Review and Herald, Vol. 21, No. 22. (4/28/1863)

Review and Herald

Apr 28, 1863

The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Apr 28, 1863

The Bible no Refuge for Slavery.

(Continued.)

2. No sanction of slavery is found in the directions given to those servants who had believing masters. This verse comes far short of expressing the full sense of the original. The present form of the text appears to intimate that servants were in danger of despising their masters because they were brethren, whereas the fact that they were brethren in no sense tended to produce such a result, but is a good reason for not despising them, and is so designed by the apostle. This will be made plain by rendering the Greek word, hoti, for, which is now rendered because. "Let them not despise them for they are brethren." It is so translated in more than two hundred and twenty-five texts.

The word partakers, does not begin to express the force of the Greek word, antilambanomenoi, from which it is translated. This word is compounded of anti, in turn, lambano, to take, or receive, and hence the compound word as used by the apostle, means partakers in turn. Dr. Clarke renders it "joint partakers," but his rendering is not as strictly in accordance with the original as mine.

The word translated benefit is euergesias, which literally means well doing, good conduct. It occurs in but one other text, Acts iv. 9, where it is translated, "Good deed done." Now let me read the verse according to these renderings.

"And they that have believing masters let them not despise them, for they are brethren, but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved partakers in turn of the well doing."

This clearly makes the last clause refer to the servants, as faithful and beloved partakers in turn of the benefit of their own labor; that is, they were paid for their service. This removes all the difficulty that critics have met with in this part of the text. Dr. McKnight affirms that benefit cannot refer to gospel benefit or salvation, and Dr. Clarke agrees with him, but intimates that it may refer to the benefits the servants receive from their masters, but has failed to explain how. Rev. A. Barnes denies that it can refer to the fact that the master receives the benefit of the servant's labor, because that can be no special motive to the servant to serve faithfully, the force of which all must feel. He therefore construes it to mean the benefit which the gospel imparts; the very thing which Drs. McKnight and Clarke deny. The advantage of my translation is, it escapes both these difficulties besides being more in accordance with the sense of the original, making the true sense to run thus: Let them not despise them, but rather let them do them service, because they, the servants, are faithful and beloved, partakers in turn of the well doing, by receiving a fair compensation for their labor. I have no doubt this is what Paul meant, and surely it is entirely free from any direct or implied sanction of chattel slavery.

I have now shown, first, that it is very far from being clear that there is real slavery involved in any part of the text; and secondly, that if those servants who are said to be under the yoke, were slaves, that slavery existed outside of the church, and those servants who served believing masters, were not slaves, but served voluntarily for wages received.

Paul to Philemon does not Justify Slavery.

This epistle of Paul to Philemon has been claimed as one of the strongest proofs of the existence of slavery in the primitive churches under apostolic sanction. As it is both brief and important I will first spread upon my page that portion which is supposed to relate to slavery, and then proceed to examine it.

Paul was a prisoner in Rome, and Philemon is supposed to have been an inhabitant of Colosse. Paul wrote him a letter by a person named Onesimus, in which the following words occurred concerning the bearer:

"I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have begotten in my bonds; which in time past was to thee unprofitable, but now profitable to thee and to me; whom I have sent again; thou therefore receive him, that is my own bowels; whom I would have retained with me, that in thy stead he might have ministered unto me in the bonds of the gospel; but without thy mind would I do nothing; that thy benefit should not be as it were of necessity, but willingly.

"For perhaps he therefore departed for a season, that thou shouldest receive him forever; not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh and in the Lord? If thou count me therefore a partner, receive him as myself. If he hath wronged thee, or owed thee aught, put that on mine account; I Paul have written it with my own hand, I will repay it; albeit I do not say to thee how thou owest unto me even thine own self besides. Yea, brother, let me have joy of thee in the Lord; refresh my bowels in the Lord. Having confidence in thy obedience I wrote unto thee, knowing that thou wilt also do more than I say."

It is assured from the above record that Philemon was a slaveholder, and that Onesimus was his slave, and that the slave, having run away from his master, St. Paul sent him back to the house of bondage from which he had escaped.

It is certainly remarkable on what slight evidence such grave conclusions are made to rest. There is no certain proof that there was any chattel slavery in the case, but undeniable and unanswerable proof that Onesimus was not a slave.

