Earlier text: Constantine.—VIThe Daily Use of the Bible.
MANY weary and heavy laden with care live from day to day forgetful of the help and comfort so much needed by all. If we all knew the value of the Bible, and the importance of reading it daily, it would not be left on the table unopened for a week. Let busy, anxious women defer some other morning duty and take time to look at the way-bill given us to guide our erring feet through life. To attend to this matter at night, after the combat is over, is too late. We need strength and courage for the hour of duty and trial. It is by daily study of God's word that we receive benefit therefrom and learn the hidden meanings of that word as applicable to ourselves. Often we are surprised and comforted in reading some familiar passage, the meaning of which we never saw before. Thus God often speaks to us through his word, and comforts our troubled hearts. Thy word can give a sweet relief
For every pain I feel. Bishop Thorold says: "When we open our Bibles, quite as much as when we fall on our knees, we place ourselves in God's immediate presence, and we should read his word both in the sense of listening to his voice, and with the object of discovering his will."—North Carolina Presbyterian. Old Testament a Text-Book.
By John Heyl Vincent
THE Old Testament is a part of God's word to the world. It is a concrete putting of great principles involved in the divine administration. In making his revelation to the world God did not directly write a book, but wrought out a history, and caused this history with all that pertained to it to be recorded in a book. Here are the lives of great men; here are events, startling, impressive, suggestive, symbolic, prophetic, and weighted with spiritual significance. Here are laws, promises, sacred poems, and vivid pictures, the knowledge of which enriches the mind and prepares the heart for the appreciation of the spiritual truths which fill the New Testament. The Old Testament is fulfilled in the New. By the New its meanings are multiplied and its spirit intensified. Much of the vocabulary of the New Testament would be inexplicable but for the history and institutions of the Old. As a fact children are delighted with it. My observation, and the testimony which I receive from others lead me to believe that the Old Testament is quite as popular with childhood as the New. The only way to neutralize the modern infidelity which sneers at Old Testament history and exaggerates its "cruelties and barbarisms" is to make our young people thoroughly familiar with it, that they may know for themselves how false the charges are which are made against it. I do not distinguish between the Old Testament and the New. Paul said concerning the former that it was "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." Believing that nothing is higher, more practical, or better for man than that he should be a man of God, and that he be thoroughly furnished unto all good works, I believe in the Old Testament as a text-book for use in the pulpit, the Sunday-school, the family, and the closet of devotion, because it is "profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness," and because it accomplishes the ends which I deem highest and best in human character and life.—J. H. Vincent, in Old Testament Student. Religious Enthusiasm and Fanaticism
By H. Clay Trumbull
"Paul, thou art beside thyself." There is nothing in which men are more likely to be charged with insanity or fanaticism, when they are simply in earnest, than in religion. If a man gives himself up to money-making, or to the pushing of business plans, and drives at it year in and year out, he is "a very enterprising fellow." If he is all carried away with political partisanship, he is "a wide-awake citizen." If he lives for pleasure and pursues it recklessly day and night, he may be called "a little fast." But if he is in dead earnest in his purpose to honor Christ and to save souls; if he feels so deeply, in his desire to turn his fellow-men from their ruin, that he talks to them as though he believed what he said—then he is "a religious enthusiast," or "a fanatic;" and there are a great many people who "don't see why a Christian should make a fool of himself." It is better, however, to be thought crazy because of one's religious enthusiasm, than to be so little concerned about Christ and salvation as to never seem excited on the subject.—H. Clay Trumbull. "Thy word is a lamp unto my feet." The Church. No. 7.
