IN last week's SIGNS we copied from the Review that portion of Elder Andrews' report from Prussia, which includes the discussion of the election question. This week we give the closing part of the report relative to the Sabbath. It is gratifying to know that Elder A. is ready to meet all forms of objections to the ancient Sabbath of the Lord. And that, while it is his nature to treat opponents with kindness and liberality of soul, he seems fired with the spirit of his mission to speak the truth of God with all confidence. Elder Andrews continues:—
As soon as the meeting closed, I returned at once to the place where we were to stop for the night, at some little distance from the hall. In a few minutes who should come in to converse, but the pastors of two of the principal national churches in that place. Indeed, one of these gentlemen is the superintendent over the national churches in this section, an office corresponding somewhat to that of bishop in the English national church. They had both been present in our meeting. This superintendent can speak English. He said he wished to know the object of our mission. I told him that I would answer his questions with the greatest pleasure; that I had come to Europe to preach to the people upon the prophecies which indicate the speedy return of the Son of man, and also to preach in behalf of the Sabbath of the Lord which the great apostasy has trodden under foot. He said in reply that there is in Germany and Switzerland an extensive association of ministers that are engaged in the study of the prophecies, and that they are generally agreed that the coming of Christ must be near. He said that he was a member of this association. I asked him if he thought I had taught the people error in what I had said in his hearing. He said, "No; I cannot deny anything you have said, but would it not have been better to preach the gospel?" I asked him if a description of the day of Judgment was not a part of the preaching of the gospel as we found it in the New Testament. He said, "Oh! yes."
Then I gave him quite a definite account of the Sabbath cause in America, and of the nature of our work. This was what he wanted to know. Then he said if we keep the Sabbath we ought to keep the Jewish feasts. I told him that we recognized the obligation of the moral law, but not that of the ceremonial, and I asked him if he did not do the same thing, and in particular if he did not believe and teach that men should keep the ten commandments. He said, "Yes." Then I added that this very position constrained us as honest men to hallow the seventh day, and that I was unable to see how he could honestly do otherwise. He replied, "Christ when he arose entered into his rest, and his rest must be our rest, and it is much superior to the seventh-day rest," etc. He spoke here at some length, and in an animated though good-natured manner.
As soon as he paused, I told him that I had only one objection to offer, and that was that nothing of this kind was said in the Bible. He smiled, and then said, "But we have the apostolic meetings upon this day to show that it is the right day." I answered that there was barely one such meeting in the book of Acts, and that though Luke is very particular when recording any act that is a custom to mark it as such (see Luke 1: 8, 9; 2: 27, 42; 4: 16; 22: 39; Acts 16: 13; 17: 2; 18: 4, and other places), he does not intimate that meetings on the first day were customary, though if they were such it was of the utmost importance that he should state the fact. It was therefore only a meeting caused by Paul's departure next morning.
To this he made no reply, only that there were some other texts which mention the first day. I referred him to 1 Cor. 16: 2, as perhaps the text he wanted. He then took out his Greek Testament to read the passage when I made this direct appeal to him: Does not "par heauto" signify that each individual was to lay apart by himself, and not to put his offerings on that day into the public treasury? He was frank enough to own, what indeed it was impossible for him honestly to deny, that this text related to what each one should do at home. But, said he, the day itself is called "one of the Sabbaths." I asked him if he would translate it thus instead of the common translation "first-day of the week"? He said, "Yes." Then said I, If you translate it thus how do you know it is the first day that is intended? He asked if I did not believe that the first day was here intended. I told him I did, but that it had no Sabbatic character in this text, for that the Hebrews spoke of all the days from one seventh-
day to another in this manner, as "the one of the Sabbaths," "the two of the Sabbaths," etc. I asked him if he was not aware that the best authorities confirmed this. He said, "Yes," and dropped the point. But, said he, there is the Lord's day, and he quoted the Greek of Rev. 1: 10. I replied, There is nothing in the connection nor in any other part of the Bible to show that Sunday is here intended, or that it has any right to that title, but there are many facts to prove that the seventh day is God's holy day, and the day which Christ claims as his own. But, said he, "We have the Christian fathers to prove that Lord's day is the proper title of Sunday." I told him that I had carefully examined all of the Christian fathers on this subject down to the Council of Nice, and that I have them now in my library at Neuchatel. I told him that no one of them gave Sunday this name till about two hundred years after the birth of Christ. And yet several of them speak of the day before that time, but only as Sunday or first-day.