1. The evidence relied upon to prove the main facts in support of slavery is wholly insufficient. The points involved shall be noticed in order.

1. Onesimus was the servant of Philemon. That he was a servant is implied, not affirmed. It is said, "that thou shouldest receive him forever, not now as a servant (doulos) but above a servant, a brother beloved." It is freely admitted that these words imply that Onesimus had been a servant, but this is no proof that he was or had ever been a slave. It has been proved in a preceding argument that the word here used, doulos, does not necessarily mean a slave but is used to denote free hired laborers, ministers and public officers. The reader is referred to the inquiry into the meaning of this word on page 109. Onesimus may then have been a free man in the employ of Philemon, or he may have been bound to him, as a minor by his parents or guardians, or he may have bound himself to serve for a time, and have taken up his wages in advance, and then run away. Any of these suppositions are much more reasonable than to suppose he was a slave. The fact that he is called a servant, doulos, does not and cannot prove that he was a slave, for Paul declares himself to be the servant of Christ, and also the servant of the church.

2. Onesimus ran away from Philemon, or left his employ improperly and without his consent. This is not affirmed but is too clearly implied to be denied. But this does not furnish the slightest proof that he was a slave, for slaves are not the only persons that run away. It is not uncommon for indebted apprentices, and free persons laboring under contracts to depart indebted to the master or employer. Such most clearly appears to have been the case of Onesimus. That he went off in Philemon's debt is more than probable, from the expression of St. Paul, "If he hath wronged thee, or owed thee aught, put that to mine account." The wronging spoken of must have been of a property natural, or it could not have been changed even to Paul. A crime or moral wrong could not be changed over to Paul. It is certain therefore that Onesimus must have borrowed money of Philemon, in which case he would have owed him, or he must have taken up his wages, or received his pay in advance on a contract for service which he left without performing, in

which case he would have wronged him, besides owing him. The whole face of the epistle goes much further to prove such a departure from pecuniary obligations, than from chattel bondage.

3. Paul sent Onesimus back to Philemon, which is regarded by the advocates of slavery as proof positive not only that he was a slave, but that it is right and a solemn duty to return all fugitive slaves to their masters. This is all an unfounded assumption. There is no proof that Paul sent him back, in the only sense in which a fugitive slave can be sent back to his master. One great fact settles this point, which is this, however clearly it may be seen that Paul sent him back, it is equally clear that Onesimus went voluntarily, of his own free will and accord. This clearly proves that there could have been no coercive servitude in the case. Though it must appear obvious upon the face of the facts, that Onesimus returned voluntarily, it may be well to glance at the proof.

(1.) The expression, "whom I have sent again," is not conclusive proof of an authoritative and coercive sending. I will save the labor of a criticism, by quoting from the Rev. A. Barnes. That able writer says, "It is commonly assumed that his returning again was at the instigation of the apostle, and that this furnishes an instance of his belief that run-away slaves should be sent back to their masters. But, besides that there is no certain evidence that he ever was a slave, there is as little proof that he returned at the instigation of Paul, or that his return was not wholly voluntary on his part. For the only expression which the apostle uses on this subject (ver. 12,) whom I have sent again—anapempsas—does not necessarily imply that he even proposed it to him, still less that he commanded it. It is a word of such general import, that it would be employed on the supposition that Onesimus desired to return, and that Paul, who had a strong wish to retain him, to aid him in the same way that Philemon himself would do if he were with him (comp. ver. 13,) had on the whole, concluded to part with him, and to send him again, with a letter, to his friend Philemon. There is nothing in the statement which forbids us to suppose that Onesimus was himself disposed to return to Philemon, and that Paul sent him at his own request."

(2.) The apostle had no means of sending him back against his own choice. There were no marshals to seize and chain fugitive slaves and carry them back to their masters. There was no provision for paying the expenses of a forcible return out of the public treasury, including the chartering of vessels and the employment of companies of dragoons. Rome was more than a thousand miles from Colosse, where Philemon resided, to whom Onesimus is supposed to have been sent, and when we consider that there were then no steamboats, railroads, mail lines, and expresses by which boxed up negroes can now be sent, it must be perfectly certain that Paul could not have returned Onesimus against his will, without an armed governmental express, which Rome was never mean enough to provide for the return of fugitives from bondage. Nor can it be supposed that Paul could have secured any such arrangement, had the thing been possible in itself, for he was at the time a prisoner in bonds.

