"WHY did the survivors survive?" This question was addressed by a friend of the Companion to Sergeant Fredericks, one of the six men of the Greely expedition who lived to return home. He had just been to visit his family and friends in Ohio, and looked the ideal survivor, ruddy and robust, packed full of muscle.
He looked puzzled at the question, and so our friend explained a little.
"What I mean," said the questioner, "is this. There were twenty-five of you, all picked men, and you were all subjected to the same hardships. You had about an equal chance for your lives. Why were you six the survivors?"
The sergeant sat silent, as if thinking the matter over. Then he said, "It was our minds that did it. We kept up our spirits. We wouldn't give in, but kept talking and telling cheerful stories, and making believe that we had no doubt about our rescue."
That was a very good account of the matter so far as it went, but it did not explain why those six were better able than the rest to keep up their spirits. A few days later, the same friend had the great pleasure of conversing with Major Greely himself, to whom he proposed a similar question.
"What kept you up, Major Greely?" (He is major by brevet, and army etiquette requires that he should be called by his brevet title.)
"You are not stronger than the other men, and you had already seen a good deal of hard service. Why did you pull through, when stronger men gave out?"
The answer of Major Greely in substance was this: "It was the feeling of responsibility that sustained me. I felt that I had to live, anyhow. I felt that I must stand by the men and fulfil the object of the expedition. A hundred times I should have been glad to die, so acute were my sufferings, but in fact I had too many things to attend to."
This was Major Greely's view of the matter. Some days later, our friend read in the Boston Journal another explanation, much more simple if less romantic.
"Of the nineteen men who perished," said the Journal, "all but one were smokers, and that one was the last to die. The survivors were non-smoking men."
The Companion would be rejoiced to be able to believe this clean-cut and highly effective statement, because we are opposed, and have been from the beginning, to the use of tobacco in all its forms. Upon referring to Major Greely, we find that the paragraph, though not exactly true, yet contains a great deal of truth.
Of the six who lived to see their country again, all were men of the most strictly temperate habits in every particular. Four of them never used tobacco. The two others would sometimes, on festive occasions, to oblige friends, smoke a cigarette or a part of a cigar. They took no tobacco with them among their private stores, and cared nothing for it.
Of the nineteen who perished, the large majority were users of tobacco, some in moderation, some to excess. The first man to die was one who had been in former years a hard drinker, and there is reason to believe that the deaths of several others were hastened by previous habits of excess.
We do not doubt that the non-smokers and non-chewers, on this expedition had a positive and very great advantage over their comrades, because tobacco acts as a stimulant upon the digestive powers, and it is the nature of stimulants first to excite, and then to weaken. The excitement is temporary; the weakening is permanent.
Every one must have noticed how uncomfortable a smoker is after dinner until he begins to smoke. The reason is that the languid digestive powers (made languid by frequent stimulation) are waiting to be roused to exertion by the accustomed stimulant. We have not the slightest doubt that men subjected to just such a trial, having to subsist upon shrimps and seal-skin, would die about in the order of the strength of their digestive organs. The sum of the matter is that all the virtues, mental and moral, tend to strengthen our hold upon life, and all the vices to lessen it.—Youth's Companion.
Temperance.
By John O. Corliss
A Good Word for Vegetarianism.
A CORRESPONDENT of the New York Observer, writing from Jerusalem, gives a description of a peculiar sect he chanced to fall in with there. He says: "We found them living in a delightful house, just inside the Damascus gate. They are as bright, happy people as I have ever seen. They eat no meat, but, in spite of that, look as well as we carnivorous creatures who feed on flesh three times a day." And why should they not be so? Probably no one doubts that when the Creator made man, he knew what was best adapted to his dietetic needs. Granting this, the question arises, Can man thrive better, or as well even, on a substituted diet as on that originally prescribed for him? "And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat." Gen. 1:29. The human family would doubtless be more robust and healthy now if man had never broken through the restriction of the original rule. Indeed, when men have in any age adhered to that direction, they have been repaid with health and vigor above that of their associates who took the opposite, or common course.
It cannot strictly be said in the case of Daniel and his three associates in Babylon, that they appeared fairer and fatter than others of the realm because of direct interposition in their behalf. See Dan. 1:5-20. If they had partaken of the same diet as the others, there is no reason why they should not have appeared health-wise the same as they, all things considered equal. Again, the narrative that sets the matter forth says nothing of any miracle intruding in the case. It simply relates that they refused the king's meat and wine, desiring to prove to him that they could thrive better on a vegetable diet. The experiment proved the efficiency of the Lord's rule, and no good reason can be assigned why its application now would not have beneficial results. J. O. C.