He referred to Barnabas. I told him that the epistle of Barnabas was spurious, and asked him if he did not think so. He assented to that view. But I said that he would find in Barnabas no sacred title for first-day, much less that of Lord's day. "Well," he said, "there are the writings of Papias." I said, Yes; but Papias does not mention the first day, or even allude to it. "But," said he, "why was there not a violent controversy on this subject between the adherents of the two days?" I told him that the apostasy was a gradual departure from God, like that which in the lapse of years elevated the pastors of the church of the Romans to claim supreme authority. I said to him that Sunday was a day of ordinary labor during the first three hundred years. At this point it was necessary that he should leave to take the cars. He acted like a gentlemen throughout our entire interview, and never appeared in the slightest degree vexed. He invited me to call upon him, which perhaps I shall hereafter do.
The other pastor remained a little longer. I said to him, I will change the form of pastor E's question, and give it to you to answer. If the Sabbath was changed from the seventh to the first day by Christ, why do we never find the Jews laying this change of action to the charge of the apostles? There is never a hint of controversy between them on this point. Can you explain this? He thought the seventh-day was a point of no importance. I told him in God's sight it was important enough to be put into the ten commandments. But, said he, we can call Sunday the seventh day. I said, Yes; but God has called the previous day by that name. I referred him to Luke 23: 56; 24: 1, to show him that the Sabbath according to the commandment is the day preceding the first day of the week. I also referred him to James' statement that he who violated one of the commandments becomes guilty of all. I said to him, I do not judge you, but I have very decided convictions that you and all others should keep the Sabbath of the Lord. Here our interview ended. This gentleman also was perfectly courteous throughout our entire conversation. Probably I cannot hope to lead either of them to see the truth, but I do believe they were made to see it and to feel its force.
Elberfeld, Prussia, Feb. 15, 1875.
Life of William Miller.
By Elder James White
THE following is continued from the Introduction to Sketches of the Christian Life and Public Labors of William Miller, Gathered from his Memoir by the late Sylvester Bliss, and from Other Sources, by Elder James White. The compiler says :—
We hold that the great movement upon the second advent question, which commenced with the writings and public lectures of William Miller, has been, in its leading features, in fulfillment of prophecy. Consistent with this view, we also hold that in the providence of God Mr. Miller was raised up to do a specific work ; therefore to us the history of the important events in his Christian life and public labors possess peculiar interest.
It is true that Mr. Miller and his associates and numerous friends were disappointed in the definite time of the second coming of Christ. And as might be expected from the nature of the case, those who have not sufficient interest to investigate the subject, especially those who are opposed to the doctrine of the soon coming of the Redeemer, conclude that the second advent movement has been a fanatical mistake.
But we take a more favorable view of this matter. We hold that Mr. Miller was correct in three of the four fundamental points of Adventism, while on the fourth he was mistaken. But even this one mistake, viewed in the light of Scripture and reason, does not in the least affect his general position.
1. Mr. Miller was correct in his views of the premillennial second appearing of Christ. No doctrine is more plainly stated and more fully sustained by the sacred Scriptures than the personal appearing and reign of Jesus Christ. And whatever may be said of the views and labors of Mr. Miller, this fact will not be denied, that very many ministers of the different denominations changed their views upon the millennium, renouncing the popular view of the conversion of the world, and the spiritual coming and reign of Jesus Christ.
2. Mr. Miller was correct in his application of the prophetic symbols of Daniel and John. In this he is sustained by Protestant expositors generally.
3. He was also correct in his exposition and application of the prophetic periods. The dates fixed upon have stood the test of the most rigid criticism. And those Adventists who have changed to other dates have done so simply because of the passing by of the first periods of expectation.
4. But Mr. Miller was mistaken in the event to occur at the close of the prophetic periods, hence his disappointment. In the case of the 2300 days of Dan. 8, which period was the main pillar in his calculations, his error was in supposing the earth to be the sanctuary of that prophecy, and that it was to be cleansed by the fires of the last day.
