Earlier text: THE WORLD'S JUBILEEThe most noted of modern swindlers and defaulters has finally met his reward, and, considering his crimes, his punishment is not severe. The city of New York, of which he was for some time the mayor by virtue of his influence with the lower classes, had great difficulty in bringing this man to justice. All that money and talent could effect was brought to bear in his defense; but the God of Heaven has strengthened the right, and justice is at least partially vindicated. Let good men thank Heaven that crime and lawlessness are not yet wholly licensed, even in New York. A powerful influence for good must follow the conviction of this prince of modern swindlers. The Commercial has the following interesting sketch of his commitment to jail, which it entitles “The Last Act.” The old jovial, hearty manner which characterized him in the days of the Tammany Ring regime was gone, but still no spectator looking at him would imagine that he was conscious that in a brief hour he would be clothed in a convict’s dress and be in the company of outcasts and the scum of society. A keen observer, however, could readily perceive, by an occasional tremor of the mouth and anxious glance of the eyes, that the wretched man, dissemble as he might, in his heart of hearts keenly felt the horror of his miserable situation. To an intimate friend of his who accompanied him and kept with him to the last, he said: “Well, my enemies to-day have, I guess, pretty well exhausted their malice against me,” adding, with a faint attempt at a smile, “But perhaps I ought to be grateful to them for affording me the pleasure of a carriage ride and a sail.” The principal topic of conversation that occupied the attention of the party on the short trip between the pier and the island, was the prospect of speedily obtaining a stay of proceedings and an order for a new trial. Upon this subject they talked earnestly, and expressed the utmost confidence of a favorable issue. The shrill whistle of the steamer broke in upon the discussion, and announced to the convict that he had reached the destined place of his abode for the ensuing twelve years of his existence. At this point, Tweed’s courage seemed to fail him, and his bloodshot eye and furrowed face showed that he was suffering terribly. As he passed along the gangway, his step was faltering, and his gait unsteady, and he kept his gaze steadily fixed upon the ground. He looked indeed like a man going to execution. The few spectators who witnessed the party coming on shore watched with eager curiosity the movements and appearance of the prisoner, and as he passed by them uttered remarks, coarse, jocular, or sympathizing, as their humor prompted. While marching from the landing to the penitentiary, the prisoner kept whispering to his son, who, bowed down with shame and sorrow, walked by the side of his unhappy father. It is understood that the friends of the family did all in their power to persuade young Tweed not to accompany the party to the penitentiary, but that their entreaties were unavailing, Mr. Tweed saying that he would not desert his father until the prison walls shut him out from his sight. At the entrance to the penitentiary the counsel and his attendant company were met by Warden Liscombe and his deputy, McDonald. Deputy Sheriff Shields informed the prisoner that the hour to part was come. Tweed said simply, “Very well,” and immediately shook hands with his friends, bidding them farewell. Then the last bitter trial to the convict’s feelings was come. With evident agitation he turned to his faithful son, and the two again and again embraced. Then Deputy Sheriff Shields formally handed over Tweed to the custody of Warden Liscombe, and the keeper McDonald, taking him by the arm, conducted him along the corridor leading to the barber’s shop, and in a moment he was lost to the sight of his friends. Immediately on entering the shop, he was placed before the desk, when the clerk proceeded to interrogate him. In answer to the usual questions, the prisoner gave his name as William M. Tweed, his age as sixty, his occupation, a statesman, and affirmed that he had no religion. He was then asked what was the religion of his relatives, to which he replied, “The Protestant.” This criminal was accordingly put down as a “Protestant.” He was then weighed, and it was ascertained that his weight was 263 pounds. Afterward he was taken to the bath, as are all other criminals, and after a thorough cleansing, and the shaving of the head, he was arrayed in the usual penitentiary uniform. Tweed, it is stated, brought with him letters from two New York physicians, asserting that he was a fit subject for the hospital rather than a cell. Accordingly, an examination of the prisoner was made by Dr. Alexander E. McDonalds, chief of the medical staff of the island. The doctor, however, pronounced him fit for a cell, and he was accordingly at once taken to cell No. 34, second tier, which bears the usual card-board, on which are inscribed the name, age, and occupation, of the prisoner as given by himself, his offense, and the sentence meted out to him. Upon resigning charge of Tweed, Deputy Sheriff Shields proceeded to the apartment in the prison known as the reception-room, in order to obtain from the proper officer a receipt for the body of his prisoner. Young Tweed accompanied him. During the time, while the receipt was being made out, the keeper, McDonald, came into the room, and, addressing himself to a boy in convict costume who had charge of the clothing department, said to him roughly, “What’s the matter with you to-day? you seem to be excited. Can’t you get me that larceny jacket?” at the same time going to one of the cells and taking down a striped flannel jacket and coarse shirt, with which he went out. The criminal’s unfortunate son, as he heard the words larceny jacket used by the keeper, turned deadly pale, a tremor shook him, and he staggered against the desk upon which, with bowed head, he was leaning. Not long after this incident, the announcement was made that the convict was in his cell, and one of the guards