Tobacco and the Alcoholic Appetite
EVEN a century ago, Dr. Rush, with an intelligence quite beyond multitudes of physicians of the present day, discerned the closely connecting link between tobacco and the alcoholic appetite. He said: "Smoking and chewing tobacco, by rendering water and simple liquors insipid to the taste, dispose very much to the stronger stimulus of ardent spirits."
The Danger of Unused Rooms
SLEEPING in rooms long unused has destroyed the life of many a visitor. Our parlors and “spare rooms” help to enrich many a doctor.—Hall’s Journal of Health.
An Acknowledged Failure.
By Editor
IT has been the confident expectation of the churches of this generation that the millennium was near at hand; that the world was fast growing better. And it has been their confident boast that they were going to "take the world." So we heard a minister express it. And now how do they stand?
Albert Barnes said the American churches were responsible for American slavery; that there was no power outside the churches that could have sustained that institution an hour, if it had not been sustained by them. Some of them ignored the question entirely; others connived at it, while others upheld it as a Bible institution, and a blessing to society! But slavery pushed them to the wall, and made most desperate efforts to destroy the Government, which had so long been perverted to sustain the abomination. Then, as a matter of necessity, a war policy, the Government put forth its strength and crushed out the viper, when, lo! the churches set up a jubilee shout over the downfall of slavery. Even the American Tract Society, which had utterly refused to speak a word on the subject, mutilating valuable works of foreign authors, as was repeatedly charged against it, to get out all allusions to the sin of slave-holding, then issued books against slavery—when slavery was dead and gone! Why did not the churches put forth their moral power and influence to put down the evil? Simply because the evil was popular. Now they admit that slavery was wrong, and that its abolition was a great benefit to the world; but, instead of their being the light of the world, and moving out in advance against the evil, they wait till the world moves out, and they follow in the light the world offers to them.
But the abolition of slavery did not bring the millennium. Evil does not seem to be greatly on the decrease, according to their showing. And now what do they propose to do? Is it to renew their consecration to God, to humble themselves before him, to send forth men full of the Spirit of God, to reach the hearts of the people, and revive true religion and morality in the body of the nation? Nothing of the kind. Indeed, they have greatly lost their faith in these old-fashioned gospel means. Now they are calling for constitutional amendments and legal enactments to put "all Christian laws, institutions, and usages on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the nation."
The difficult problem in question is this: Sin is openly on the increase; irreligion, recklessness, and every evil work, are becoming so bold and outbreaking that many begin to see that the whole body is diseased and corrupt, and something must be done to check "the demoralizing tendencies" of society, as our very existence as a people is in peril. And what are the churches doing? Are not they "the light of the world," and "the salt of the earth"? So they claim; but, alas! their light is gone out—the salt has lost its savor. Their influence is powerless for good, and legal enactments become their only hope in these days of peril.
It is said of Nero that he amused himself with fiddling while Rome was burning. Notoriously wicked as he was, many have doubted the correctness of such a statement of history, not believing it possible that any one could be so hardened as to look with indifference on such a calamity, especially as he bore a great responsibility in regard to the welfare of the nation. That a conflict is pending—a crisis is near, all admit. That the very existence of the nation is in peril, the association believes; and the representative men of almost every denomination are pleading for the religious amendment as the only hope. What are the churches doing to check the downward tendency, and save the moral world from utter demoralization? They are "eating and drinking with the drunken," inventing new methods of frolic and fun to call in the rabble, and get money! Neck-tie socials, sheet-and-pillow-case socials, oyster suppers, and all manner of silly and wicked amusements find patronage in these institutions of popular folly, while the prayer-meeting is neglected, and devotion becomes a thing unknown.
When we consider the great increase of crime, the danger impending, and the awful responsibility of these churches as professed servants of the Most High, and then behold their suppers and amusements, their church parties and socials, their flaunting advertisements of "fun for everybody," we no longer look upon Nero as a sinner above all others! The Saviour said of the last days, "Because iniquity shall abound, the love of many shall wax cold." Read 2 Tim. 3:1-5, and see its fulfillment in our own times.