By Editor
NO QUESTION has ever arisen among us in regard to church order, which has presented greater difficulties than that of the jurisdiction of the officers. We will examine the points which have been raised in actual cases. 1. Does the ordination of an elder of a church qualify him to act as elder of any other church? Answer: The ordination of any officer cannot go beyond the extent of the office to which he was elected. When the church of A elects an elder, it does not elect him to serve as elder of the church of B. It is entirely out of the power of any church to elect an officer to serve in any other church. And, of course, no man can be properly ordained to fill an office to which he was not elected. It has been held by some that if an elder of one church transfers his membership to another church, he may be called by that other church to act as elder by virtue of his previous ordination. But we cannot concur in that opinion. It cannot justly be said that the action of the second church is a ratification of the act of the first church, for the action of the first church had no reference whatever to the exercise of official authority in any other church. If it should be announced by the church of A that it elected and ordained an elder to act, not only in that church, but also in the church of B, the latter would resent the action, not only as uncourteous, but as illegal; it would be a usurpation. And all must agree with the statement herein made, that ordination qualifies a person to act in the office to which he was elected, and in no other. Any other rule than this opens the way for abuses and difficulties between churches. It has been questioned whether it is proper to ordain a person the second time to the same office. But, as we have shown, it is not the same office. An officer in one jurisdiction does not and cannot hold the same office that is held by another officer in another jurisdiction. Each must be qualified in his own jurisdiction. And it will be remembered that when we considered the subject of ordination, attention was called to the fact that Barnabas and Paul, two well-accredited ministers, were ordained to a special work, not outside of their ministry, but in the ministry in which they were already engaged. There can be no objection to setting apart a person a second time, when called to fill an office which was not contemplated in his first election and ordination. But other questions are involved. If a church has no deacon, is it lawful for the elder to attend to the duties pertaining to the office of a deacon? It is. The higher officer may discharge the duties of the lower, especially when the lower office is vacant, though the lower cannot legally discharge the duties of the higher. This is well understood, and is so held in the election. And, the position of the elder makes it obligatory upon him to act under such circumstances. He is the "overseer" of the church; he is to "care for the church;" his office is to "feed the flock," to strengthen and build it up by all the means within his reach, or in his power. And, in the absence of a deacon, were he to neglect those things to which a deacon should properly attend, the church would no doubt complain that their overseer was unfaithful; that he did not properly care for his charge. Nothing further is needed to show that our usage in this respect is correct. Again: Does not the rule which confines the action of an elder within his own church, admit of an exception? We think it does; but in the exceptional case the proper guards or restrictions must be recognized and applied, or the rule will be utterly broken down and confusion be the result. If the church of A has no elder, and wishes the service of an elder for a specified duty on a special occasion, it may secure the services of the elder of the church of B, by (1) extending the request to the church of B for the help of its elder on such occasion, and (2) procuring the consent of the Conference, or its Executive Committee, to receive the service of such neighboring elder. Now it is well known, and everywhere received as just, that the Conference Committee has a right at its own discretion to send a minister to aid a church in any emergency. But if all the ministers are otherwise engaged, and it would prove detrimental to the interests of the cause to call any of them from their labor, then we hold that the course here pointed out would be allowable. But we do not consider that the call would be allowable without the consent of the Conference Committee, for to that committee is given the general oversight of the cause in the whole field, and in all the churches. Nor do we think that it would be proper for the Conference Committee, for want of a minister, to send a local elder of one church to assist, and act for another church, without the consent and acquiescence of that other church; for such action would be liable to lead to unpleasant complications in or between the churches. But where the committee and the churches are fully agreed in regard to the action, no unpleasant relations can result. The object of all action and of all organization is the prosperity of the cause,—the welfare of the churches,—and no rule should be so arbitrary as to work ill to the cause. And, on the other hand, no plea of the necessity of the cause should be admitted which opens the door to abuses, and introduces confusion into the churches. The duties of the elder