Earlier text: Is Slavery Sanctioned by the Bible?BRO. PHELPS has finally come out with his objections to organization in a communication for the Review. We have concluded to give the entire article, excepting that portion of it referring to Brn. Andrews and Loughborough. We still believe Bro. P. can be helped. We divide his communication as most convenient for a distinct reply to each point, commencing his remarks with Bro. P., and our reply with Ans. BRO. P.—"I read with a degree of satisfaction the remarks addressed to me in No. 7. There is a candor and friendship in them seldom manifested by any toward those who come out from among their brethren. And I take it for granted from the heading of your remarks, that I am still permitted to speak through the Review, and I gladly embrace an opportunity, though it is quite a tax for me at present to write much. But I wish to notice one or two points in your remarks to me for the purpose of giving an explanation." ANS.—We are truly gratified to learn that Bro. P. has not been grieved with our remarks, and now has the frankness to state his objections to organization. Again we say, Bro. P. can be helped. BRO. P.—"First, you say, 'Should not such a declaration of separation from the body be accompanied with your reasons? I will give the reason why I did not accompany my declaration with my reasons. I waited for some one more competent than myself to take up the subject. And a few have spoken a very little, and in some instances I thought were met with severe remarks, which caused me to dread raising my objections to the course taken by the body of Sabbath-keepers with which I was connected. But I had, notwithstanding, made up my mind to speak frankly, until I read in Good Samaritan for June, 1861, Cause of Discouragement. In that it was stated, 'We hope to receive letters of counsel and encouragement from friends in different parts of the field. Be assured that all such communications will be perused with pleasure, while those of a meddling, fault-finding character, or highly tinctured with wormwood and gall will be speedily reduced to ashes. We have something better to do than to reply to, and mourn over, such communications.' This is why I have taken the position which I now occupy without giving my reasons. And now, while I have taken my pen once more to write, I will say, that I hope that none of the friends will feel that I am meddling, or finding fault, or that my communication is highly tinctured with wormwood and gall, for I have nothing but the best of feelings toward all my brethren; but I wish to speak freely, if I speak at all." ANS.—It is frequently the case when brethren unfortunately take the wrong side of a question, hard to defend, that they feel injured at the frankness and plain speech of those who try to help them, and such will share largely the sympathy of those on that side of the question. Bro. P. had his sympathy in the wrong place, is the reason why our remarks hurt him. When we first suggested organization to hold church property, eighteen months since, we made the following request: "If any object to our suggestions, will they please write out a plan upon which we as a people can act." This request was reasonable, and fully opened the way for any to bring scripture to bear upon the subject, show the error of organization, and state a plan upon which we as a people could act. But the request was utterly neglected, and those objecting to organization did not bring one text of scripture bearing directly on the subject. Such a course deserved exposure and rebuke, and if Bro. P. had been standing on the right side of the question, his sympathy would have been with the one who had to feel the injustice of such organizationists. Bro. P. knows we have ever treated him kindly. When he gave his influence to that sheet which poured forth its slander upon us, we could pray, Father, forgive, for he knows not what he does, and when we met him afterwards at Crane's Grove, Ills., and heard his confession, with joy we mingled our tears with his. We still cherish a high regard for Bro. P. We believe him to be sincere, and pray God to keep him out of the wake of those who, in order to carry their points, when all other means fail, resort to a hypocritical whining about "harshness," and "a bad spirit." We cannot accept Bro. P.'s apology for withholding his reasons for seceding from his brethren, for he had no just cause for the fears he expresses. Certainly no one could taste wormwood and gall in his communications unless he put the tincture in. Having received many very highly tinctured communications from numerous sources for the past ten years, we think we have some skill in detecting, and therefore pronounce Bro. P.'s communication free from wormwood and gall. His difficulties seem to arise from misplacing his sympathy, and the want of a thorough examination of the organization question. BRO. P.