That the American churches have utterly failed to fulfill their mission cannot be denied. The reasons set forth to prove the necessity of the religious amendment are an acknowledgment of this fact. They well know that the people have not confidence in their preaching and their moral standing so as to be influenced by them. "A great revival" is no longer an index of a great reform. Their moral influence is not sufficient to check the "demoralizing tendencies" of society, and they call for laws to stay its downward progress! It is time they learned that human laws cannot make people religious. They may make bigots. They may make hypocrites, and gather into their folds dishonest politicians, and thus add to the worldliness and corruption of their own bodies. "God is a Spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." But this end can never be brought about by legal enactments.
However specious the pretense for this amendment may be, all history attests this truth, that the nearer the church is allied to the State the more corrupt the church becomes. And were not the churches already blinded in regard to their duty, as well as to their condition, they would regard the success of this movement as the greatest calamity that could befall the cause of true godliness and vital piety.
The church of Rome tried the experiment of extending the influence of religion without the slow success of increasing religious sentiment, and Protestants are following in its footsteps. The result, if successful, will be "an image" to that which so long wore "out the saints of the Most High."
The Saviour's injunction to "Watch!" becomes his people now.
How It Was Done, and Why.
By Ellet Joseph Waggoner
THE Sunday-schools of the country are now engaged in studying the book of Acts, having recently begun with the twentieth chapter, where they left off six months ago. That chapter notes a certain meeting that was held by the disciples, on the first day of the week, and it was to be expected that the many lesson commentators would make as much out of it as possible, to bolster up Sunday observance. In looking over the list, we find that they are all about the same. The following from the N. Y. Independent, of Dec. 25, 1884, is a fair sample of the whole:—
"At Troas we find the brethren assembled on a Sunday. In the early churches there was an observance of the seventh day and the first day both. The observance of the seventh day has never been formally abrogated; but it died out gradually, as the converted Jew of to-day does not circumcise his children, though the command to circumcise has never been formally repealed. Among the converted Gentiles the Lord's Day [By this term the Independent means Sunday, and not the Sabbath.] would naturally command a more general observance than the seventh day, and as Christianity ceased to make converts among the Jews, but increased among the Gentiles, the observance of the first day became general and that of the seventh was gradually discontinued."
In nothing else would scholars, such as the editors of the Independent, tolerate jumping at conclusions in this way. A single meeting on the first day of the week is accepted as proof that Sunday was the regular day of worship among the early Christians. If this be logic, what conclusion must we draw from the fact that, beginning with the day of Pentecost, they held meetings every day? The Sunday controversy affords proof that the keenest logicians may be led by self-interest to take leave of logic, and reason like infants. Let us notice in detail the Independent's position on the introduction of the Sunday into the Christian church.
1. "In the early churches there was an observance of the seventh day and the first day both." Well, then, if we are to be guided by the practice of the early church, why do not all the churches now observe both days? Why is it that the Independent, which believes in following the example of the early church, has omitted one important item? One thing is certain: The Independent has no ground on which to condemn Seventh-day Adventists. It acknowledges that Christians generally have departed from the custom of the early church, which it regards as authoritative. For our part we make no claim to follow a certain course simply because some one did so long ago. The Scriptures are the only guide, and we can read them and understand them as well as people ever could.
2. "The observance of the seventh day has never been formally abrogated." But it was formally enjoined, and is therefore still binding. "It [the observance of the seventh day] died out gradually." Will the Independent please tell us what constitutes sin? Is it violation of law, or violation of custom? Among certain nations the worship of the true God gradually died out, until it ceased altogether. Must we conclude that in those countries the old law which says, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me," is not binding? that the worship of idols is all right? Why cannot people remember that the command, "Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil," is for all time, and that wrong cannot be made right, no matter how many people practice it. The New Testament bears this testimony: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law, for sin is the transgression of the law." 1 John 3:4. Modern and uninspired teachers would have us accept this version: "Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also custom; for sin is the transgression of custom." We do not accept this new version. "The old is better." If the law enjoining the observance of the seventh day has not been abrogated, then every one who does not observe the73seventh day is, to that extent, a sinner. With many, such action may be a sin of ignorance, but it is a sin nevertheless.