(3.) The fact that Onesimus was made the bearer of a letter setting forth Paul's wishes, and urging Philemon to receive him kindly, is irresistible proof that it was all a voluntary operation on the part of Onesimus. Dispatched with a communication on a journey of more than a thousand miles, he must often have had every opportunity to have escaped. He could have stopped anywhere short of his journey's end, or gone in any other direction, with the most perfect safety to himself, for there could have been neither slave catcher, marshal nor bloodhound upon his track.

(4.) To assume that necessity impelled him to return to a chattel bondage, on the ground that he could not provide for his own wants, without a master to do it for him, is too absurd to be made the basis of an argument. He was capable of making his escape, and of finding his way to Rome, which, at that age, was more than it would now be for a man to work his way around the world. Paul declares it desirable for him to retain Onesimus to administer to him in his bonds. It must be clear therefore that in Rome he was capable of doing more than merely to provide for his own wants, he was capable of doing that, and assisting Paul in addition.

(5.) The supposition that Onesimus returned to a state of chattel bondage, as a moral duty required by the gospel, is the last and hopeless resort of the advocates of slavery. It has been shown that no other power could have accompanied, to conduct him safely to his former home against his own will. He willed himself to return, or he never would have found his way back. Will it then be said that by being converted under the labors of St. Paul, he became so thoroughly convinced that slavery was right, and that Philemon had such a right of property in him, as to render it his moral and Christian duty to return to the condition of a chattel bondsman, as a means of glorifying God and saving his soul? Nothing else can be said, and to say this, is to abandon the argument, besides contradicting the universal consciousness of mankind.

It abandons the argument, because it gives up the point that Paul sent him back as a fugitive slave against his own will. The moment it is claimed that Onesimus returned from a sense of moral obligation, the idea of coercive slavery vanishes, and the most essential element of American slavery is blotted from the record. In that case there was no slavery involved, except such as was submitted to by the slave from choice, since he had it in his power to have avoided it had he thought best so to do. If American slavery was made to rest upon the choice of the slaves, we certainly should feel much less disposed to oppose it than we now do. If the Congress of the United States will so modify the fugitive slave bill, as to secure the return of fugitives only by the use of the same means as those by which Onesimus was returned, there will be no more forcible rescues. There are not wanting enough Doctors of Divinity in the North, who claim that slavery is right. Now let Congress enact that it shall be lawful for each Doctor of Divinity to advise each fugitive slave to return to his master, and on obtaining his consent, to write a letter to said master, advising and entreating him to receive his slave and to put the same into the hand of the same fugitive slave. Let Congress further enact, that each slave, having received such letter addressed to his master, shall have the right of returning, and that it shall not be lawful for any abolitionist, judge, sheriff, constable or other officer, or any other person, to prevent, hinder obstruct or delay his return. Such a law would excite little opposition among anti-slavery men.

But to suppose that Onesimus went back to chattel bondage from a sense of moral obligation, is to contradict the universal consciousness of mankind. No man ever did believe, or can believe that it is right that he should be held as a chattel slave. Every man's consciousness within himself, tells him that he has a right to himself; that his head and feet, and hands, and ears, and eyes, and tongue, and heart, and soul belong to himself, and are not, and cannot be the property of another. If Onesimus was converted to a belief that he was the rightful property of another, then has the gospel lost its power, for no such conversions take place in these times. The most pious slaves in the South would escape from their masters, did they know how to effect it. The writer recently entertained a very pious slave, a member of the Methodist church in the South, who escaped. So deeply impressed was this man of devout prayer, that he was wrongfully held, and that it was right for him to escape, that he trusted in God to assist and protect him in his flight. He said he prayed all the way as he traveled, that God would guide him in the right way, and turn his pursuers from his track. And from his narrow escape, I was inclined to believe that God heard his prayer. Within the last three months the writer has seen several fugitive slaves converted at the altar at which he officiates, and on getting emancipated from the bondage of sin, a return to physical chattel bondage, is the last thought that enters their minds. They shudder at the thought of the cruel and polluting touch of slavery more than before. It is clear then that there is no proof that Onesimus was ever a chattel slave.

II. There is much proof upon the face of the record that no slavery was involved in the relation that existed between Philemon and Onesimus.