include the administration or celebration of the ordinances. It is our usage to have a minister attend each quarterly meeting of each church, as far as convenient. But that is not always possible. And when it is not possible, those churches which have no elder, if there are any such, should have the precedence in regard to help from the Conference. Because, without such help they would be deprived of having the ordinances celebrated. In case the church has no elder, and no minister can be had at the indicated time for holding quarterly meeting, it is custom, and properly too, to hold such meeting at some other time, when the necessary help can be obtained. Another question of great importance was brought to the attention of our last General Conference, and judgment was passed upon it. "Shall local elders and licentiates among us be permitted to solemnize marriage?" This question was duly considered, and decided in the negative. And we think this decision is just and eminently discreet. The laws of some of the States are quite too loose on the subject of marriage; and it would be too much to expect that every local officer, or inexperienced licentiate, would have discretion to act with all that men and judgment which the importance of the subject demands. He is fortunate indeed who has often solemnized the rite of marriage, and can look back and see no cause for regret in any case. In our ministry we have refused several applicants, and yet, with all our care, we have abiding regrets concerning a few cases. We are not sorry that our General Conference hedges around this matter with great care; our fear is that some of our ministers will be only too glad of the privilege of officiating at a marriage, and not investigate the circumstances as they should. The laws of some States will not permit licentiates or local elders to marry, while others will. But in any State such action will be held as unauthorized, disorderly, among Seventh-day Adventists. There is little more to be said, than has been said, of the duties of the deacon. The declaration of "the twelve" (Acts 6:2-4) has been universally accepted as the key to the duties of the deacons. They are to attend to such secular or temporal matters of the church as would interfere with the proper discharge of the duties of those who should give their time "to prayer and to the ministry of the word." It was the multiplicity of such secular duties which gave rise to the call for such an officer. In like manner now, the number of deacons required in any church depends on the amount of labor required, or on the circumstances and size of the church. And in small churches, where there are diligent and efficient elders, it is frequently the case that no deacons are needed. A delegate from a certain State, at one of the sessions of our General Conference, presented the following question: "Has a deacon authority to baptize outside of his own church?" We have promised to notice questions raised in actual cases; yet nothing but a strong sense of duty would lead us to bring this one before the public, as we do not like to subject our people to the mortification of having it known that occurrences amongst us have given rise to the consideration of such a question. No person is qualified to hold the office who does not know that a deacon has no authority to baptize at all—either in his own church or anywhere else. From this circumstance we draw a lesson in favor of church organization. If such abuses of church order and official authority occur in spite of organization, what might we not expect if we had no organization? The injunction of the apostle is to "Let everything be done decently and in order." That this may be carried out we must have concert in action; that is, there must be agreement—there must be some plan on which we can unite, for if each acts independently of the judgment of all others there can be little else but confusion. We are aware that this idea of yielding their independence of spirit and of action is very displeasing to some, but to none who have imbibed the true spirit of the gospel and are instructed in Christian life and duty by the word of truth. "Yea, all of you be subject one to another, and be clothed with humility," is an order which must come very unwelcome to those who love their own way, and despise the idea of submission. "In honor preferring one another," is a duty which they know not how to learn. But this is only one item of the much that may be produced showing the necessity of church and conference organization. The question has been asked, Is it the duty of the deacon to pass the bread and the cup at the celebration of the Lord's supper? That does not come within the duties of his office. But if the officer who breaks the bread to the congregation wishes to commit this to some one, it seems most fitting to designate the deacon to perform the duty. If a minister officiates, he should request the local elder or elders to pass the elements. If the elder is officiating he may ask the deacon to do so. We say it seems fitting to call upon the deacon, if there are no elders, or if more assistance is needed, inasmuch as the qualifications of the deacons are of a high order, and they have been chosen by the congregation to an important position; and if any must be called to perform such an act, probably the whole church would be better satisfied to have their deacons selected. Troubled about the Calendar.
