THE delegates of the recent Catholic Congress at Baltimore, which closed the 12th instant, adopted a manifesto "with enthusiastic unanimity" setting forth their views. In this declaration there are some things worthy of notice. They begin by saying (as reported in the San Francisco Examiner of November 13):—
"We claim to be acquainted with the laws, institutions, and spirit of the Catholic Church, and with the laws, institutions, and spirit of our country, and we emphatically declare there is no antagonism between them. We repudiate with equal earnestness the assertion that we need lay aside any of our devotedness to the church to be true Americans, and the insinuation that we need abate any of our love for our country's principles and institutions to be faithful Catholics."
Just fancy a congress of Congregationalists, or Baptists, or Presbyterians, or any other Protestant sect, asserting in such forcible terms that their sect was loyal. A loyal sect does not need to do so. Rome knows her past, and the world knows it. They know that whenever she possessed power in any government, that wherever necessary that power was always subverted for the advancement of the church, at whatever expense to the public weal. That church over and over declares her unchangeableness and infallibility, and over and over again indorses the whole history of her infamous past; and now she would seemingly wish to cry her patriotism so loud that the wail of the martyred millions of the past cannot be heard by the multitude of to-day.
Put the above declaration of loyalty by the side of the last expression of the manifesto:—
"We cannot conclude without recording our solemn conviction that absolute freedom of the holy see is equally indispensable to the peace of the church and the welfare of mankind. We demand in the name of humanity and justice that this freedom be scrupulously respected by all secular governments.
"We protest against assumption by any such government of the right to affect interests or control the action of our holy father by any form of legislation or other public act to which his full approbation has not been previously given.
"We pledge to the worthy pontiff to whose hands Almighty God has committed the helm of Peter's bark amid the tempest of this stormy age, the loyal sympathy and untainted aid of all his spiritual children in vindicating and perfecting the liberty which he justly claims as his sacred and inalienable right."
The Roman Catholic's first duty is to his church and to the pontiff at Rome as the head of that church. This would not be so bad if it related to things purely spiritual, but it does not. The temporal power of the Papacy is the one leading question among Romanists to-day. Let the United States become involved by treaty with Italy the same as Germany and Austria are at present, let this government support Italy in its quarrel with Pope Leo XIII, concerning his temporal power, and every Catholic who adopted the above declaration would be bound to rebel against his own government and render "untainted aid" "in vindicating and perfecting the liberty which he justly claims." So the Englishman, the Frenchman, the German, who had sworn allegiance to this government, would have the same right to join the forces of their native lands in war against this country. They demand that the United States shall "respect" the temporal power of the pope, that no legislation shall be taken which will control his action as the actions of other men are controlled without his full approbation, and Catholics are pledged to carry this out. No true Roman Catholic can be a loyal citizen of this, or any government, unless that government is in harmony with the church, and then the public weal must always be subservient to the wishes of the church.
A blow is well struck against the combined power of wealth and evils in our social system, one of the greatest of which is intemperance, which no organization outside of the whisky rings fosters more than the Church of Rome.
The chronic growl at the public school is indulged in with the recognition of the three great agencies in the education of the child, namely, the church, the school, and the Christian home. No one objects to Rome's using all these agencies, but she has no right to demand the public money therefor. If she had more of the last agency she would not clamor so much for the second.
Mormonism, a thousand times lesser evil than Roman Catholicism, because of lesser and local influence, is denounced; Catholic clergy to minister to Catholic prisoners is demanded; Catholics are exhorted to mingle more in works of national virtue such as non-Catholic citizens are engaged in; Catholic circulating libraries and reading circles are recommended, in which the history of the past will be glossed, perverted, or obscured; emphatic determination is expressed to close saloons Sundays by the passage and enforcement of the necessary laws; the establishment of Catholic daily papers is looked for; and the faithful are exhorted to unite with non-Catholics in securing better Sunday observance. These are the principal points set forth. We have noticed the last elsewhere. We do not know why a daily press is needed, when so many of the secular dailies can be used by the church. On the whole, the platform is one well calculated to please National Reformers and the American Sabbath Union and Sunday temperance workers.