1. The simple fact that Paul so earnestly exhorted Philemon to receive Onesimus, is proof positive that the latter was not returning as a chattel slave, for no class of men have to be less earnestly entreated to receive their lost property when it is returned to them. Here the apostle talks, "I beseech thee for my son Onesimus, whom I have sent again; thou therefore receive him, that is mine own bowels." Verses 10, 12. Again, in verse 17, he says, "If thou count me therefore a partner, receive him as myself." It is worthy of remark that Paul does not plead with Philemon to abate the punishment Onesimus deserved, he does not plead to have him count a less number of lashes upon his naked back; nor yet does he plead with him, not to sell his son Onesimus to the slave dealers. There is not a word of all this, but he simply pleads that he will receive him, the last thing in all the world he would need to have asked at his hand, had he been a chattel slave. That slaveholders do not need to be moved by the pleadings of an apostle to induce them to receive returned fugitives, we have sufficient proof in the enactment of the fugitive slave law of 1850, in these United States, and in the forcible attempts that have been made to execute it, which have rocked the nation to its center. These facts show that Onesimus could not have been a chattel slave, but must have sustained some relation to, or held some position or office in, the family of Philemon, which was both respectable and advantageous to himself, the trust of which he had betrayed, and from which he had wrongfully departed; hence Paul entreated Philemon to receive him back. No argument could be necessary to persuade a slaveholder to receive back a returned slave.

(To be continued.)

The Suffering Son of God.

O SACRED brow! though unbelief Discoveres not thy majesty, Beneath that vail of shame and grief, Its glory still unchanged I see. Thy visage, marred beyond compare, Yet beauteous to my eye appears; Those features heaven's own image bear, Even though defiled with blood and tears.

Nor, through the unending heavenly day, However great its splendors are, More glory will that face display, Than now its pallid features wear. Even there, in Beauty's own domain, The eye shall ne'er such beauty see; Such glory as adorned thy train When going up to Calvary.

Ye angels, who with equal love The Father and the Son adore, Fulfilling in the courts above Your ministry forevermore; Ye mighty seraphs near his throne, Think ye the Incarnate Mystery Has ever with such radiance shone, As on the hill of Calvary?

The work of sacrifice below There crowned the heaven-descended Word; The shame of Mary's Son is now The glory of the Son of God. My name is Love, the Father said;— Jesus replied, when from above Descended, on the cross he bled, I am thy Son; I too am Love.

For Love is highest excellence, The source of all the joys above; 'Tis stronger than Omnipotence, And Jesus' richest crown is love. How vain the honors men possess, The honors of the loftiest state! And heaven and earth alike confess That charity alone is great.

Fretting.

I propose twenty-one reasons why you should never fret, the first of which shall be as good as the one which a certain lawyer announced before the court as the first of forty good and sufficient reasons why the man represented by his client did not sign the deed, which was, the man had long been dead when the deed was written. "Prove that," responded the judge, "and save us the trouble of the other thirty-nine." But men, to learn righteousness, must have "line upon line and precept upon precept."

1. If we fret at the wrong-doing of others we sin against God.

2. Fretting can do no good. It will not restore loss, repair injury, or reform the guilty.

3. If we abstain from fretting at an offense against the truth, we shall promote the good and offset the offense.

4. God has suffered the offense to transpire; he could have prevented it had it been best. We do not mean that it was best that the offense should occur, but it was not best for God to interpose to prevent it. Preventing would be worse than permitting.

5. It is a great gratification to the devil to see men fret; he tries to make them.

6. Fretting destroys our own peace.

7. Out of the present evil God can accomplish a future good. There can no possible evil befall us here, but that in it God designs our highest benefit, according to the ever-blessed assurance that "all things shall work together for good to them that love God."

8. Resisting the temptation to fret glorifies God.

9. Fretting evinces unbelief. It is an expression of dissatisfaction before God with what he suffers; it amounts to saying that we know better than he.

10. It is a manifestation of self-will, it is insubordination, it is rebellion.

11. It is not Godlike, hence it is an expressed disapproval of his likeness; it is casting contempt on his image, hence it is profanity.

12. Fretting fixes and confirms a sinful habit, which grows and strengthens with every indulgence, so that we become slaves to a fretful disposition.