But the Independent claims to present a parallel to the neglect of Sabbath observance. It says: "It died out gradually, as the converted Jew of to-day does not circumcise his children, though the commandment to circumcise has never been formally repealed." If a text could be found which should say, "Sabbath-keeping is nothing," as 1 Cor. 7:19 says of circumcision, how readily it would be quoted. Of circumcision Paul says: "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the Spirit, and not in the letter." Rom. 2:28, 29. If now the Independent could find a text, saying, "For he is not a Sabbath-keeper, who observes the seventh day; . . . but he is a Sabbath-keeper, who observes the first day," then it would have as good ground for Sabbath desecration as it has for not practicing circumcision. The Independent well knows that there is no point of comparison between circumcision and the Sabbath. By the style of argument which it uses, every one of the precepts of the moral law may be trampled upon without sin. The Spiritualist says, "Whatever is, is right;" that is, custom and inclination must be allowed to settle questions of right and wrong. "Oh, no," says the Independent, "you must not say so of everything; that is true only when applied to the fourth commandment." But it will not be long before Christian people who give custom and inclination as reasons for disregarding the Sabbath of the Lord, will find the same argument thrown back on them concerning the sixth, seventh, and eighth commandments. Those who thus set at naught a portion of the law of God, are opening the flood-gates of iniquity, and will certainly be responsible for the wickedness that follows.
3. "Among the converted Gentiles the Lord's Day [Sunday] would naturally command a more general observance than the seventh day." Of course it would; and so, likewise, falsehood, and demon-worship accompanied by licentious rites would naturally command more general observance than would the pure worship of Jehovah; but that would not make such practices right. In the last part of the paragraph quoted, the Independent has let us into the true secret of the change from the seventh to the first day of the week. The first day was the heathen festival day. Around that day clustered memories of wild revels in honor of their god; in fact, all their old religious prejudices were naturally in favor of that day, and as they increased in numbers until the true disciples became only a small minority, the old customs were indeed gradually brought in. And because a horde of heathen chose to call themselves Christians while retaining their heathen customs, Christians of to-day think that they must follow their example. Dr. Killen, in "The Ancient Church," p. 449, gives us another custom for which these nominally converted heathen manifested a natural fondness. He says:—
"The code of heathen morality supplied a ready apology for falsehood, and its accommodating principles soon found too much encouragement within the pale of the church. Hence the pious frauds which were now perpetrated. Various works made their appearance with the name of some apostolic man appended to them, their fabricators thus hoping to give currency to opinions or practices which might otherwise have encountered much opposition. At the same time many evinced a disposition to supplement the silence of the written word by the aid of tradition."
And the successors of those persons are now numbered by the million. Tradition is now exalted far above the law of God. Why do not the churches adopt lying as a Christian ordinance? It was practiced in the early church. To be sure there is a law against lying, and it was never formally abrogated, but the converts from among the Gentiles had a natural tendency to lie, and so a strict regard for truth began gradually to die out. If it is right to keep Sunday, then it is right to lie and deceive, for both practices stand on the same foundation, namely, the custom of the majority. Verily, "The customs of the people are vain." E. J. W.
The Principles of Protestantism.
By Alonzo T. Jones
IN our article last week on the California Sunday Law discussion, we were led to ask the question. In what single thing do Protestants now protest against the work of the papal church? We now propose to follow up that inquiry.
"Protestant—One who protests. Especially a Christian who protests against the doctrines and practices of the Roman Catholic Church."—Webster.
"Protestants—Is a collective name for all genuine believers in evangelical Christianity—those who protest against the errors and renounce the communion of the Romish Church."—McClintock and Strong.
The term Protestants was first applied in derision to the princes and delegates of the Reformed faith, who, in 1529, entered their protest against the decrees of the second diet of Spires; and that term was extended from those who signed the protest, to all who embraced the fundamental principle involved in it. The principle is this:—
"The Bible is not to be interpreted and used according to tradition, or use, and wont; but to be explained by means of itself, its own language and connection. This doctrine—that the Bible explained independently of all external tradition, is the sole authority in all matters of faith and discipline—is really the foundation-stone of the Reformation."—McClintock and Strong.
"The bold voices of all the Reformers soon proclaimed this powerful principle, at the sound of which Rome is destined to crumble away. 'Christians receive no other doctrines than those which are founded on the express words of Jesus Christ, his apostles and prophets. No man, no assembly of doctors, are entitled to prescribe new doctrines.'"—D'Aubigne, Reformation, Book 2, chap. 7. "'Luther then vigorously proceeds to lay down the fundamental principles of the Reformation—The word of God, the whole word of God, and nothing but the word of God.'"—Id., Book 3, chap. 9.