To the intelligent friend of civil and religious liberty, to the true Bible student, Rome appears as she ever has, the inveterate foe to truth and freedom. The only difference is between Rome triumphant in power and Rome bidding for power. Her words are softer than oil, yet are they drawn swords.
INDEPENDENTS.
By William N. Glenn
IN every Christian denomination there occasionally arises an independent operator, who conceives that his ability is not appreciated in the church, and that the Scriptures warrant him in laboring, regardless of church obligation or the advice of the brethren. Such laborers generally insist on doing as they please, whether it be in harmony with the church or not; yet they will put on a solemn air of injured innocence if their church refuses to indorse them. No matter how utterly out of harmony their hobbies may be with the church to which they belong, they will insist on their right to advocate them, as members of that church, thereby making the church responsible to the public for their idiosyncrasies.
In most cases these individuals have eccentricities of character, arising mainly from ambitious desires and a spirit of self-sufficiency, which render them unreliable as representatives of any body of Christians, and without exception they are averse to the restraints of counsel, which is essential to the success of organized effort. In a majority of cases, such persons are "unlearned" as well as "unstable," and not only unlearned, but are disposed to boast of the fact, and claim that the Lord can the better use them on that account.
Amongst this class of "evangelists," or "apostles," or "reformers," or whatever role they may choose to assume, are some would-be Abrahams, and Johns, and Pauls, who have been specially called (in imagination) to do some wonderful work, and particularly to be very conspicuous. This last characteristic is made manifest by the prerogatives generally claimed as being directly given of the Lord, and the assumption of offices "set in the church," and to be conferred through the church in an orderly manner.
Now no one will deny that individuals have been, and are yet, and ever will be, specially called to do special duty in the Lord's work, and for which duty a special fitting can only come from his Spirit. And this very fact gives us a measure by which the pretended imitators of such may be tested. Abraham, for instance, was called of God to be the "father of the faithful." Among other requirements, he was obliged to leave his country and his father's house. Why did the Lord call Abraham? Was it because Abraham set himself up, and became dissatisfied with his brethren's estimate of his ability and qualifications? The record says it was because God knew Abraham, that he would be obedient, and bring up his children in obedience to the truth.
When Moses was called out for a leader of God's people, he was not taken until he was schooled to humility. He did not then start out and assume prerogatives, but rather shrank from responsibilities. Was he ignorant?—No man of his time had greater learning. And God gave him unmistakable credentials, so that all might know that "I AM" had sent him forth. Aaron was called into a new mission, but God so endowed him that his authority was indisputable. And under that order of priesthood there was regular provision for ordination to the ministry, while some who attempted an independent ministration were summarily rejected of the Lord, and swallowed up by the opening earth.
John the Baptist was sent out independently on a special mission. There was no voluntary assumption on his part. His advent into the world was preannounced by an angel; it was then said of him that he should "be great in the sight of the Lord," and that he should go before the Messiah "in the spirit and power of Elias." He was miraculously born, and by special manifestations was acknowledged as one sent of Heaven. Let those who cite John as a warrant for their independent assumptions in spiritual things, show like qualifications, and bring forth such credentials as he presented.
Paul is frequently cited as an example by those who claim to be specially led by the Spirit in a way of their own. And it may well be demanded that they show the same evidences of a call that Paul did. The inspired record shows that the Lord personally appeared to Paul by the way, when he was called "to show how great things he should suffer" for the sake of the name of Jesus. It is true that he "conferred not with flesh and blood," nor went up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before him, but "went away into Arabia." It is also true that when he went back to Jerusalem, three years afterward, he tarried but a short time, and then went away into Syria and Silicia, and did not return again for fourteen years. But during that short stay at Jerusalem, he abode with Peter fifteen days, and there is no reference to any inharmony at this time. It is also true that when he left Jerusalem after his first short visit, the brethren gave him a safe escort to Cesarea, and sent him forth to his home at Tarsus.
Admitting that Paul did labor somewhat independently, the proof that he was led by the Spirit lies in the fact that after seventeen years of isolated ministry he was found to be in harmony with the church. The first thing he did on his second return to Jerusalem was to seek out "them which were of reputation" (leaders in the church) and "privately" show them what he had been preaching, as he says, "lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain." This carefulness showed that he had been careful all the way through, and that was why the Spirit could lead him so perfectly in the truth that when he came to report his labor to the apostles at headquarters, they could give him "the right hand of fellowship," and indorse his ministry. Paul had a sharp contention with Peter at one time, and again with Barnabas, but never ran counter to the body. He was one of the men chosen to go on the first foreign mission tour on record; and on another occasion was one of the delegates from a conference at Jerusalem to carry a special message to the church at Antioch.