—"You say, in speaking of the victory over the beast, &c.—'That great and glorious victory will be sung upon the sea of glass. Rev. xv, 2. It is doubtless the new song of the 144,000 of chap. xiv, 3. But that, dear brother, will be a united company. They will have one name, be sealed with the same seal, and sing the same song.' All this I most firmly believe, and think it is not difficult to determine what name they will have, when we consult Rev. xiv, 1, 'Having his Father's name in their foreheads.' And chap. iii, 12. 'I will write upon them the name of my God.' And with this agrees the apostle in all his epistles. They are addressed to the church of God. Acts xx, 28; 1 Cor. i, 2; x, 32; xi, 22; xv, 29; Gal. i, 13; 1 Tim. iii, 5. Now if we have a right to depart from the simplicity of the gospel in one instance, have we not in another? Most assuredly. Is not this the course that Babylon's churches have all taken? But enough of this at the present." ANS.—We conclude that Bro. P. thinks that church of God is the proper name for the church. But we do not see how this is proved by the fact that Rev. iii, 12; xiv, 1, describes the 144,000 after, or just before, the Second Advent, as having the name of God written upon them. Bro. P. seems to reason like this: The name of God is to be written upon the saints; therefore they should be called the church of God. But his mode of reasoning would prove too much, for in Rev. iii, 12, Christ also says, "I will write upon them my new name;" therefore the church should be called the church of Christ. Again, the same verse says, in stating what shall be written upon the saints, "and the name of the city of my God, which is New Jerusalem;" therefore the church should be called the New Jerusalem church, and the Swedenborgians have it right. These are all excellent names, and all in use before Sabbath-keepers began to talk of a name. Which shall we choose? Or would Bro. P. have us take all three because they are said to be written upon the overcomers? We should not depart from the simplicity of the gospel; but have a perfect right to depart from all positions which do not show wisdom, either divine or human. The New Testament speaks of the people of God as follows: The Church. Matt. xvi, 18; xviii, 17; Acts ii, 47; v, 11; vii, 38; viii, 1, 3; xi, 22, 26; xii, 1, 5; xiii, 1; xiv, 23, 27; xv, 3, 4, 22; xviii, 22; xx, 17; Rom. xvi, 1, 5, 23; 1 Cor. iv, 17; vi, 4; xi, 18; xii, 28; xiv, 4, 5, 12, 19, 23, 28, 35; xvi, 19; Eph. i, 22; iii, 10, 21; v, 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 32; Phil. iii, 6; iv, 15; Col. i, 18, 24; iv, 15, 16; 1 Tim. v, 16; Philemon i, 2; Heb. ii, 12; James v, 14; 1 Pet. v, 13; 3 John 6, 9, 10; Rev. ii, 1, 8, 12, 18; iii, 1, 7, 14. Churches. Acts ix, 31; xv, 41; xvi, 5; xix, 37; Rom. xvi, 4, 16; 1 Cor. vii, 17; xi, 16; xiv, 33, 34; xvi, 1, 19; 2 Cor. viii, 1, 19, 22; xi, 8, 28; xii, 13; Gal. i, 22; 1 Thess. ii, 14; 2 Thess. i, 4; Rev. i, 4, 11, 20; ii, 7, 11, 17, 29; iii, 6, 13, 22; xxii, 16. If either of the above names be selected by which the church should be called, doubtless "Christian" is the one. "And the disciples were called Christians first at Antioch." Acts xi, 26. On this passage we give the following from Clarke's Commentary, and Horne's Introduction: "And the disciples were called Christians first at Antioch. It is evident that they had the name Christians from CHRIST, their master; as the Platonists and Pythagoreans had their name from their masters, Plato and Pythagoras. Now, as these had their name from those great masters because they attended their teaching, and credited their doctrines, so the disciples were called Christians because they took Christ for their teacher, crediting his doctrines, and following the rule of life laid down by him. It has been a question, by whom was this name given to the disciples? Some think they assumed it; others, that the inhabitants of Antioch gave it to them; and others, that it was given by Saul and Barnabas. This latter opinion is favored by the Codex Bezae, which reads the 25th and 26th verses thus: And hearing that Saul was at Tarsus, he departed, seeking for him; and having found him, he besought him to come to Antioch; who, when they were come, assembled with the church a whole year, and instructed a great number; and there they first called the disciples at Antioch Christians." "The word χρηματίσαι in our common text, which we translate were called, signifies in the New Testament, to appoint, warn, or nominate, by divine direction. In this sense, the word is used, Matt. ii, 12; Luke ii, 26; and in the preceding chapter of this book, verse 22. If, therefore, the name was given by divine appointment, it is most likely that Saul and Barnabas were directed to give it; and that, therefore, the name Christian is from God, as well as that grace and holiness which are so essentially required and implied in the character."