By Editor
SOME time since there was noticed in our paper a letter from a correspondent in Ohio who was troubled to identify the Sabbath. He has favored us with another letter, in which he says:— "Cæsar, a heathen, made a new calendar under which civilization has progressed for nineteen centuries." And again: "You say you do not propose to change the calendar; but for all that it has been changed time and again. And when God permits it to be changed again, I believe we should take the hint, and conclude he does not want us to observe the Sabbath now." The writer appears to be in a needless dilemma. Needless, because a little study of the subject would show him that the cycle of the week has never been changed. In regard to the order of the days of the week there has never been any controversy, any question, nor any legislation. Discrepancies between the beginning of the year and the seasons have been corrected; in part under Cæsar, and in part under Pope Gregory, but these had nothing to do with the days of the week. Perhaps our correspondent knows—we are not sure that he knows—that the change made in the days of the month under Gregory was not generally concurred in when it was made. Also that some never concurred in it; Russia reckons by the Old Style at the present time. But all agreed with Rome in the order of the days of the week, and so Russia does at the present time. On this point, we repeat, there has never been any question. Every one can readily see that a change in the days of the week could never take place all over the world at once; it could not take place without creating discussion, and confusion also; for it would not be agreed to by all. Suppose that in the days of Cæsar he had tried to adopt a new reckoning of the week, would the Jews have agreed to it? Never. They would have clung to their own reckoning, and to the Sabbath of the decalogue. If Gregory had tried to make a change in the week, as he made in the month, those nations which did not adopt his calendar would have disagreed with him in the days of the week, as they actually did in the days of the month. But such was not the case. Russia has disagreed with Rome in the days of the month ever since the time of Gregory, but she has always agreed with Rome on the days of the week. Most people know all this to be true; but we are compelled to believe, by his own words, that our Ohio correspondent does not know it. And therefore not even "the hint" exists on which he seems to rest his case for the non-observance of the Sabbath. Did it exist, we are free to say that a hint based on the action of a heathen ruler would be too small a foundation for our faith in regard to Christian morals! We have "the law and the testimony;" the holy Scriptures, which an inspired apostle declared are able to make us wise unto salvation, and thoroughly furnish the man of God unto all good works. It will take a stronger hint than we have yet received to turn us away from the sacred word of God to human speculations. And we would call the attention of our correspondent to the fact that Paul's high eulogy on the holy Scriptures referred to the Old Testament, and not a word of it to the New. See 2 Tim. 3:14-17. If he revises his faith where he is so manifestly in error, he will have no trouble with his minor points. Light Literature the Bane of Purity and Peace.
By A. T. Jones
LAST week, in studying the Scripture injunction to be sober, we found that it is especially insisted upon in the last days, because that its opposite—"lightness"—will be most prevalent; and in the definition of the word we found that, "sober is opposed to flighty." Flighty is thus defined: "Indulging in flight, or wild and unrestrained sallies of imagination, humor, caprice, etc.; given to disordered fancies and extravagant conduct; volatile, giddy;" and this is exactly what is referred to in Jer. 23:32, where it is declared that "lightness" is a characteristic of the last days; and it is the events foreshown in Jer. 23:16-32, to which Paul has reference, when, in 1 Thess. 5:6, 8, he exhorts us to "be sober." Now let any sober-minded person take this definition of "flighty," and, bearing it in mind for a week, compare with it the actions of the people generally, as they come under his notice either by direct observation, or as reported in the daily papers, and we are sure that he will be ready to admit that certainly these are the times pointed out in these scriptures. And the longer he conducts the observation, the more thoroughly will he be convinced that this is so. And another thing of which he will be convinced by such observation is that the one source, more than all others, whence this instability, this flightiness, this lightness springs, is the "light" literature that is found everywhere, low and high, from the hovel to the palace, from the gamins to the pampered heirs of millions. Light literature it is called, and properly so, for light it is. In it is embodied every element that tends to lightness. There is not a single idea contained in the definition of flighty that is not demonstrated in this light literature. The mind, like the body, is, in this respect, an assimilation of what it feeds on; and the mind that dwells upon this kind of literature soon becomes as light and shallow as the stuff that is read. It is a poison to the mind as veritably as is whisky, or tobacco, or any other poison, to the body; and like other poisons it creates an appetite which nothing but itself can supply; and as there is absolutely nothing in it by which the mind is fed, developed, or strengthened, the more of it that is devoured, so much the more is demanded, and so much weaker and more morbid the mind becomes. And so the mind is