These remarks are by no means intended to convey the idea that the church is infallible; history forbids any such conclusion, and there is no church but may become so degenerate as to be utterly "spewed out" by the Lord. But it is poor evidence of a special call from the Lord, when self-styled reformers feel the necessity of making some denomination responsible for their acts and hobbies, even though they be out of harmony with its practices and teaching.
The only man who can fairly lay claim to the considerations accorded to John, or Paul, or Luther, or any other of the Lord's special laborers, is he who can show like credentials, or exhibit like fruit. "By their fruits ye shall know them."
SCIENTIFIC (?) THEORIES.
WHAT will we do? One scientific professor thinks that so much tapping of the gas in the earth, which is a hollow sphere filled with gas, will cause a collapse, and the earth will be thrown from its orbit, and fall to pieces. Another thinks stringent laws ought to prohibit drilling the earth. An explosion might take place, and a great canal opened through the gas regions of Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, "to the depth of 1,200 to 1,500 feet, and the earth flopped over like a pancake, leaving a chasm through which the waters of Lake Erie would come down, filling the Ohio and Mississippi valleys, and blotting them out forever." Still another says that under the gas field "an immense cavity exists, and that here the gas is stored; that a mile below the bottom of the cavity is a mass of roaring, seething flame, which is gradually eating into the rock floor of the cavern and thinning it. Eventually the flames will reach the gas, and a terrific explosion will ensue." All these theories will be believed by different persons, and some will believe them all who would reject the biblical account of the creation and the deluge, because it is controverted by such inaccurate and inconsistent scientists as these.
RELIGIOUS BACKBONE.
By Editor
It is refreshing in these days when one hears so much sentimental gush about so-called "Christian union" on a milk-and-water basis, to know that there are some people who feel under obligations to profess and defend that which they hold to be truth, even at the risk of being considered "narrow." In this line the following from Rev. S. C. Keetch, a contributor to the Herald of Truth, will commend itself to the good sense of the reader:—
"There is a good deal of sentimental nonsense indulged in by many in these days, in the name, and under the guise, of Christian Catholicity. There are not a few who seem to be so extremely anxious to free themselves from all suspicion of being narrow-minded and bigoted, that they go to the extreme of that wishy-washy liberalism which lacks the backbone of pronounced conviction, and which, we believe, cannot be other than enervating to the life of any church or denomination. It is often said that all the denominations are equally good; especially is this statement thought to be true when the reference is to those denominations which are termed evangelical. But is this true? Is it possible for denominations to exist, each being different from all the rest in its principles and practices, and yet equally possessing and practising the truth? It is surely manifest that the denominations cannot be equally good, unless they are equally scriptural in their creeds and polity; and if the Bible is, as we all believe, the word of God, and therefore the truth, and nothing but the truth, this is evidently out of the question. It would not be more absurd to say that a triangle, a square, and a circle are equally round, than it would be to say that all the denominations are equally scriptural, and therefore equally good. If, for example, I am a Baptist, and thoroughly persuaded that the denomination to which I belong is scriptural in refusing to baptize infants, and in teaching that the only true and valid baptism is the immersion of a believer, 'in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,' can I believe that a denomination is equally scriptural that teaches infant baptism as a divinely-appointed ordinance, and teaches that sprinkling or pouring are scriptural forms of baptism, and therefore just as acceptable to God as immersion?—Certainly not. I am compelled to believe that my denomination is right with reference to this ordinance, and all others wrong, who do and teach otherwise. Narrow, do you say? Then common sense is narrow. Bigotry, do you say? Then logic is bigotry. The writer was born a Methodist, christened by a Methodist minister, brought up by Methodist parents, instructed in a Methodist Sunday-school, converted in a Methodist Church, and for two years labored as a Methodist preacher. But when, by a faithful and critical study of the Bible, he found out that Methodism was unscriptural in many important matters, he severed his connection with that denomination, and became a Baptist. Could he have done otherwise?"