—A. Clarke. "Some are of opinion that it was first invented by the enemies of religion, and was fixed upon the disciples of Christ as a stigma of reproach. In confirmation of this opinion, they refer to Acts xxvi, 28, and 1 Pet. iv, 16. Others imagine, that the Christians themselves assumed this appellation. Others, with more propriety, conceive that it was given to them by divine appointment."—Horne's Introduction, Vol. I, p. 350. But, from the fact that the church is called by the above names, it is evident that the Holy Spirit did not design to point out in the New Testament the name by which the church should be called. This is left as a matter of propriety and convenience. Hence our preference and love for the name, Seventh-day Adventists. BRO. P.—"You said in the heading of your remarks to me you had a firm hope that I could be helped. Well, this is just what I want, and what I must have. If I am ever moved from my present position. And now I wish to ask frankly a few plain, simple, candid questions, for the consideration of Bro. White, or any other brother, not for the sake of discussion, but for the sake of light on the subject, and if Bro. White, or any other brother, will answer them frankly and candidly, and clear up the subject, I as an honest man, and a christian, will be frank in confessing my error." ANS.—We have taken hold in faith to help Bro. P., and shall certainly help him out, if he will be helped. With pleasure we answer his questions. BRO. P.—"And the first question is, Are the churches Babylon, as declared by the second angel's message?" ANS.—The strongest position we have ever taken on the subject is that the Babylon of the Revelation embraces all corrupted christianity, and we have never seen good reasons for changing our position. But it is evident that this subject was poorly understood by the Advent brethren at the time of the giving of the second angel's message. The question with us is, What will stand the test of criticism? and not, What did we once believe? We once made Rev. xviii, 4, a part of the second angel's message; but we now place this in the future to take place under the loud voice of the third message. We had the second message embrace too much, and were too fast in denouncing voting, the judicial oath, and holding of a civil office, as the mark of the beast, and the very climax of the sins of Babylon. As God's people are commanded to be separate from the world, they should engage in these things as little as possible and do their duty to God and their fellow men. But we do solemnly protest against distorting the subject of Babylon, for fear some one will become like the world and nominal churches. When we commenced to publish, ten years since, the cry was raised, Babylon! At the establishment of the Office, the cry was, Babylon! When the brethren erected an exceedingly plain place of worship at Battle Creek, only 22 by 30, which would141 not seat comfortably more than one half the present congregation, one of our ministers groaned out, "Ah! this looks like Babylon!" And now, when the simplest legal organization possible to hold church property, and the simplest form of church organization, are suggested, we hear the same cry, Babylon! These things have hindered the progress of the work, and have thrown insupportable burdens upon those who devoted their entire energies to the cause. We suggest that it would be a wiser course to thoroughly investigate the Babylon question, and see if it will not harmonize with sensible efforts to advance the cause, and save the church from ruin, than to hold to all the notions that have attached themselves to the subject of Babylon. BRO. P.—"If so, what does their confusion consist in? Surely, not in the disagreement of any one sect upon doctrine; for each sect is a unit, and have their name, discipline, doctrine, and usages, from the Catholic church down to the last sect organized." ANS.—The confusion of Babylon consists in the use of creeds, which have secured false doctrines to the churches, instead of the gifts of the Spirit, given to secure the purity and unity of the church. "And he gave some apostles; and some prophets; and some evangelists; and some pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ. Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." Eph. iv, 11–13. If the church had ever enjoyed these blessings, instead of being cursed with human creeds, we should now have but one church, and that, probably, bearing the simple and beautiful name of Christian. We are surprized that Bro. P. classes name, doctrine and usages with discipline and creeds, as constituting the confusion of Babylon, after giving nine texts for no other conceivable object than to prove that we should take the name of Church of God; and he well knows that a church without doctrine and usage would be no church at all. BRO. P.