rendered almost useless for any sober purpose; it is almost if not altogether impossible for such a mind to concentrate itself upon a subject that requires deep thought; to follow a line of sound reasoning; or to appreciate the principles that underlie the most important concerns of life. One of the most noticeable instances in proof of this is the fact that when the attention of such is called to the benefits to be derived from the study of the Bible, the complaint is made that they cannot remember the Scripture when they do read it; while at the same time they can remember the characters and their career, in the whole course of perhaps a half-dozen of the continued stories in the Ledger, Weekly, Saturday Night, Chimney Corner, Fireside Companion, and other such namby-pamby papers, pamphlets, etc. If the mind were as diligently and persistently bent to the study of the Bible, if it were brought into such sympathetic harmony with the Scripture as it is with these stories, there would not be the least difficulty in remembering it. Then all its glorious beauty would pervade the mind; its rich treasures would there be bestowed; its important truths would enlighten, and its sound principles confirm the mind, which would thus be fed, developed, strengthened, and ready for every good work. We do not say that the Bible alone must be read, to the utter exclusion of every other book; this the Bible itself would not allow; but we do say that the Bible must be read before any other production. It must lead the way; it must guide the mind; it must be the center whence every line of thought radiates; upon its principles must every course of conduct be founded. Without this there can be no well built, properly rounded, symmetrical life in this world; with it the universe becomes our own, to study and to enjoy. The Bible will show us what we are and how to become what we ought to be; it will guide us through all the mazes of human history; it will lead us to the enjoyment of the wealth of the wondrous works of God; it will enable us to think the thoughts of the Almighty, after him. Thus we may honor God, and be an honor to the human race. And thus the life that we now live will be simply the beginning of that to which there is to be no end; and the habits of mind, and the courses of thought, will be those which are never to cease, nor to be broken in upon. It is not so with the light literature of which we write. Of that the nature and the tendency are, in every respect, directly the opposite, so that in it all there is no good thing. But it is asked, Are not these stories pictures of real life? No. They are altogether fictitious; the very name, "novel," means "a fictitious tale or narrative;" but the fictitious part is not the worst, it is "intended to exhibit the operation of the passions, and particularly love."—Webster. There is expressed the dangerous, the destructive influence of this kind of literature. The passions are given full swing. All the baser elements of human nature,—envy, jealousy, hatred, strife, deception, ingenious trickery, murder,—are exhibited in their most active energy. Obscenity is forbidden by the law, but in this respect what this literature218 lacks in plain expression, is amply made up in suggestiveness. So that even were it granted that it is real life that is portrayed it would still be altogether objectionable, because it is the action of the worst elements of human nature that is pictured. In the definition above given, it is said that it is "particularly love" that is intended to be exhibited, and these are sometimes called "love stories," but, whatever may be intended, it is not love that is therein exhibited; it is simply an exhibition of extravagant, misguided passion. And this counterfeit is dressed in all the gorgeous and dazzling array that rhetoric can invent, and is paraded as love; the readers of these stories mistake it as such; and then, of course, to them, anything that lacks the distinguishing traits of the leading characters in the stories, cannot be love. So when, unfortunately, the time comes when they shall choose for themselves, the choice must be made in accordance with the most approved style of romance; it must be made in opposition to the most sacred wishes of parents and friends, so that the consummation of it must be by an elopement or a secret marriage, and then— Ah! then the fiction vanishes and the fact appears; then the romance ends and the reality begins; the glamour of years is swept away in a day; it is found that true, genuine love is something widely different from this dazzling array of platitudes; and that this one all-essential element of a happy wedded life is sadly lacking. Then there follows, as the inevitable consequence, disgrace or a life of misery, and in the very nature of the case there is absolutely no power that can prevent it. These dangers beset us on every hand. Parents of precious children, and even those professing to be Christians, will so far forget their duties toward God, toward their children, and toward themselves, as to spend their time in devouring this poison. Is it by filling the mind with such wild ideas, with such base thoughts, with such vain imaginations, that it is to be prepared to receive the things of the Spirit of God? Is it by such means that a people are to be prepared for the coming of the Lord? Of a truth, "Of the times and the seasons" of his coming we need not write so much, but of the duties, and the manner of life by which we must be prepared to meet him, we must write more. "Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober." "Abstain from all appearance of evil. And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." A Theological Puzzle.