"'The Scripture, without any commentary,' says he on another occasion, 'is the sun from which all teachers receive light.' Such are the principles of Christianity and the Reformation. According to these venerable words, we are not to take the Fathers in order to throw light on Scripture, but Scripture to throw light on the Fathers. The Reformers and the apostles held up the word of God alone for light, just as they held up the sacrifice of Christ alone for righteousness. To attempt to mix up human authority with the absolute authority of God, or human righteousness with this perfect righteousness of Christ, is to corrupt Christianity in its two foundations. Such are the two fundamental heresies of Rome, heresies, moreover, which some teachers would fain introduce, though, doubtless, in a modified form, into the bosom of the Reformation."—Id., Book 9, chap. 5.
These fundamental principles, and those words of the illustrious historian, are appropriate to-day, and will be even to the end of the world. The Reformation of the sixteenth century was not simply for Europe and the sixteenth century alone, but it must extend to all nations and be for all time. Says D'Aubigne, "The Reformation is Jesus Christ." And as Christ liveth ever, so the Reformation will be a living, practical movement while the world stands. Protestantism is Jesus Christ; and as the papacy stands arrayed against Christ till the time comes that the saints possess the kingdom (Dan. 7:21, 22), even so Protestantism will be a living, active principle with those who serve Christ, till the day that he comes, and his saints enter into his everlasting kingdom. The last of the saints of God who live in the world, and who leave the world alive, are those who carry on the most persistent protest against the papacy and its allies. And when they leave the world, singing a song that no man can learn but they, it is the song of "victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name." Rev. 15:2.74From the fundamental principles above given, it is plain that Protestantism is not simply a negation. It does not rest simply upon a denial of certain dogmas of the papacy, but it goes at once to the root of the whole matter, in the assertion that "the word of God, the whole word of God, and nothing but the word of God," is the rule of faith and practice for the human race. To affirm this proposition is to deny in toto the principles of the papacy. This was the intent of the proposition when it was first stated; this was the effect of it; so it was then understood by the papacy, and so it is still. To assert this was the strongest protest that the assembled princes and delegates could make on April 19, 1529; it is the strongest protest that can now be made. Protestantism, therefore, is not a negation, except as it is involved in an affirmation; and the force of the negation is proportionate to the power of the affirmation. He who the most consistently, and the most earnestly, affirms this proposition, is the strongest Protestant, the greatest reformer, and stands nearest to Christ.
And this is just the obligation that is laid upon every one who becomes a servant of God and of Christ. The perfection of this declaration is the goal that must, and will, be reached by that people who get "the victory over the beast, and over his image, and over his mark, and over the number of his name." "Ye are my witnesses, saith the Lord, and my servant whom I have chosen." Isa. 43:10-12. "And ye shall be witnesses unto me," said Christ. Acts 1:8. When a man amongst men is called to be a witness, he is sworn to tell "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth;" and shall the Lord require less in this respect than is required by man? Christ says: "To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth." John 18:37. But he is not alone in this; read again the verse from Isaiah, "Ye are my witnesses, and my servant whom I have chosen." Since Christ left the world, his servants are his witnesses, and witnesses of God, bearing witness to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. "Pilate saith unto him, What is truth?" and did not wait for an answer. However, the question is answered for all, in the prayer of Jesus, "Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth." John 17:17. Therefore, as the word of God is truth, and we are his witnesses, we must, in precept and practice, testify to the word of God, the whole word of God, and nothing but the word of God. Every Christian, therefore, must, in the very nature of the case, be a Protestant.
We read again: "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God." Matt. 4:4. Mark, he does not say, "by some of the words," nor "by the words," but, "by every word." This takes all of the word of God. The word of God was all written for our learning, "that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Again, "Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish aught from it." "What thing soever I command you, observe to do it; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it." Deut. 4:2; 12:32. "Every word of God is pure. . . . Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee and thou be found a liar." Prov. 30:5, 6. We see, therefore, again, that the Lord demands of us that we do all that he has commanded, neither less nor more. We are not to add to his word, nor diminish aught from it. Now when any man, or any set of men, practice, or teach others to practice, less than the Lord has commanded, i. e., to refuse, and teach others to refuse to do what the Lord has commanded, they virtually "take away" from the word of God. And when such do, and teach others to do, as duty toward God, anything that the Lord has not commanded, they virtually "add to" the word of God. How much more, then, when they strive for the enactment of penal laws, by which to compel people to do that for which they themselves declare there is no command of God. Such are not Protestants, such are not reformers, such are not the servants of God.