—"Does it not take the whole of the religious bodies together, with their multiplicity of doctrines and creeds to constitute Babylon? If so, can we as a people organize, have our name, doctrine, discipline, and church usages, and not have them precisely in harmony with the Bible, and yet not help make up the great confusion." ANS.—Bro. P. will certainly except that first "religious body" of Christians, the sect everywhere spoken against (Acts xxviii, 22), as not belonging to the great family of Babylon. And he will certainly except the last religious body, who reject human creeds and disciplines, receive the gifts of the Spirit, and are seeking primitive christianity, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. We are glad that he uses the brotherly phrase, "we as a people," which shows that he has not really cut his log loose. But why this indiscriminate mixing up—name—creed—discipline—doctrine—church usages? Imagine a church with neither name, doctrine, or church usages! Bro. P. must be laboring under confusion of thought as if he himself had been sipping of the intoxicating wine of Babylon. BRO. P.—"Again, if the churches are the Babylon of Rev. xiv, 8, they are surely the harlot daughters of Rev. xvii, 5, and if so, what does their harlotry consist in? Does it consist in being incorporated by the government, and receiving the protection of the law, as Adventists have always believed and taught? If so, can we as a people do the same, and not become a member of the same great family, or become one of the harlots? For I do not understand there is any difference between the charter of the Seventh-day Adventists and any other sect in the land. If so, do we not then help make up that power which is symbolized by one of the horns on the two-horned beast? Or have we been mistaken in the application of the symbol to the ecclesiastical power, or to the churches of this government?" ANS.—Here Bro. P. erects a man of straw upon which he is charging most chivalously. There is no Act in the statutes of any State, or county in reference to the Seventh-day Adventists in particular. The Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association (which has no connection whatever with church organization) organized under general law, and has no more of a charter from government than Bro. P. has to hold his land. In both cases the papers have to be made out and recorded according to existing law. Those churches who build places of worship, and wish to hold church property, only have to make out papers conforming to existing law, the same as Bro. P. would do to secure to himself and his family real estate. Hence, in condemning us, Bro. P. condemns himself. For, if it be wrong for the church to hold property legally, it is wrong for an individual to thus hold it. Further than this, we have only suggested a more perfect organization of our churches, and the division of the territory of our people into conferences, and the furnishing of our ministers with the papers showing their church standing, all of which has no more to do with the government than Bro. P.'s family prayers. The harlotry of the daughters of the mother Babylon of Rev. xvii, 5, is explained in James iv, 4. "Ye adulterers, and adulteresses, 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." Do we become friends of the world in conforming to law to hold church property? then Bro. P. becomes a friend of the world, and the enemy of God, in securing real estate legally. Bro. Phelps, dear brother, when you see a people adopting a human creed sustaining popular fables, and thus putting an end to investigation and reform, rejecting the gifts of the Spirit, perverting much of the faith of Jesus, seeking the friendship of the world, and conforming to its spirit and fashions, you may safely include that people in the great Babylonian family. But the Seventh-day Adventists have no human creed or discipline, therefore give room for God to teach through the gifts of the Spirit. They ardently desire to cast aside the traditions and fables of men, and keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus Christ. Their weekly practice in keeping the Sabbath is a standing rebuke on the churches and the world, and on almost every point of Bible truth they stand in direct opposition to the popular doctrines of the churches. And, besides this, there has been an unceasing testimony among us, warning us to stand out separate from the world. The only mark of Babylon among us is the element of confusion that would trample down that organization and order necessary to push forward the great work, and worship God without distraction. Beware, then, dear brother, how you brand this people as Babylon, who have done no more in uniting with the world, and in seeking the protection of government than you have done in securing property, lest you incur the frown of God, and the penalty of offending Christ's little ones. EXTRACT FROM "ELIJAH THE TISHBITE."