By Editor
THE Sunday question is an endless puzzle to its advocates. Speaking of the ministerial meeting in San Francisco at which the subject of the Sabbath was discussed, and wherein the Sunday received some deadly wounds at the hands of its friends, a D. D. remarked to us that he wished the ministers would make a point or keep silent. But that is impossible. They cannot make a point, because there is no Scripture proof in favor of the Sunday; this they confess. Of course their reasons for keeping the Sunday are as various as the minds which devise them, and each contradicts the others. And they cannot keep silent, for it is confessedly one of the most prominent questions of the day, and "will not down." On one side the advocates of Jehovah's Sabbath, the Creator's rest-day, are pressing to the attention of the world the claims of the divinely-blessed institution, enforcing the claims by the plainest Bible testimony. On the other side is a multitude of adherents to "the venerable day of the sun," each with his own "unanswerable argument," peculiar to himself, and destructive to those of his associates. But they have one bond of union; a mutual determination to stand by, and to observe the Sunday, without regard to reasons or to consequences. And they are not only determined to keep the Sunday, but they are determined to compel everybody else to keep it, whether they believe in it or not. They declare that it is a Christian institution; some go so far as to say that it is "the very foundation of our holy religion." Now they do not pretend that they can compel unbelievers to become Christians; this is not their aim; they know that that is impossible. Their object is—not to actually make men Christians, but—to make them act as though they were Christians! And when the church is fully wedded to the world, and the world is compelled to act the hypocrite under laws dictated by the church, then will come the millennium; then the world will be convinced that "this is a Christian nation!" Then the ministers will have an easy time; their avocation will be only pleasant and restful. For what if men will not accept the Christian faith? they can compel them to Christian works! And, with the strong arm of civil power to back them up, this will be a means to "indicate to the world that this is a Christian nation," more easy and effective than the slow and tedious process of converting them by the preaching of the cross of Christ. Sunday-Law Difficulties.
By Editor
The Watchman (Baptist) says:— “The enforcement of Sunday laws, for which appeals are frequently made, is rendered in many cases difficult if not impracticable, by the fact that among those who believe the observance of the Lord's day to be obligatory and important, there is no agreement as to the standard of observance.” That is a fact; but wherefore the fact? and how shall it be remedied? Here is the Watchman's plan:— “The churches have need . . . to set up for themselves . . . a standard of proper observance, and live up to it.” But that is just what they have done, and are doing. They have “set up for themselves a standard,” and that is what causes all the disagreement. If there was any standard of Sunday observance, set up by the Lord, there would be no room for such disagreement; but as there is no such standard, all who will keep Sunday must do it according to a standard “set up for themselves,” and the Watchman would have them effect an agreement by continuing the disagreement. Is this a new application of homeopathy? In this case we hardly think that like will cure like. I HAVE lately met five opposition discourses on the millennium, restoration of the Jews, and the Sabbath. We have just been cheered by a visit from Elder Whitney. My brother, who has been laboring in France, came with him, and will remain here while I attend to duties elsewhere.
T. D. BOURDEAU.
Torre Pellice, March 4. Effort for Eternal Life
By T.
To INSURE success even in temporal affairs, requires well directed toil; and can we hope to gain Heaven and eternal life with less effort than he must put forth who would secure worldly riches? The Best Advertisement
By Theodore L. Cuyler
The best advertisement of a workshop is first-class work. The strongest attraction to Christianity is a well-made Christian character. —T. L. Cuyler. Gratitude Translated Into Deeds
By Methodist Recorder
GRATITUDE, it has been said, is most acceptable to God, when translated into deeds. The psalmist declares, "My goodness extendeth not to thee, but to the saints which are in the earth." We cannot, as an expression of gratitude, benefit the Lord by anything that we can do, but we may benefit his children, and Christ has taught us that kindness done to them for his sake, he will regard as done to him. Gratitude that bears no fruitage, that leads to no act of devotion, if an opportunity for such exists, must be cold and barren indeed, and we can hardly hope that it will be acceptable to God.—Methodist Recorder. Work Among the Vaudois.