In view of these principles, is it not proper for every one to inquire, Am I a Protestant? Am I a true witness of God and of Christ?
Further inquiry next week, if the Lord will.
ALONZO T. JONES.
The Lord's House and Our Own Houses.
By John Norton Loughborough
THE apostle Paul, when addressing the Philippians, made a statement fairly illustrating the tendency of the natural heart. Speaking of Timotheus, he said, "I have no man like minded, who will naturally care for your state. For all seek their own, not the things which are Jesus Christ's." Phil. 2: 20, 21. The lingering desire of the carnal heart leads a person to regard that which is pleasing to himself, while the indwelling of the Holy Spirit establishes in him another nature. While under the influence of God's Spirit—partaking of the divine nature—there is a caring for the cause of God more than to please self. So long had Timotheus shared the spirit of the Master, it had become natural to him to look out for the interests of the cause of God, even though it might diminish earthly pleasures, and retard the accumulation of this world's goods.
This earthly tendency of the carnal heart, is graphically illustrated and reproved in the Lord's instruction to the Israelites in the days of Zerubbabel. The Lord's house languished for the lack of their care and attention. He sent to them the prophet Haggai with these words: "Is it time for you, O ye, to dwell in your ceiled houses, and this house lie waste." Hag. 1:4. He represented them as saying, "The time is not come, the time that the Lord's house should be built." Verse 2. It appears from the above language that then, even as now, when the servants of God were urging the people on to forward movements to advance the cause of God, those whose thoughts and affections were mostly on their own houses, feared that the leaders were moving too fast, and calling for too great an investment in the work. Indeed they thought they had a most plausible excuse for neglecting to contribute for the building up of the Lord's house. Notice what the Lord said of their situation, by his prophet: "Now therefore thus saith the Lord of hosts; Consider your ways. Ye have sown much, and bring in little; ye eat, but ye have not enough, ye drink, but ye are not filled with drink; ye clothe you, but there is none warm; and he that earneth wages earneth wages to put it into a bag with holes." Hag. 1:5, 6. Again he said to them: "When one came to an heap of twenty measures, there were but ten; when one came to the pressfat for to draw out fifty vessels out of the press, there were but twenty." Hag. 2:16. Their financial situation, as above set forth, was certainly not a very flourishing one.
I doubt not if many who profess the truth at the present time had been there, they would have said, Surely people meeting with such reverses cannot do anything to help the cause. In these hard times, when some have received from their labors only one-half, or two-fifths of what they had anticipated, they are much inclined to say, if they do not really say it, I am certainly excused from bearing financial burdens in the cause, for I have no more than I wish to use for my family. Let us see what the Lord said to that people under their peculiar circumstances: "Thus saith the Lord of hosts; Consider your ways. Go up to the mountain, and bring wood, and build the house; and I will take pleasure in it, and I will be glorified, saith the Lord." Hag. 1:7, 8. Instead of the Lord accepting their excuses for neglecting his house, even under such apparently forbidding circumstances, he gave them an explanation of their losses very adverse to their excuses. He, in fact, showed them that the very reason they were in such financial embarrassment was because of their selfishly withholding from his cause: "Ye looked for much, and lo, it came to little; and when ye brought it home, I did blow upon it. Why? saith the Lord of hosts. Because of mine house that is waste, and ye run every man unto his own house. Therefore the heaven over you is stayed from dew, and the earth is stayed from her fruit." Hag. 1:9, 10. Again, "I smote you with blasting and with mildew and with hail in all the labors of your hands; yet ye turned not to me, saith the Lord." Hag. 2:17.
Under this reproof they decided to take hold of the work of building the Lord's house. He at once made them very encouraging promises, in these words: "Consider now from this day and upward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, even from the day that the foundation of the Lord's temple was laid, consider it. Is the seed yet in the barn? yea, as yet the vine, and the fig tree, . . . hath not brought forth; from this day will I bless you." Hag. 2:18, 19. The above shows that when we are in apparently adverse circumstances, thinking that we can do little or nothing to advance the finances of the cause, it may be that the Lord has permitted adversity to overtake us because of our lack in sacrificing as we should to build up his cause.