The primary signification of the word sanctuary is “a sacred place.” Neither the earth, nor any portion of it, has been such a place since the fall of man, and the reign of Satan and of death began. The apostle's commentary upon the typical system, in his epistle to the Hebrews, points to two sacred places as the sanctuary of Jehovah ; first, the typical tabernacle of the Jews ; and, second, the greater and more perfect tabernacle of which Christ is now minister in Heaven. For a full exposition of the subject of the sanctuary and the nature of its cleansing, see Thoughts on Daniel, by U. Smith, and The Sanctuary and Twenty-three Hundred Days, by J. N. Andrews.
But other great men have made as grave mistakes relative to the event to occur at the close of the great periods of Daniel as Mr. Miller. These, however, are soon forgotten, while that of Mr. Miller is ever fresh in the public mind. The late learned Geo. Bush, Professor of Hebrew and Oriental Literature in the New York City University, in a letter addressed to Mr. Miller, and published in the Advent Herald for March, 1844, made some very important admissions relative to his calculations of the prophetic times. Mr. Bush says :—
“Neither is it to be objected, as I conceive, to yourself or your friends, that you have devoted much time and attention to the study of the chronology of prophecy, and have labored much to determine the commencing and closing dates of its great periods. If these periods are actually given by the Holy Ghost in the prophetic books, it was doubtless with the design that they should be studied, and probably, in the end, fully understood ; and no man is to be charged with presumptuous folly who reverently makes the attempt to do this. On this point, I have myself no charges to bring against you. Nay, I am even ready to go so far as to say that I do not conceive your errors on the subject of chronology to be at all of a serious nature, or, in fact, to be very wide of the truth. In taking a day as the prophetical term for a year, I believe you are sustained by the soundest exegesis, as well as fortified by the high names of Mede, Sir Isaac Newton, Bishop Newton, Kerby, Scott, Keith, and a host of others, who have long since come to substantially your conclusions on this head. They all agree that the leading periods mentioned by Daniel and John do actually expire about this age of the world and it would be a strange logic that would convict you of heresy for holding in effect the same views which stand forth so prominent in the notices of these eminent divines. Your error, as I apprehend, lies in another direction than your chronology.”
Here Prof. Bush speaks frankly and truthfully, and his words of candor and wisdom sustain the Adventists in that feature of their faith most objectionable to their opponents. But what was the event for which Mr. Bush looked to mark the termination of the 2300 days? Let the following extract from the same letter to Mr. Miller answer :—
“You have entirely mistaken the nature of the events which are to occur when those periods have expired. This is the head and front of your expository offending. You have assumed that the close of the 2300 days of Daniel, for instance, is also the close of the period of human probation, that it is the epoch of the visible and personal second coming of Christ—of the resurrection of the righteous dead, and of the dissolution of the present mundane system. The great event before the world is not its physical conflagration, but its moral regeneration. Although there is doubtless a sense in which Christ may be said to come in connection with the passing away of the fourth empire and of the Ottoman power, and his kingdom to be illustriously established, yet that would be found to be a spiritual coming in the power of his gospel, in the ample outpouring of his Spirit, and the glorious administration of his providence.
Evidently, Mr. Bush looked for the conversion of the world as the event to mark the termination of the 2300 days. Both Mr. Miller and Mr. Bush were right on the time question, and both were mistaken in the event to occur at the close of the great periods. Mr. Miller held that the world would be regenerated by fire, and Mr. Bush, by the gospel, at the end of the 2300 days. The conversion-of-the-world theory of Mr. Bush has had the terrible test of the last thirty-two years of apostasy, spiritual darkness, and crime. This period has been noted by departures from the faith of the gospel, and apostasies from the Christian religion. Infidelity in various forms, especially in the name of spiritualism, has spread over the Christian world with fearful rapidity, while the dark record of crime has been blackening since Prof. Bush addressed his letter to Wm. Miller. If this be the commencement of the temporal millennium, may the Lord save us from the ballance. Both these great men mistook the event to terminate the 2300 days. And why should Mr. Miller be condemned for his mistake, and Mr. Bush be excused for his unscriptural conclusion? In the name of reason and justice we plead that while the Christian world excuse Prof. Bush for his mistake, professedly pious men and women will not too severely censure Mr. Miller for his.