By R. F. Cottrell
"Elijah had prayed—in zeal for the honor of God he had prayed that it might not rain; and, being assured of an answer to his prayer, had gone to Samaria, to meet Ahab. There, in his presence, he declared with holy boldness—and no doubt the whole country was soon filled with the report of it—'There shall not be dew nor rain these years, but according to my word.' "The word was spoken in God's name, and the judgment denounced immediately followed: first, in appalling harbingers; then, in complete desolation. The sun glared upon the earth with its beams, a memento of the eyes of the Lord, the righteous judge, which are described as a 'flame of fire;' those rays which heretofore had diffused a smile over the whole face of nature were now changed into arrows of destruction and death; while the sultry winds dried up with their burning gusts every rivulet from its bed, and every fountain from its source; the plants and trees dropped their leaves and withered away; the lowing herds and bleating flocks explored every spot upon the parched fields; the wild beasts moaned in the forests; the dearth rose to its height, and it was not long before the famine became universal, and turned every habitation into a place of mourning and wo. "And where is Elijah? Where should he be? He is sharing in the common calamity. No angel has come to convey him away—no chariot of fire has taken him up. There he stands, with the criminals on the place of execution, apparently himself a sacrifice to the wrath he had drawn down, and exposed, with the ungodly, to famine and death. There he stands, panting and groaning like the rest, exposed to the same dangers, and, over and above, execrated by a whole nation, and devoted to ruin by the infuriated populace. He seemed likely to suffer the fate of Sampson, who pulled down upon himself the pillars of Dagon's temple-roof, and was buried in the common ruin of his enemies. Surely it was no small matter, in such circumstances, to keep faith alive. What a commotion must have arisen in his soul at beholding the universal misery around him and his own personal danger! How easily may we suppose natural pity at one time, and natural fear and despondency at another, suggesting to him, 'Why didst thou pray for this?' It is not difficult to realize the perplexity in which the prophet must have felt himself. His joyful elevation of high spirit must well nigh have subsided, and no support was left him but simple faith in the 'Amen' of his God; the consciousness that all had been done in God's name, and that now the Lord would provide." Elijah is considered a type of those that are alive and remain to the coming of the Lord, from the fact that they are to be taken up to heaven without death as he was. But there is much in his experience before his translation, which strikingly corresponds with that of the last generation of the true church, as marked out in the word of God. 1. He was a commandment-keeper in the midst of commandment-breakers—the mass of the people who were the worshippers of Baal. The mass of professed christians are now breaking one of God's commandments in following after the Baal of the book of Revelation—the papal beast. 2. Elijah had a message for the people of his time, very similar to the third angel's message, which is addressed to the last generation of earth. Compare them. 'How long halt ye between two opinions? If the Lord be God follow him, but if Baal, then follow him.' The people were reined right up to a choice between the service of God and that of Baal. The same is true of the last message. 'If any man worship the beast and his image, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God,' &c. 'Here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.' Men must choose between the two. 3. Those that heeded Elijah turned back from Baal to the commandments of God. So will those that heed the third message. Elijah restored the commandments to the true Israel; so will this message. 'Elias must first come and restore all things.' 