The prophet Malachi, in his description of the people living in the time when the coming of the Lord to judge the world is near charges them with "robbing" God "in tithes and offerings." On the other hand he speaks of great blessings, both spiritual and temporal, that shall be poured upon those who "bring all the tithes into the storehouse." We are living in that time when the Lord is soon to come; when his Holy Spirit is soon to be poured out. If we would share in that refreshing, and be partakers of that blessing which "there shall not be room enough to receive," we must comply with the conditions, and cease to "rob God" in tithes and offerings.
In former articles I called attention to our institutions, such as our publishing houses, and schools. I trust our people on this coast will be faithful in paying their tithes and offerings to the Conference funds, and, as rapidly as possible, redeem all their pledges to the cause, in all its branches. In addition to what I mentioned in former articles, there is one enterprise I will speak of in this article; it is the city missions in the California Conference. As the work is being carried on in these missions, with the distributors for papers, tracts, etc., it requires a constant inflow of means. Considerable has been pledged for this purpose. Let these pledges be paid as fast as possible, that this part of the work may develop equally with other branches of the cause.
I trust with each of us there will be a prayerful and careful study of the financial wants of the cause. What is our duty? What pledges have we made? What can we do in these hard times to redeem our vows and pledges? In all our financial planning let us obey our Saviour's injunction to "seek first the kingdom of God," that we may not be numbered with those who run to their own houses, while they leave the Lord's house to lie waste, nor of those who shall only regard their own personal wants and interests, while they leave the cause of God to languish.
J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.
The Missionary.
By Stephen Nelson Haskell
The Cause Is Onward.
It is now fourteen years since our State Tract Societies were organized. The great benefit to be derived from organization is concentration of effort. No people on earth will be more closely united than the people of God. To this end the Saviour prayed for his disciples when upon the earth: "That they may be one, even as we are one; I in them, and Thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that Thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as Thou hast loved me."
We have one common foe to meet, and that foe is Satan. The most successful way in which he can hinder the work of God is to alienate the hearts of God's people; but if there is among them a oneness of purpose and sympathy, a thousand avenues by which Satan would enter the heart are closed. God is leading his people, and in proportion as there is union there will be strength. From time to time enterprises have been entered upon by our tract societies, by which much good has been accomplished. Over ten thousand dollars was raised by them in a brief period of time while in their infancy, to remove indebtedness at the office, on our periodicals. Over ten thousand non-paying subscribers were also taken in a few months on the paper called the Voice of Truth. But nothing has shown the strength of our tract society system, and the union of sentiment among our people, more than the recent movement in connection with the "Sunshine at Home" and the SIGNS OF THE TIMES.
At the time of the General Conference, about the first of November, after many of our leading brethren had gone to their respective fields of labor, arrangements were made to combine the SIGNS OF THE TIMES with the "Sunshine at Home," by furnishing the SIGNS three months to those who should purchase "Sunshine." Our brethren went home and began to organize their forces, expecting to at least sell ten thousand "Sunshine," and thus increase the circulation of the SIGNS ten thousand for three months.
The canvass commenced in all parts of the country, from Maine to California. The result was that in less than thirty days from the time the agreement was entered into with the Publishing Association, ten thousand books were not only made and shipped to different parts of the country, but ten thousand subscribers had been taken, and if the books had not been delivered, they were in the hands of those who were to deliver them. This was but the beginning of the work.
We have received encouraging letters from all parts of the field respecting this work, especially in the cities where it has been difficult to canvass. In our leading cities it has seemed that the angels of God have prepared the way for a grand success. In Indianapolis, the great railroad center of Indiana, one brother canvassed on some of the most aristocratic streets, and within twenty days had placed one hundred "Sunshine at Home" in as many families, among the wealthiest in that city. This brother was in the employ of the Conference, and he not only earned sufficient to pay his own wages, but the expenses of the mission while he was canvassing.
This may be an exceptional case, but I know of many who average from six to eight per day. When we work, ourselves, God goes before us, and we can truly say that God is leading in the work. Souls have embraced the truth; many have become interested, and if the work continues as it has commenced, more than one hundred thousand families will have the light of present truth in their dwellings by this enterprise alone, before the close of 1885.