Christian Union.
By Editor
WORDS among the churches of the present day, seem to have lost their significance. The Lord God of Israel told his people they would be holy if they kept his commandments. Now we find professors of religion boasting of the highest type of "holiness" who openly break God's commandments. And more, they teach that obedience to the whole law of God is a hindrance to holiness! A more marked case of putting darkness for light was never known among any people. Again, the Lord commanded his people to be of one mind, to speak the same thing, and to keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. Of late they have sought for union on a different basis. Not to be united in spirit, in judgment, in doctrine, and in word, but to be united in personal courtesies, in mere outside civilities, and this they call "union of Christians!" For what more than courtesy, or expediency, is a union which leaves each party with all their sectarianisms complete? What does such a union amount to?
Of late many who profess to be Adventists have talked long and loud about this union. They try by every means to coalesce with denominations whom they profess to think entertain the most grievous errors. With far more show of consistency the denominations often hold them off, and refuse to recognize them. We have lately seen some notable instances of this.
But now comes the last and least-looked-for move toward "union." It is of the factions claiming to be Advent believers in parts of New England. Eld. H. Pratt, in the Crisis of March 3, thus expresses himself, and quotes as follows:—
"THE SCALES FALLING.
"In Springfield, Mass., where the cause has been bleeding for years by division, a new era seems to be dawning. The old path of oneness, unity in Christ, apparently is being sought out. God help to find it. And if unity in Christ can be effected in Springfield, among Adventists, then why not in other places? The following from the Springfield Republican of Feb. 13, 1875, is the true outlook for to-day:—
"'It is well known that, of late years, the sect of Adventists has been broken up into sections, there being three of these represented in this city, known as "old-school Adventists," "age to come Adventists," and "non-resurrectionists"; and the same division has existed throughout the denomination, to some extent. Recently, however, a movement has taken place in this city toward the union of these different branches for evangelical work, which reached its conclusion, last evening, in the formation of the Springfield Adventists Union, composed of the old-school and age-to-comeists, the others holding themselves aloof, for the present, but with some prospect of eventually coming in.'"
The Work in Europe.
By John Nevins Andrews
ELDER ANDREWS has a very interesting account of his labors in Europe, given in the Review for March 18, 1875, under the heading, The Work in Europe, from which we take the following concerning the results of advertising. He writes from Prussia:—
I will now state the result of advertising in the Journal de Geneve, so far as that result has been reached. My call was addressed to those who observe the seventh day as the Sabbath, or who are interested to examine the subject.
The first response was from a professor of languages in one of the institutions at Geneva. He is a first-day man, and in response to his letter, I addressed him a communication in behalf of the seventh day, and sent him some Sabbath publications.
My second letter was from a gentleman who stated that he was proprietor of an extensive watch factory in Geneva. He also is a first-day man. He wrote me that he finds it difficult to establish the sacredness of the Christian Sabbath in the minds of his workmen, and asked counsel as to the proper course. I responded by showing him that the difficulty lies in the nature of the institution; that if he would return to the Sabbath which God ordained, he would find the authority of God's law to back it up, whereas now he has nothing but a human institution and no greater authority to move the conscience than the authority of man. I sent him also publications on the Sabbath.
My third letter is from a gentleman of Geneva who states that himself and his family are adherents to the seventh-day doctrine, and that he desires to enter into communication with me upon the subject. In signing his name he styles himself "maitre imprimeur," meaning, if I understand the term, foreman of a printing office. I have written this gentleman from this place, but have not yet had time for his reply. But to get knowledge of this seventh-day family in Geneva gives me no little joy.
My fourth letter is from a gentleman, also a resident of Geneva, who thinks "le Dimanche," that is, Sunday, the day to be hallowed, but he wishes publications. I shall write him at once, and send him what publications I can. But alas! my stock is almost exhausted.
