here in America, where they have been imprisoned. It only increases their zeal, and leads them to desire a closer walk with God that they may do nothing for which he would condemn them, but have his approval and guidance. No reason can be given for the progress the work has made in this newly-entered country, save that God is with his truth, and it should encourage the hearts of the brethren here in America to see the hand of God so clearly leading and guiding the work of the Third Angel's Message. It is what we have been looking for for so many years. We can only say, May God hasten the time when the earth shall be lighted up with the radiant truth that he has given his people in the last days.
S. N. H.