And this is just what every man ought to do, just what God requires every soul to do, to exchange error for truth, and to obey truth regardless of consequences. Every man ought to be able to give a reason for the hope that is in him, and if he finds that he has no reason for his faith or practice, or that his reason is unscriptural, his duty is to abandon it for something that is scriptural. It was obedience to this rule which made Mr. Keetch a Baptist, and continued adherence to it would not only still further transform Mr. Keetch, but it would make Baptists, and Sabbath-keeping Baptists at that, out of the honest-hearted everywhere.
(Lesson 10, December 7, 1889.)
1. WHAT was the condition of the people to whom Paul wrote this letter?
2. In what words did he give them a most solemn warning?
"But that which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned." Heb. 6:8.
3. How did he express his hope of them?
"But, beloved, we are persuaded better things of you, and things that accompany salvation, though we thus speak." Verse 9.
4. For what did he commend them?
"For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labor of love, which ye have showed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister." Verse 10.
5. How does the Lord regard his erring people?
"As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten; be zealous therefore, and repent." Verse 10 and Rev. 3:19.
7. What was his desire in regard to them?
"And we desire that every one of you do show the same diligence to the full assurance of hope unto the end." Heb. 6:11.
8. What should the Christian not be?
"That ye be not slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience inherit the promises." Verse 12.
9. Whom should they follow? — Ib.
10. Who was most remarkable for faith and patience?
"For when God made promise to Abraham, because he could swear by no greater, he swore by himself." Verse 13. Compare Rom. 4:16-22.
11. What did God say to Abraham?
"Saying, Surely blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee." Heb. 6:14.
12. What is the meaning of this form of promise: "Blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thee"? — Ib. See note.
13. How greatly was his seed to be multiplied? Gen. 13:16; 15:5; 22:17.
"And I will make thy seed as the dust of the earth; so that if a man can number the dust of the earth, then shall thy seed also be numbered." Gen. 13:16.
"And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them; and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be." Gen. 15:5.
"That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies." Gen. 22:17.
14. Did he obtain the promise?
"And so, after he had patiently endured, he obtained the promise." Heb. 6:15.
15. Did his seed become as numerous as the dust of the earth?
16. How, then, did he obtain the promise?
Ans.—After his long and patient waiting, he received the son in whom the promise was to be fulfilled. His faith embraced the promise in its fullness.
17. By whom do men swear?
"For men verily swear by the greater; and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife." Verse 16.
18. Why did God swear by himself? Verse 13.
19. Would an oath by an inferior object be solemn, and expressive of obligation?
20. Of what is God willing that we should have full proof?
"Wherein God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath." Verse 17. Compare Mal. 3:10.
21. Who proved the Lord, and were still unbelieving?
"When your fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my works forty years." "So I sware in my wrath, They shall not enter into my rest." "So we see that they could not enter in because of unbelief." Heb. 3:9, 11, 19.
22. Have we not reason to believe that many are doing the same thing even in this day?
23. What two immutable things are referred to in Heb. 6:18?
"That by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us."
24. To whom is this intended to give assurance?
25. Who have the privilege of laying hold of it? Verse 18.
26. Of what do we lay hold? — Ib. See note.
27. Where is this hope set? Verse 18.
28. Does hope ever look back to the past? See Rom. 18:24.
NOTES.
HEB. 6:14 is an intensive form of expression not uncommon in the Hebrew. It denotes certainty. Two instances are found in Genesis 2. Verse 16 reads: "Of every tree of the garden eating thou shalt eat." It is translated, "Thou mayest freely eat." Verse 17 reads: "In the day that thou eatest thereof dying thou shalt die." Rendered, "Thou shalt surely die." These translations are literally correct, the words freely and surely representing the certainty contained in the form of the original. Again in Ex. 3:7 the Lord said, "Seeing I have seen the affliction of my people." Stephen, quoting this (Acts 7:34), expressed the intensive of the original by a repetition: "I have seen, I have seen the affliction of my people." And indeed duplication is another method of expressing intensiveness in the Hebrew, as "good good," for very good. Our version very correctly translates Ex. 1:7, "I have surely seen."