13. It grieves the Holy Spirit.

14. It destroys one's influence. Few people have confidence in a habitual fretter; he is regarded as having sold himself to the bidding of a capricious tyrant, and as having thrown into the bargain his manly dignity and moral integrity.

15. It will make you hated, dreaded, and avoided.

16. God will avenge you and take care of the wrong-doer.

17. Really the causes of fretfulness are seldom worth fretting about.

18. The fretful man is as a foot-ball with which Satan makes sport.

19. Fretting is contagious. Let there be one fretter in a family, and the probability is that all will become fretters.

20. Abstaining from fretting under temptation strengthens every virtue and weakens the power of every sin, according to the law that every moral act strengthens the whole moral man.

21. The redemptive power of Christlike forbearance is seen in strong contrast with its opposite, in the currency which fretting gives to evil surmisings, and the facility with which the maligned character is redeemed by patience and forbearance. Fret, and men will believe the evil spoken; bear it, and they will say it is untrue.

Finally, beloved, let me propose ten specifics for this terrible disease, either of which will be found a curative:

1. Hide in the "Cleft Rock" when adversity comes. Lie low when the wind blows. The truly humble soul whose all is God, and whose self is nothing, has no self-interest over the abuse of which, to fret.

2. Overlook the immediate instrument of evil or injury and see God in it trying you, as God suffered Job to go to trial under the Devil.

3. Cultivate a tender sensibility, be pitiful, commiserate the misfortunes of the guilty. A certain fretful man was advised to repeat the Lord's Prayer when he became angry, before he vented his anger, and he never after could get over the petition, "Forgive us . . . as we forgive" . . . without losing his angry feelings.

4. Think of your own faults—the wrong you have done to others.

5. Think what the Saviour suffered, and how he bore it.

6. Don't complain of the wrong, or talk about it; your words will add fire to your spirit.

7. Don't think about it, for thought is fuel to the fire that burns the soul.

8. Don't pray about the offense; pray for the offender, and think only of his guilt before God and not against yourself.

9. Do a kindness to the offender.

10. Look forward to the judgment.—Christian Advocate and Journal.

The Times of Refreshing.

By F. Gould

In consequence of the great apostasy, foretold by the apostle Paul, and incurred through the influence of the "man of sin," primitive order, and the gifts in the church, have been almost lost sight of; but they will be restored. There is already a sound of an abundance of rain. "Repent and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord, and he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you, whom the heaven must receive, until the time of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets, since the world began." Acts iii, 19–21.

This great refreshing is just before us. The signs are fast fulfilling which proclaim Christ near, even at the doors; and are we ready? Repentance, confession of sins, humbling ourselves under the mighty hand of God, and turning to him with full purpose of heart, are required of us as a preparatory step in order that we may participate in the last closing notes of the message, and be gathered with the ripe sheaves into the garner.

A good and correct theory of Bible truth, alone, will not be sufficient to give us a passport into that better kingdom. All our thoughts, words, and actions, must correspond with it. Then we shall be sanctified through the truth. The message to the Laodiceans is full of weight and power. "As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; be zealous, therefore, and repent."

The prophet Joel gives us some characteristics of the third angel's message, and makes a special call to the church in connection with the closing scenes of earth.

"Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly, gather the people, sanctify the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the children, let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch and the altar, and let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord, and give not thine heritage to reproach, that the heathen should rule over them." Joel ii, 15–17.

God is fitting up a class of people that will stand when there shall be no mediator, when he that is filthy will be filthy still, and he that is holy will be holy still. The same rain that ripens the wheat for the garner, will also ripen the tares to be burned. I would say in the language of the prophet, Seek ye the Lord, all ye meek of the earth, which have wrought his judgment, seek righteousness, seek meekness: it may be ye shall be hid in the day of the Lord's anger. Zeph. ii, 3.

F. GOULD.

East Brookfield, Vt.

Arithmetic Applied to Tobacco.

By Van Horn

COULD the young man who is rolling the first morsel of tobacco under his tongue, realize the immense drain he is about establishing on his system and pocket, he would turn from the grim idol with disgust. It is a much-quoted saying that "figures will not lie," and we will spend a few minutes applying them to the subject under consideration.