My fifth letter is in English, though from the name and the style I am sure that the writer is a Frenchman. He also is a resident of Geneva. The penmanship is very beautiful. I omit the first sentence it is so warmly expressed. The remainder of the letter reads thus:—
"Having just read your appeal inserted in the Journal de Geneve, I hasten to let you know that my wife and myself, are observers of the divine command relative to the seventh-day rest, and desirous to see it fully observed. Therefore, we are quite willing to hear from you any communication on this most important subject. May the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, bless your gospel mission to Europe.
"Yours respectfully, M. de C."
I have just written to this gentleman concerning our sacred work, and given him quite a full account of the Sabbath-keepers throughout the world. These five letters are all that I have thus far received in response to my advertisement. But two of these letters are from seventh-day families! If it please God, I shall very soon after my return to Neuchatel visit these Geneva friends. These things greatly interest our friends here in Prussia.
The writer gives his experience in holding evening lectures in Hidden, Prussia, in the paragraphs that follow:—
The only hall that could be obtained is a large hall in the second story of a hotel. There is a custom connected with such halls that I did not know. It is in good order to drink beer and to smoke while listening to the speaker. The first intimation that I had of this was when entering the hall I saw that four rows of tables extended the entire length of that large hall, and that the chairs were placed by the side of these tables, and on each table was a match case. A good congregation assembled, very intelligent in appearance, and they were very well dressed. Before our services commenced, a waiter handed about beer, and he renewed this from time to time during the meeting! Moreover, a considerable number smoked during the service! The reader will say, perhaps, that it would have served them right had I turned away and left them. But it was this place or none. Paul says, "Instant in season, out of season." If this was not a good place, it was at least a poor one, and this was better than none at all. But now I will say that these people paid the strictest attention. I could never turn my eye to any part of the hall in which I did not see every eye fixed steadfastly upon me. And when prayer was offered by Bro. Ertzenberger at the commencement and at the close, every person stood up and remained motionless. We had a very solemn meeting, and God gave great freedom in speaking.
The meeting next evening was at a private house. Here the smokers came again, though they ceased to smoke on coming in. But to see men sit before you with pipes about four feet long is a strange sight. As some of them seemed possessed of fair mental powers, I watched them to detect some tinge of shame for having such implements of folly in their hands. But I looked in vain. These persons smoke during their entire waking hours. I am told that they take their pipes with them to their beds, and smoke as they lie down to sleep! Tobacco is the god they worship; or rather, their base appetite is their god, and the tobacco is the incense which they burn to the demon they worship. The Sabbath truth is too pure to dwell in the same heart with this vile weed; and it is no small witness to this that our German Sabbath-keepers are wholly clear from tobacco.
I cannot close without mentioning a very interesting item that appeared in the German papers of last week. It is this: That a few days since there died at Prague, in Bohemia, a Sabbatarian, aged one hundred and five years. From some cause he has been very highly honored by the last two Austrian emperors, and at their request has visited them both in their palaces. The papers say that this man was the last of the sect of Sabbath-keepers. I do not believe this statement; for though Sabbath-keepers have always been in a minority, God has always had these witnesses to his truth, and though their enemies have wished them to die out, and have thought from age to age that they would, they have thus far waited in vain.
J. N. ANDREWS.
Elberfeld, Prussia, Feb. 21, 1875.
Two Ways of Giving.
By National Baptist
RECENTLY, a man in Worcester, Mass., has died, bequeathing to the city $250,000 for the establishment of a city hospital. The bequest did not involve sacrifice on the part of the giver. The money was designed for this object, when it could no longer be retained in the hands of the owner. The will is contested; an expensive lawsuit will follow; the eyes of the lawyer will stand out with fatness; hard feelings will be engendered; very possibly the testator himself will be abused by both sides, to make him turn in his grave; at last, possibly, many years hence the property, or what is left of it, will go towards the designed object; but more likely the bequest will prove futile and the will be broken. It is always the instinct of a jury to decide for the natural heirs, and against a corporation. Nothing is so easy as to prove the insanity of a man, after he is dead, especially if he has left his property in a manner not expected or desired by his relations.