As faith rests only on the word of God (Rom. 10:17), so hope rests only on the promise of God. Where God has not spoken there can be no faith. There may be opinion, or conjecture, or strong feeling, and even much confidence, but no faith. So where there is no promise of God there may be feeling, and strong self-confidence, but no true hope. And a promise fulfilled is no longer a promise—it is a matter of the past. Hope can no longer rest upon it, "for hope that is seen is not hope." Once received, it is no longer hoped for. Losing sight of this evident truth, many have been led to indulge false hopes. They will profess to hope in God, while there is not a promise within their reach. For all the promises of God rest on conditions, and if we neglect the conditions, we cannot rightfully claim the promises. Claiming God's promises without fulfilling their conditions is not an indication of faith but of presumption. But if indeed we have fled for refuge to Christ, and have laid hold upon the hope set before us, what a strong consolation we have in the sure promise of God confirmed by his oath, brought near by the blood and intercession of our High Priest in the heavens!
ADDITIONAL NOTES.
It is the duty of every Christian to bear fruit to the glory of God. Said the Saviour: "I am the vine, ye are the branches; he that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit; for without me ye can do nothing. If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned." John 15:5,6. The language of the apostle given in verse 8 of our lesson expresses the same truth. It follows that fruit-bearing is one of the conditions of eternal life. But let none conclude from this that heaven can be earned by good works; that does not follow, and the idea is utterly forbidden by other scriptures; but the point is that those who are abiding in Christ will bring forth fruit just as surely and as naturally as will the healthy branch that abides in the vine.
The fruits brought forth by a Christian are of two kinds, or, rather, they are twofold, that is, there is the inward change of character and feeling, and the outward manifestation of this change. Among the fruits of the Spirit, the apostle enumerates love, joy, peace, and faith. These are primarily inward fruits, that is, they are feelings which the Spirit of God implants in the heart; but long-suffering, gentleness, and goodness are outward manifestations of the inward fruits, or of the grace of God dwelling in the heart. If love, joy, and faith are in the heart they will manifest themselves; and "herein," says the Saviour, "is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit." And again: "Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven." Matt. 5:16.
HEB. 6:10 contains a thought that is full of encouragement to everyone who has given himself to God. Says the apostle: "For God is not unrighteous to forget your work and labor of love, which ye have showed toward his name, in that ye have ministered to the saints, and do minister." Here we have the idea of obligation on the part of God; and it is even so that God has obligated himself to all who enter into covenant with him. True, our failures and short-comings might serve to release God from this voluntary obligation, but he seeks no release. He works in us both to will and to do of his good-pleasure. He is more ready to do for us, we are assured (Luke 11:9-13), than are earthly parents to give good gifts unto their children. Shall we not then embrace his mercy and confidently, though humbly, claim his promises?
The promise to Abraham was twofold, namely, the promise that he should inherit the earth (Gen. 13:14, 15; Rom. 4:13), and that he should have a son (Gen. 13:15, 16 and 18:10), and that his seed should share the inheritance with him, and that in his seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed. This promise he obtained, that is, it was fulfilled, so far as regarded the birth of a son, and it is to this which the writer of Hebrews refers in Heb. 6:15. The fulfillment of the other part of the promise is, as we learn from Acts 7:5 and from Heb. 11:13, still future. In his defense Stephen evidently alluded to the unfulfilled promise to Abraham in order to show the absolute necessity of a resurrection, and that that resurrection would be accomplished through Christ. But he was not permitted to conclude his argument. Paul, however, declared (Acts 23:6) that it was for the hope of the resurrection of the dead that he was called in question, and again (Acts 26:6, 7) he said: "And now I stand and am judged for the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers; unto which promise our twelve tribes, instantly serving God day and night, hope to come. For which hope's sake, King Agrippa, I am accused of the Jews." This shows conclusively that the resurrection of the dead is inseparably connected with perfect fulfillment of the promise to Abraham.715God promised the land to Abraham, and yet he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not so much as to set his foot upon; but the promise of God cannot fail; it was confirmed by two immutable things, God's word and oath, therefore Abraham will be raised from the dead, and God's promise will be literally fulfilled to him.
If we are Christ's we are Abraham's seed (Gal. 3:29), and the promise is just as sure to us as to him; and in this fact there is strong ground for confidence. Says the apostle: "God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an oath; that by two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before us." Heb. 6:17, 18.