After a chewer has become "rooted and grounded" in his habit, he will spit, on an average, twice in five minutes, and half a teaspoonful at a time, making 24 expectorations in an hour, or about 240 in a day, which will amount to 120 drachms, or about a pint. This will give 360 pints, or 45 gallons in a year, almost 1½ barrels! If his vitality withstands this drain for 50 years, he will have lost 2,250 gallons, or over 71 barrels, enough to fill a good-sized cistern! Estimating a pint as weighing a pound, he will lose 7 pounds per week, or 365 a year, and 18,250 pounds, or over 9 tons, in 50 years. Can we wonder that the devotee of tobacco is thin and haggard-looking, when we consider that he spits away his own weight in less than six months?

Let us make another calculation. After fully forming the habit, he will chew about 2 inches of light plug per day. For convenience, we will say 1 foot per week, or 52 feet in a year, which will amount in 50 years to 2,600 feet, or nearly half a mile. At present prices, this is worth 2 cents per inch, which gives the neat little sum of $624, which if deposited in the saving's bank instead of the tobacconist's till, would have given the chewer a fine farm, instead of 18 or 20 bushels of useless quids.

But, suppose the man is a smoker and indulges in cigars. Very moderately, we will say only 3 per day, each 4 inches long, and costing 2 cents apiece. Each day he will consume 1 foot of tobacco, at an expense of 6 cents, or 7 feet in a week, 30 per month, and 365 feet per year, costing $21,90; in 50 years he will burn 18,250 feet, which would make a cigar 3½ miles long, costing $1,095. Set upon end, that cigar would extend beyond the top of Mount Blanc!

We might calculate the time spent in taking a chew, or lighting a cigar, and prove that it would be sufficient, if rightly spent, to give a man a thorough knowledge of several sciences; but at present we push our inquiries no further.—Van Horn, in Presbyterian Witness.

Made for Immortality.

By Mrs. H. F. Richey

It cannot be that earth is man's only abiding place. It cannot be our life is a bubble, cast off by the ocean of eternity, to float a moment upon its waves, and then sink into darkness and nothingness. Else why is it that the high and glorious aspirations which leap like angels from the temple of our hearts, are ever wandering abroad unsatisfied? Why is it that the rainbow and the cloud come over us with a beauty that is not of earth, and then pass off, and leave us to muse on their faded loveliness? Why is it that stars, which hold their festivals around the midnight throne, are set above the grasp of our limited faculties, forever mocking us with their unapproachable glory? And why is it that bright forms of human beauty are presented to our view and then taken from us, leaving the thousand currents of our affections to flow back in an Alpine torrent upon our hearts? We are born for a far higher destiny than that of earth. There is a realm where the rainbow never fades, where the stars will be spread out before us, like islands that slumber on the ocean, and where the beings which here pass before us like visions, will stay in our presence forever.

Mrs. H. F. Richey.

Eckford, Mich.

The Perfect Pattern.

By Lydia J. Shaw

“THERE is no friend like Jesus, So gentle, kind, and true; This Friend is always near us, And sees whate’er we do.”

Dear reader, do you want an example, beautiful, safe, heavenly, perfect as perfect can be, without spot, blemish, or any such thing—a pattern to imitate in all you think, say, and do—calculated to make you happy here, and happy in the new earth? Where will you look for such a pattern? Where will you find it? On earth? No. There have been great men, good men, wise men—very great, good, and wise—from the days of Enoch until now; but where, among all the sons and daughters of Adam, can we point you to one, even one, that would be safe to imitate in all things? The greatest, wisest, and best men on earth have nothing save what God gives them, and are subject to like passions as we are, liable to err and mistake in judgment. They have nothing good or praiseworthy save that received. If the greatest, wisest, and best men that ever lived were unsafe guides, where shall we look for a safe and perfect pattern, one that it is safe to follow always, everywhere, but the footsteps of our blessed Saviour?

Yes, that is it. Look to Jesus, the bright image of his Father, full of grace and truth. The voice from the excellent glory said, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” One great design in his assuming our nature was to set us a perfect example in all things. Holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners, Christ was a perfect pattern from his childhood; perfect in patience, in meekness, in love, in humility, in self-denial, in doing good, in submission. All the Christian graces were in him and abounded—“love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness, temperance; against which there is no law.” Is it not safe and wise to imitate Jesus in all these things? He gave himself for us that he might redeem us from iniquity and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. He teaches us that denying ungodliness and worldly lust we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present evil world.