Within a few days, an honored citizen of Philadelphia, has died. We do not learn that he made any bequests. Indeed, we presume he had nothing to leave. While he was in the enjoyment of life and health he gave to a hospital in West Philadelphia the large lot of land on which the hospital stands, devoted through all the time to the relief of the distressed, of whatever creed, race, or color. The lot has risen in value, and now is worth at least $150,000; perhaps more. He further bound himself to raise $100,000 towards the endowment. This amount he reached and exceeded. He was permitted to see the hospital erected, dedicated, and occupied. He heard the thanks of those whose woes were alleviated. After enjoying a few months of the purest pleasure which the great God permits to man, he departed in peace from within the walls, which speak of his truly Christian enterprise, of his grand design, and of the work completed within his lifetime. Shall we insult the common sense of our readers by asking the question, which of these two ways of giving most commends itself? If we have anything to do for God, for man, let us do it; let us do it now; let us do it to-day. Let us not put off the doing of it till after we
are in our graves. Let us allow ourselves the pleasure of seeing it done, of knowing that it is done, done in the best way, and of seeing its results. Let us sit under the shade of the tree that we ourselves have planted, and let us, if it pleases God, taste of its ripened fruit.
—National Baptist.
Bacon on Philosophy and Religion
A "LITTLE philosophy," said Bacon, "inclineth men's minds to Atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion."
Calls for Help.
By Editor
Elder Isaac Sanborn of the Wisconsin Conference writes from Baraboo, Wis., Feb. 24, 1875, under the heading of The Calls for Help :-
“A few weeks ago, I put a notice in the Review without qualification, requesting any one who wanted preaching in his locality to write to me. Within ten days I have received twenty letters calling for help; one from New Jersey; three from Illinois; five from Iowa; five from Wisconsin; the rest from Kansas, Dakotah, Nebraska, and New York. And I consider most all of them good openings. But where are the consecrated men to fill these calls? Truly the harvest is great, and the laborers are few. Why should we not pray the Lord of the harvest to send forth laborers into his harvest? I notice that several of these calls are the result of an interest awakened by reading a tract or a trial volume of the Review, which has caused the readers to see light in God’s word. Some have already commenced keeping the Sabbath, and are calling for preaching. May the Lord send them the living preacher soon.”
Pendleton, Oregon.
By I. D. Van Horn
WE have now been holding meetings in this place three weeks. We can report no definite result, more than a good interest to hear and some are favorable to the truth. We had our first Sabbath meeting yesterday. About a dozen were out, and the meeting was one that gave us some hopes of a good result.
To-day Elder Horner, Methodist, spoke against us on the nature of the soul. He speaks again this evening on the Parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. Judging from his course to-day, I think his effort will help on our cause, as I have already presented this subject to the people. His effort will serve to wake up the people to an investigation of the subject, which we are sure will work favorably for our cause.
We have sold about $28.00 worth of books, beside ten pictures of the Way of Life. The school teacher, a man of good education and ability, who has heretofore been a skeptic, acknowledges now that his skepticism is all gone.
My prayer is that the Lord will give grace to carry the meeting through to his glory, and that the standard of truth may be raised here and held up till the Lord comes.
I. D. VAN HORN.
Patience.
By John Norton Loughborough
"In your patience possess ye your souls." It is the duty of Christians to manifest the grace of patience under all circumstances. Not only is this clear from the injunction in the above text, but Peter, in giving us his great problem of addition in the Christian graces (2 Pet. 1:6), says, "Add to temperance, patience." As much as to say, be temperate because it will be difficult for you to be patient unless you are temperate. Temperance is defined by Webster, "Habitual moderation in regard to the indulgence of the natural appetites and passions."
Applying the above definition to eating and drinking, we may say that the excessive use of food, that is of itself healthful when taken in proper quantities, will overburder the nervous system and become a source of nervous irritation to be manifested in the impatient words or manner of the excessive eater.
So, also, one may exhaust nervous energy by overwork, and under a pressure of care loose that power of self-control that steady nerve and calm reflection would insure. With one thus overworked, and carrying a greater burden than is meet, work will not only be improperly done, but under circumstances of perplexity, their work will be liable to be marked with words and acts of impatience.