C. P. B.
THE temple built by Solomon, the dedication of which is described in the chapter containing this lesson, was, in arrangement and purpose, a counterpart of the tabernacle built by Moses in the wilderness of Sinai. It is quite common among theologians to treat both structures as types of something that was to occur on this earth under the Christian dispensation. And we have heard prominent ministers laboring hard to point out in the structure of the Christian church some antitype of every detail in the temple. It seems evident that such labor is in vain.
WE learn from Heb. 8:5 that "Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle," that he should make all things according to the pattern shown to him in the mount. And concerning Moses' sprinkling both the tabernacle and the vessels with the blood of calves and goats, Paul says: "It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices." Heb. 9:23. Then the tabernacle and temple were patterns of something in heaven, according to Paul's exposition.
AND the next verse carries further the same idea: "For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us." As this appearing for us shows him in the light of a priest "in heaven itself," his mediatorial ministration must be in his temple. If one is "in heaven itself," the other must also be there. In the eighth chapter, verses 1 and 2, we read: "We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; a minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man."
WE can see from these facts some reason why the Lord was so careful with the sanctuary, as well as the priestly ministration, that it should be according to the pattern. Otherwise they could not faithfully portray the real mediatorial work of Christ.
"BLESSED be the Lord that hath given rest unto his people Israel." He hath given them rest from their enemies, absolute peace. What for? To consume the blessing upon their lusts?—No; it was to give them opportunity to set about a work that was designed to glorify God in the eyes of all the nations of the earth. When Israel was delivered from Egyptian bondage, it was to give them freedom to observe his law and to spread a knowledge of the true God throughout the earth. And in Rev. 7:1-3 we read of the angels holding the four winds until the servants of God should be sealed. It appears, then, that all the peace vouchsafed in this sinful world is that opportunity may be given for furthering the great plan of salvation.
"THERE hath not failed one word of all his good promise." And there never will. "For all the promises of God in him [Christ] are yea, and in him amen." 2 Cor. 1:20. "Let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering (for he is faithful that promised)." Heb. 10:23. "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is long-suffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." 2 Peter 3:9.
THERE are some promises that are too important to be overlooked in connection with this feature of the lesson. "We, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness." 2 Pet. 3:13. "Blessed are the meek; for they shall inherit the earth." Matt. 5:5. And John saw in prophetic vision the new heaven and new earth, and also the holy city, New Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven. Rev. 21:1, 2. And in chapter 22:14 is the final promise: "Blessed are they that do his commandments, that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city."
THAT there is no difference in the requirements and necessities incident to a godly life in Solomon's day and ours, is clearly set forth in the following petition in verses 57 and 58 of the lesson: "The Lord our God be with us, as he was with our fathers; let him not leave us, nor forsake us; that he may incline our hearts unto him, to walk in all his ways, and to keep his commandments, and his statutes, and his judgments, which he commanded our fathers."
AND the grand object of a perfect walk is not, as many suppose, merely that the individual so walking may be saved; but "that all the people of the earth may know that the Lord is God, and that there is none else." The plan of salvation is broad enough to include the world; and the Saviour never did anything with a narrow design. His prayer for the unity of his disciples was "that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me." John 17:23.
IN this age we can hardly comprehend the immense slaughter of 22,000 oxen and 120,000 sheep as a sacrifice; but it was acceptable to God. We must not indulge the too common idea, because the day of animal sacrifice is past, and the great antitypical sacrifice has been made, that all obligation has ceased and offerings are no longer due in connection with the worship of God. In proportion as our light and privileges increase, so does our obligation increase. "Give unto the Lord the glory due unto his name; bring an offering, and come into his courts." Ps. 96:8.
Reading, Thought, and Mental Growth
THOU mayest as well expect to grow stronger by always eating as wiser by always reading. Too much overcharges nature, and turns more into disease than nourishment. Tis thought and digestion which make books serviceable, and give health and vigor to the mind.—Fuller.
True Joy
By Seneca
TRUE joy is a serene and sober motion; and they are miserably out that take laughing for rejoicing; the seat of it is within, and there is no cheerfulness like the resolutions of a brave mind.
TENT-MEETING IN TULARE CITY.