4. Elijah was accused of troubling Israel; so are those accused that preach this last message. But the answer of Elijah to Ahab applies with equal force today: 'I have not troubled Israel; but thou and thy father's house, in that ye have forsaken the commandments of the Lord, and thou hast followed Baalim.' But in reading the above in a book entitled, 'Elijah the Tishbite,' I was struck with the analogy between Elijah in the time of drouth and famine which had come according to his word, and the saints remaining on earth in the time of trouble, and while the seven last plagues are being poured out. We are now predicting, from the Bible, a time of trouble such as never was. We are warning men of the coming wrath unmingled—the last plagues. Soon we shall find ourselves involved, in a measure, in these troubles, though no plague shall come nigh our dwelling. The rage of the people will be turned against us, as the cause of their troubles. They will try to destroy us, but God will interpose for us. He will feed us if necessary in the time of famine by the agency of ravens, or by causing the handful of meal in the barrel not to fail, and will deliver us from the rage of the people that have rejected the final warning. The chariots of God will appear for us, and we shall be taken up to heaven as Elijah finally was. But I only desired to call attention to this extract, and let each reader trace the analogy. Never defend an error because you once thought it to be truth. NECESSITY OF CHURCH ORDER.
By Rufus Baker
THE necessity of order in the church must be apparent to all who have given the subject an impartial investigation, from the fact that we have entered the perils of the last days, and are living in a time when Satan is trying with all his power to overthrow the message of the third angel, by bringing confusion and distraction among the people of God. It truly seems as though the children of light ought to manifest as much wisdom in conducting their affairs as the children of this world. To illustrate: Suppose the government of the United States should call out their subjects and send them south to fight without qualified leaders, or even enrolling their names or having any principle of order by which they could concentrate their forces. Should we not think there was a great lack of wisdom in such proceedings? Surely we would; and it would be no marvel if half their number never reached their place of destination; and those who did reach it would be at the mercy of their enemy, liable to be cut to pieces or taken captive by them at their will. But this is not the case. On the contrary, we find them calling for volunteers, who, after being suitably inspected and having their names properly enrolled, have to go through with a thorough course of discipline before they are considered capable to be brought into action. So likewise should it be with those who are brought out under the proclamation of the third angel's message. They should be such as are willing to obey God by keeping his commandments and the faith of Jesus, and then be brought into gospel order and disciplined in the school of Christ, and thereby be brought into one solid phalanx to attack their common enemy, who is going to make war with the remnant of the seed of the woman. Rev. xii, 17. I cannot bring myself to believe that God is calling out a people to go to distraction; and without order we are all liable to be imposed upon by impostors or unqualified teachers. It has been shown through the gift of prophecy that this door through which the enemy comes in to perplex and trouble the flock can be shut by fleeing to God's word and becoming established upon gospel order. Order was observed in the days of the apostles; for Paul said to Titus, "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order things that are wanting," &c. Titus i, 5. It appears from this testimony that what was wanting was order. This order consisted partly in ordaining elders in every city or church. Acts xiv, 23. The apostle, after giving the qualification of the elders, proceeds in verse 10 to give some reasons why it was necessary that the church should be thus organized. For, says he, there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, especially they of the circumcision, whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole houses, teaching things which they ought not, &c. Are we any more free from unruly and vain talkers and deceivers now than the apostles were in their day? I leave the reader to judge. Again: Acts xx, 29. Here the great apostle to the Gentiles, after giving the elders their charge to take the oversight of the flock, and feed the church of God, over which the Holy Spirit had made them overseers, subjoins his reason: For, says he, I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock; also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. Has Satan grown so stupid for the last eighteen hundred years that we have nothing to fear from this source? I think not. But on the contrary, he has come down with great wrath, knowing that his time is short, and he is to work with all power, signs and lying wonders here in these last days. Therefore we see the necessity of being prepared