During the few weeks past, while released from public labor, I have been looking over my life, especially in California, and I have some things to say relative to the bearing of the above principles on my own case. I have, in many instances, been intemperate in labor. I have gone many times beyond my strength, and, at such times, with nervous power exhausted, I have not moved with that calm reflection becoming a minister of Christ. Words of impatience, savoring too much of scolding, have been spoken by me, under such circumstances. This is true relative to two or three instances in connection with our last camp-meeting. This was all wrong. I ask of those who witnessed it forbearance. I do not ask you to excuse the wrong under the plea of overwork. Wrong is wrong.
I am resolved, by the Lord's help, to be temperate in labor for the future, not only in amount of labor, but in kind; leaving that which can be done to better advantage by others than myself for them to do, and calmly and patiently doing what the Lord would have me to do.
J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH.
Do Church Tea-Parties Glorify God?
A CHRISTIAN lady writes, asking, “Do church tea-parties glorify God?” She says a lady belonging to a certain church gave a ticket to a Catholic, her dress-maker, for one of these festivals. She attended, and her friend afterward asked her candid opinion of the affair. The Catholic said she was delighted with it, but to tell the truth, she never would have thought that it was a Methodist gathering, or indeed, a religious gathering of any kind. How careful the church needs to be about expedients employed, lest there be a deadly influence.—Sel.
Limit your Wants.
LORD BOLINGBROKE, in his reflections upon "Exile," says: "Our natural and real wants are confined to narrow bounds, while those which fancy and custom create are confined to none." Young men who are just entering upon life, and forming habits which are likely to adhere to them to its close, will do well to treasure up in memory these true and instructive words of one of England's finest writers and most philosophic statesmen: "Our natural and real wants are confined to narrow bounds."
It is surprising how little it is that is absolutely essential to man's existence, and, if he will take an intelligent and considerate view of life, to his comfort and happiness. Intellectual enjoyments are comparatively cheap. The cultivation of the mind, which affords the highest and the only enduring satisfaction, can be pursued on an income quite insignificant for the supply of luxuries. Our physical wants are very few, if we preserve our tastes simple, as they are by nature. To eat, to drink, to exercise, to sleep, to keep warm, and to be sheltered: a small sum will supply all these necessities. The pleasures which are pure, and which tend to our improvement, are within the reach of almost every one. But the wants which fancy and custom create, as Lord Bolingbroke well says, are confined to no bounds. It is against these that young men on the threshold of life should sedulously guard. Beware of luxurious and expensive habits. The gratification of them may cost you much of the labor and time which, if given to intellectual cultivation, would be far more conducive to happiness. It is easy to do without that which you have never indulged in. It is hard to leave off habits, however extravagant and absurd. When you are to decide about adopting a mode or style of living, consider well whether it is certain that, without inconvenience, you will be able always to preserve it. The only safe rule is, to keep your wants within narrow bounds.—Sel.
It’s No Use.
It is said that a country woman went into a store on Hanover St., Boston, one day, and putting four dollars on the counter, remarked to a clerk: "There; fourteen years ago—'twill be fifteen this fall—I bought something next door, and gave them a dollar bill; but they couldn't give me the change, so they sent a boy into the next shop, and he brought me back the change for five dollars instead of one. I took it, but 'taint no use; I ain't going to keep it any longer; so there it is, all back again." And before the astonished clerk had time to make any inquiries, she was gone.
Poor woman. She had endured fourteen years of trouble for a single sin, and at last had to confess and make restitution. It was well that she had courage and grace to do it finally.
We heard of an old gray-headed man who took a returned missionary aside one day, and confessed to him how fifty years before, when they were boys together he picked up and kept a quarter of a dollar which the missionary lost, and tried in vain to find. "I have carried the load on my conscience," said he, "for fifty years, and I would not carry it fifty years longer for the whole world." And so he paid him back a silver dollar, and begged that he would forgive the sin committed so long ago.
It is of "no use" to sin. If you have done wrong, make it right, and the quicker you do it, the better; life is uncertain; time is short, sin is a heavy load here, but it will be heavier still to bear it before the Judgment-seat of Christ. Make haste, then, to get rid of every sin; fly to Christ for pardon and for peace, and make ready to stand accepted and blameless in the Judgment day that is "near and hasteth greatly."—Sel.