By A. W. Bartlett
MEETINGS were held here with good interest last summer. The tent was taken down and meetings ceased during the camp-meeting at Oakland. When we came here after the tent-meetings had been renewed, we found that the interest had greatly subsided, and the attendance was very small, due, in part, to rainy weather. Some that had signed the covenant had lost their interest. But we are glad to report that God has revived the interest and attendance in a good measure, and four adults have begun the observance of the Sabbath, in addition to those observing it as a result of last summer's work. We look for more converts soon. Elder Hunter, who has labored so faithfully here, has gone to Los Angeles.
A. W. BARTLETT.
November 12, 1889.
MISSIONARY MURMURINGS.
THERE is only one Protestant missionary in the republic of Costa Rica.
ONLY 11,000,000 out of 250,000,000—the population of India—can read and write.
It is said that in France working people are frequently met who have never heard of the Bible.
THE capital of South India, Madras, with its population of 400,000, has 39,094 Christians.
THE Record of the Free Church of Scotland makes the statement that there are 47 Protestant Jewish missionary societies in the world, employing 377 missionaries among the Jews, and spending about a half million dollars annually. There is, therefore, about one missionary for every 17,000 Jews, inasmuch as their number is 6,500,000. It is said that 80,000 copies of Delitzsch's Hebrew New Testament have been distributed in Eastern Europe and Siberia, while of Salkinson's Hebrew New Testament two editions of 200,000 have appeared. It has been estimated that fully 100,000 Jews have, during the century, been brought into the Church of Christ.
THE Catholics have in China, according to Hugh P. McElrone, in the Independent of August 22, the following:—
The twenty-nine Vicariates Apostolic of China, each, with one exception, having a bishop, contain 390,000,000 inhabitants, 485,403 Catholics, 2,460 churches and chapels, 440 European missionaries, 303 native priests, 1,804 schools, 25,219 pupils, 34 seminaries, 666 seminarians. Besides these there are colleges, orphan asylums, homes for the aged, industrial schools, foundations of nuns and sisters, etc., concerning which the reports are very incomplete, merely saying that they are in proportion to the other figures. Mr. McElrone calls attention to the fact that these converts are not massed in certain localities, but are scattered in every province throughout the empire, and that nearly one-half the Catholic priests in China are natives.
THE AMERICAS.
THE journey through the United States of the delegates to the Pan-American congress, at Washington, makes it pertinent to remind our readers that Central and South America embrace an area a little greater than twice the extent of country in the United States and Territories, and a population of about 50,000,000, or about one-sixth less than the population of the republic.
Mexico covers an area just about equal to that part of the United States east of the Mississippi River, exclusive of the States of Louisiana and Mississippi, and has 10,000,000 inhabitants.
The five Central American republics of Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Salvador, cover an extent of country about the size of the five States of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, and Illinois, and have a population equal to both New York and Indiana.
Brazil's area is somewhat greater than that of the United States, exclusive of Alaska, and her population is about that of New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio.
The Argentine Republic, with about half the area of the United States, has a population not quite as large as Pennsylvania.
Colombia is nearly equal in extent to New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin, with a population probably a little less than that of New York State.
Bolivia's territory is somewhat greater than that of the Atlantic States, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan, and her population is about Indiana's figure.
Peru is a little larger than the Atlantic States and Pennsylvania, and her population is about that of Illinois.
Venezuela is larger than Peru by about as much territory as is embraced in New Jersey, and her population is about equal to Indiana's.
Ecuador could contain Ohio, New York, Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Illinois, but her population is not quite up to that of Michigan alone.
Chili's domain, cut up, would make States as extensive as Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Indiana; her population is somewhat greater than that of Indiana.
Paraguay is big enough to include Ohio and New York within her borders, but her entire population scarcely exceeds that of Cleveland.
Uruguay is not quite as large as Ohio and Indiana combined, and has just about the same number of inhabitants as Brooklyn, N. Y.
The Guianas are English, French, and Dutch colonies. British Guiana, twice as large as Ohio, has just about the population of Cleveland. French Guiana, somewhat larger than Ohio, has about as many inhabitants as Toledo. Dutch Guiana, nearly as large as Pennsylvania, has not more inhabitants than Columbus.—Selected.