to shun his deceptions. For, as says the apostle, we are not ignorant of his devices. Past experience also justifies us in this position; for it is a fact that those churches prosper best which have organized under the order of the New Testament. The fanatical spirit which arose in Wisconsin last winter, originated, and did its greatest work, among those who were opposed to order. If we may be permitted to learn from experience, it truly seems as though we should try to close this door of the enemy. Wisdom is justified of her children. I sincerely hope that the time may soon come when the subject of organization will be more fully entered into, and carried out through all the various branches of the church of Christ. A stormy future is before us. Satan is mustering his forces for the great battle. Therefore we do well to prepare for the conflict, by pressing together and striving to fortify ourselves for the attack. I confidently believe that the Lord is stirring up his faithful children to the subject of more thorough organization. May God grant to speed on the work and hasten the time when we all shall see eye to eye on this subject, is my prayer. RUFUS BAKER. Mackford, Green Lake Co., Wis. COFFEE—ITS EFFECTS.
By M. B. Smith
THERE are two reasons why the writer believes that this article should not be used as a beverage: 1. Because it is poisonous to the human system. 2. Because it is using the Lord's money for that which at most only gratifies the taste without nourishing the body. We read in 1 Thess. v, 23, that Paul prayed that their bodies might be preserved blameless. Now in order to preserve our bodies blameless it is necessary that we use all those means within our reach which will enable us to become acquainted with those organic laws by which we are governed, and then in our dress, food, drink, &c., pay strict obedience to them. Now if the use of coffee and tea is contrary to those laws, we are under most solemn obligations to quit their use. Again, we read in 1 Cor. x, 31, that whether we eat or drink we are to do all to the glory of God. Now if the use of coffee as an article of daily consumption is contrary to the organic laws (and the organic laws are the laws of God), then we cannot use it "to the glory of God." Some may call this a very small and unprofitable subject to write upon, but perhaps if they could fully realize the amount of suffering in the shape of neuralgia, dyspepsy, nervous debility, &c., produced by these narcotics, they would not think so. Many are the arguments and excuses brought forward to sustain the use of these articles; and while we desire to exercise christian charity and forbearance, we are compelled for the sake of truth to join issue with those who try to justify themselves in their use. We hope that none will try to justify themselves because many good and wise men have used them (although they have only been used in Europe about two hundred years); for if they are anti-vital they cannot become nourishing because many have used them, any more than Sunday can become God's sanctified rest-day because many have observed it as such. A very common excuse is that those who use them do not experience any ill effects from their use. Let me say to such that feelings are not a safe guide in a physical, any more than in a religious, point of view. There is a false as well as a true experience. We need something besides feelings in religious matters; and in physical matters, we need facts as well as feelings. Conscience is not a safe guide of itself in religious things, neither is experience in physical things. For instance, Alexis St. Martin had his left side so wounded as to leave an external opening through which could be seen the condition, and, to some extent, the operations, of the stomach. In these circumstances Dr. Beaumont instituted a series of experiments on the nature and effects of the gastric juice, by which he made many curious discoveries. One of these was that the lining membrane of the stomach might be so inflamed and filled with eruptions and ulcerations as not only to secrete pus, but to bleed without the subject being conscious of the least suffering, and without his health being in any way affected "in any sensible degree." This was often caused by a moderate use of liquor, eating voraciously, or to excess, &c. Now suppose St. Martin, relying on his feelings alone, were to insist that drinking liquor, beer, cider, tea, coffee, &c., did not hurt him, while the facts in the case proved the contrary, ought we to believe him? He certainly would speak from experience, but yet it would be a false experience. We hope all who profess to deny themselves and follow Christ, all who wish to get rid of every foolish or hurtful habit and do all to the glory of God, will try to be willing to be convinced of