By Editor
IN a late number of Les Signes des Temps, we find a report of Elder D. T. Bourdeau's work in Torre Pellice, Italy, which was taken from a secular paper of that place, l'Avvisatore Alpino, of which we here give a translation:— 'For several weeks we have had at Torre Pellice an Adventist minister, Mr. D. T. Bourdeau. The Adventists are thus named because grounded on the one hand by the declaration of Jesus, "Behold I come quickly," and on the other by the prophecy by which they say that we are in the last days,—that the Saviour's coming is near,—that we must prepare ourselves by keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.' Mr. Bourdeau goes still further. It is his personal opinion that there are now living among us those who in this life will see the Son of God come in the clouds of heaven. 'Among the signs of the end he shows the unbelief, indifference, formalism, and selfishness so marked in our day. He believes that in the last days many of the churches will have the appearance of piety but deny the power; that in the place of searching the Scriptures they will content themselves by glancing over them; that the worldly churches will declare as mysteries the most simple things in revelation, and that the disconnected texts which they will choose, will but serve them as pretexts for defending their customs, their dogmas and their theories, which they cherish more than the word of God. Imagine the impression this makes upon the Athenians of Torre Pellice, as they are called. 'This which he has advanced is in part only, but the doctrine will be given soon in print to the public, in order that they may, with Bible in hand, study, compare, instruct themselves, and open their eyes to truth. In this connection we may add that several people of Torre Pellice have testified to having learned more, and having received a better understanding of the Bible during these meetings of Mr. Bourdeau than during all the rest of their lives. Thus we see that, except a systematic opposition from a certain party, this pastor has met much sympathy from the people; and his work, based on the unshaken truths of the gospel, will certainly triumph over all obstacles, for the Adventists, by the merit of their cause, make rapid progress in all parts.' The Missionary.
By Stephen Nelson Haskell
The Reformation at Prague.
Huss, like other reformers, was destined to have his courage and faith tested. While the doctrines of the Reformation continued to gain many friends, and prominent members of the university spoke out boldly in their defense, the popular party decided against them. Late in the year 1408 preparations were made by the "faithful" for holding a council to devise some means of relief from the extraordinary evils and embarrassments which endangered the church. The German students, who constituted a large majority in the university, decided against the Reformation, while those from Bohemia, and the small countries adjoining, were in favor of it. The latter, who were the founders of the university, and in whose territory it was located, desired to control it, and to this end appealed to the Bohemian king for certain privileges afforded to the founders of other universities. These, which gave the Bohemians three votes to one of the other countries, were granted on January 18, 1409. This was a cause of joy to Huss and the friends of the Reformation, but it resulted disastrously to the temporal welfare of the university and of Prague itself. The following month four thousand of the students left en masse for their homes. Only five hundred remained. This move resulted in the founding of the university at Leipsic. Huss and Jerome were placed in an odious light by the world-loving multitude, and the students who left the university carried unfavorable reports concerning their views and the reformation to all parts of Europe. But Huss was treated with deserved honor at home. Rising from a sick bed, he was elected rector of the university. The archbishop of Prague, who was an enemy to the Reformation, secured a papal bull against its doctrines, which reached Prague in March, 1410. Huss brought forth the works of Wycliffe and desired that the errors contained in them should be pointed out by the Scriptures. But the strength of Romanism did not lie in that direction. The archbishop resorted to error's logic. More than two hundred of Wycliffe's books, in beautiful bindings, were burned. This was July 16, 1410. Huss was forbidden to preach in the chapel, but he entered it fearlessly and preached with more than usual energy and power. "Where is there any authority of Holy Writ, or where are there any rational grounds, forbidding preaching in so public a place, fitted up for that very purpose, in the great city of Prague? Nothing else can be at the bottom of this but the jealousy of antichrist," said he. The noble spirit of the reformer rose above the storm that was about to burst upon him. It was at these times, and under such circumstances, that he wrote the following words: "I avow it to be my purpose to defend the truth which God has enabled me to know, and especially the truth of the Holy Scripture, even to death, since I know that the truth stands, and is forever mighty, and abides eternally. And if the fear of death should terrify me, still I hope in my God and in the assistance of the Holy Spirit, that the Lord himself will give me firmness. And, if I have found favor in his sight, he will crown me with martyrdom. But what more glorious triumph is there than this? Inviting his faithful ones to this victory, our Lord says, 'Fear not them that kill the body.'"