We must be like Jesus. Like him in prayer—the stillness of night and early morn witnessed his earnest supplication for his disciples. Like him in teaching—the hearts of his disciples burned within them, and their souls were quickened at his words. Like him by the way—ever uttering words of kindness and comfort to all who came to him troubled. Like him in good works—at all times doing the will of our Father in heaven. Like him in knowledge—possessing the knowledge of the life that now is, and of that which is to come.

Even hereunto were ye called; because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example that ye should follow his steps; who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth. Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not, but committed himself to Him who judgeth righteously. 1 Pet. ii, 21-23.

Reader, will you take this blessed Jesus for your example? Strive to imitate him in all things. Follow him through evil report, and good report. He invites you freely: “I love them that love me, and they that seek me shall find me,” saith the Lord. If ye love me, keep my commandments. And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments; but who so keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected. Will you not imitate the example that Jesus has set us, heed the admonitions of our great Teacher, and follow on to know the Lord, whom to know aright is life eternal? LYDIA J. SHAW. Strykerville, N. Y.

General Conference.

By Editor

A FEW weeks only and our General Conference will be in session. Delegates are being appointed to this assembly from different States, and our people are looking forward to it as the most important meeting ever held by the Seventh-day Adventists.

The great object of this contemplated meeting, as far as it has been expressed by those who plead that the present state of the cause demands it, is to secure the united and systematic action of the friends of the cause in every part of the wide field.

But what will the first brief session of General Conference do toward accomplishing this grand object? What should be done? We do not propose to answer these questions; but in asking them wish to call attention to them, and suggest that they should be well considered, especially by our preachers, before Conference assembles.

We shall all be happy to meet true friends of the cause from the different States, and elsewhere. We shall enjoy the reading of the epistles sent in, as we hope they will be, from those localities which may not be represented by delegates. A free interchange of thought as to the best general course of action would be very agreeable. And should nothing more be accomplished, such a meeting might have a salutary influence on the general good of the cause. But may we not look for something more than this?

As far as the use of means is concerned in securing united, systematic action in the entire body, must not the General Conference be the great regulator? If so, is it not the duty of General Conference to mark out the general course to be pursued by State Conferences? And if it be the pleasure of State Conferences to carry out the decisions of General Conference, unity thus far will be secured.

But in our unorganized condition our preachers have not been properly distributed. Vermont and Michigan have more than their proportion, and five still have their headquarters at Battle Creek, while Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota, the Canadas, and Western Territories are almost destitute. All reflecting persons will conclude that there is a wrong in this somewhere. Shall General Conference correct the wrong by making a judicious distribution of preachers throughout the wide field? Does organization reach as far as our preachers? or does it not? When our churches are well organized, with systematic Benevolence in full operation, and they united to some State Conference, does the work stop there? or does it reach our preachers, systematizing their labor, and regulating their support?

If our preachers, like those of several denominations, were left to seek their support from the people where they might labor for a specified length of time, then Conference might not dictate to them their place of labor, or the amount they should receive. No, it would grant them the right to go where they could gain the reputation of well-doing as ministers, and receive all the people might choose to give them. But our preachers do not confine their labors to any one place, or to any specified number of places. They go among the churches where most needed, and then enter new fields without expecting to receive anything from those for whom they labor.

In order that this manner of labor might be sustained, systematic benevolence has been introduced to our people, and it has proved a perfect success. Now our preachers can be well sustained, while they devote their entire energies to pushing forward the work. But for our preachers to hold our people under obligation to support them by a system of liberality, and they locate where they please, and labor where, and as, they please, seems to us extremely absurd. We plead for system. And while ministers call for systematic benevolence, let the people loudly call for systematic labor. Can General Conference take this matter in hand? If not, what use have we for General Conference? Again, should not General Conference control all missionary labor in new fields? If so, would it not control missionary funds, and require, among other officers, a treasurer and board of directors? Every such organization should be as simple as possible, and accomplish its design. Useless machinery of this kind is badly in the way. But that which is worth doing at all, should be done correctly and well. If General Conference is not higher in authority than State Conferences, we see but little use for it. Think of these things, brethren, and be ready to act when assembled in General Conference.

Continue reading: Lessons for Bible Students