the truth, let it be what it may, and be governed by reason rather than appetite. Coffee is a medicine, a narcotic. To prove this we will cite some of the best medical men of Europe and America. Hooper, in his medical dictionary, says, "It possesses nervine and astringent qualities. It is said to be a good antidote against an over dose of opium, and to relieve obstinate spasmodic asthmas." Dr. Paris says, "It is suspected of producing palsies, and not without foundation." Do we need any stronger evidence of its narcotic tendency? Dr. Willich represents coffee as possessing anti-spasmodic virtues, and speaks of its powerful effect on the nervous system. Prof. Hitchcock, in his "Dyspepsy Forestalled," speaks of coffee as a narcotic. He says, "The bewitching influence lies in its narcotic qualities—the same principle that gives opium and tobacco their attractions. The exciting principle is the same as ardent spirits." Dr. Trotter, in speaking of the cause of nervous maladies, say that "the only means of cure lie in a total abstinence from every species of fermented liquor, and from everything that bears any analogy to them, such as tea, coffee, opium, and all other narcotics." Dr. Dunglison admits its narcotic tendency. The same admission is made in the Journal of Health, the Catechism of Health; and in Bell's Catechism of Health it is admitted that coffee in all circumstances has a "pernicious effect on the stomach, bowels, and nervous system generally." All this is good authority, and cannot be set aside unless we can discard all physiological facts, and consent to be led by feeling altogether. Dr. Combe, in his work on Diet and Regimen, says, "It acts as a strong stimulant, and certainly increases our comfort for the time. Like all other stimulants, however, its use is attended with the disadvantage of exhausting the sensibility of the part on which it acts, and induces weakness." Dr. S. A. Shurtleff, of Boston, says: "Of all common beverages drunk in society, coffee is decidedly the worst." Londe, a French writer on health, classes coffee among the drinks which stimulate, but do not nourish. "Coffee," he adds, "should be used only in those circumstances in which it is proper to use fermented or spirituous liquors." Dr. Millengen says, "It is liable to produce feverish heat, anxiety, palpitations, trembling, weakness of sight, and pre-disposition to apoplexy." Dr. Wm. A. Alcott, the well-known writer on health, bears this testimony: "They (tea and coffee) are among the numerous tributaries to the mighty stream of premature death; and he who effects a reform in his habits with regard to tea and coffee, though he were for a time to retain beer, cider, wine, or even alcohol, opium or tobacco, has not only removed from his family two articles that never ought to have been received into it, but has begun a good work in the right way, by commencing at the foundation. Let the sources of intemperance and disease, the causes of an undue fondness for excitement, and an unnatural thirst, be but dried up, and the larger streams which they have so long fed will soon cease to flow, while the renovated, and happier, world will rejoice in their extermination." He elsewhere says, "Coffee, like tea, is a slow poison to all under all circumstances." We might quote from the writings of Hahnemann, father of the homeopathic system, Dr. Burdell, of New York, Mr. Cole, and others, to prove that coffee is a medicine—a narcotic. Besides all the suffering it produces, think of the vast amount of money we spend as a nation for this luxury. Dr. Alcott makes the estimate at $12,000,000 yearly. Suppose there are 4000 families of Sabbath-keepers in the United States, and they each spend $12 a year for these articles, it would amount to $48,000 yearly; and notwithstanding this large sum might be spent for these unnecessary articles, and will be if we use them, the cause of God is suffering for want of pecuniary aid. The work is hin143dered and crippled for the want of means to carry it on. In a world like this, all that we have above what we need to supply us with the necessary things of life, can be spent in a good manner in advancing the cause of God, helping the needy, or in some way that will be a blessing to our fellow beings. Remember that we are under solemn obligations to do all in our power in this direction to advance the cause of truth and righteousness; not merely to do as much as some one else, but to do all in our power. The earth is the Lord's and the fullness thereof. We are stewards, and will have to render an account for the manner in which we use the Lord's property. O, let us cast away our idols, our unnecessary articles of dress and diet, and make to ourselves friends of the unrighteous mammon, that they may receive us into everlasting habitations. Luke xvi, 9.