almost simultaneously declared that the boat was ready to start on her homeward trip. The deputies, accompanied by Mr. W. M. Tweed, Jr., and the representatives of the press, started for the boat, and in a moment were steaming down the river for Pier No. 26. On landing at the pier, Mr. Tweed and his friends entered the carriage in waiting for them, and were driven rapidly away. “And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.” Acts 11:15. This is one of the many repetitions of the Pentecostal scene which occurred in early days. Most unscriptural is the statement of some, that the gift of giving the Spirit at Pentecost was a thing done once for all, not to be repeated, and that we are not to pray for nor expect such things again. The whole of the Acts of the Apostles is a direct refutation of this piece of human fancy. Wherever the apostles went, there was a repetition of Pentecost, whether at Jerusalem, or Samaria, or Antioch or Corinth. Every conversion is a repetition of Pentecost; it is doing the same thing for an individual soul as was done for three thousand there, by a similar process, and by the same power—the power of the Holy Ghost. Let us note the different expressions used concerning him and his work in the history of the early church. “Baptized with the Holy Ghost;” Acts 1:5; “after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you;” 1:8; “they were filled with the Holy Ghost;” 2:4; “I will pour out of my Spirit;” 2:17, 18; “He hath shed forth [poured out] this which ye now see and hear;” 2:33; “ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost;” 2:38; “they were filled with the Holy Ghost;” 4:21; “they received the Holy Ghost;” 8:17; “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost;” 10:38; “the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word;” 10:44; “on the Gentiles was also poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost;” 10:45; who “have received the Holy Ghost;” 10:47; “the Holy Ghost fell on them;” 11:15; “John indeed baptized with water, but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost;” 11:16; “the disciples were filled with joy, and with the Holy Ghost;” 13:52; “when Paul laid his hands on them the Holy Ghost came on them;” 19:6. Such are the different ways in which the baptism of the Holy Ghost is represented—such the different figures under which the bestowal of this great gift on us is set forth—a coming down, a pouring out, an anointing, a shedding forth, a coming upon, a falling on, as water is poured on us, as oil anoints us, as showers fall upon, as fire descends upon, so does the Holy Ghost come in contact with, and operate upon, us and within us. In one sense, then, Christ is the life of the church; in another sense, it is the Holy Spirit. The church is a body which the Spirit fills, energizes, quickens; without whom, no external, or ecclesiastical, or governmental organization is of any avail. In our day, we look to externals, to pecuniary prosperity, to numbers, to bulk, to bustle, to schemes; or to talent, to intellect, to eloquence, to learning. What are these without the Holy Ghost? The spirit of the age, no doubt, is slow to recognize this purely supernatural element. The idea of human progress and development which has taken possession of men cannot co-exist with it. The settled conviction of our age, that men are finding their way upward by self-reliance and personal energy, and that the world is quite able (only give it time and scope) to regenerate itself, is utterly at variance with it. But in spite of all this, such is God’s idea of a church, its root, and life, and constitution, and work. This book of the Acts reveals to us more of a church’s true life, of a soul’s true life, than all the philosophies of earth, all the refinements of the most advanced or the most stereotyped theologies of the day. The all-pervading, all-animating thing which makes a church what it is, a Christian what he is, is not a principle, or an idea, or a creed, or a dogma, or a rite, or a sentimentalism, or a sacrament, but the personal Spirit—he who is emphatically called in the Scripture the Holy Ghost. Without him, all churchmanship is vain—all creeds, all ceremonies, all services, all edifices, all altars, all liturgies, all pictures, all processions, all solemnities, all devotions, all genuflections, all chantings, are utterly vain. 1. Beware of superficial religion. No mere surface work or sentimental excitement will avail with God, or stand the coming test of the great day of the Lord. The primitive religion was deep and real: it penetrated every recess of a man’s heart, every region of his being. 2. Beware of an ecclesiastical externalism. A goodly order of things in the church is right, but woe be to the man who trusts in this. Israel trusted in this, and cried, “The temple of the Lord are we;” but what availed all their outside completeness? Did it not deceive them, and make them lose sight of the awfully sifting words, “Ye must be born again”? 3. Beware of seeking anything less than the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Our whole life is to be a reception of this Spirit. He is to be continually coming down on us and filling us. Let us open our mouth wide that he may fill it. Let us beware of anything that would present itself as a substitute for the living Spirit. Many such things may we expect in these last days from Satan as an angel of light. 4. Beware of grieving the Spirit. There is great danger in this. Israel was continually guilty of this crime, and so is the church. “We do always resist the Holy Ghost.” Let us not by unbelief, or error, or inconsistency, or backsliding, or apostasy, grieve or quench this Spirit whereby we are sealed unto the day of redemption. Whosoever Will: The Anthem of God's Mercy
The New Testament opens with “Peace on earth, good-will to men;” and these were the last words that rang through the air before the vision failed: “And the Spirit and the Bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come.” And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely.” And all between these two magnificent notes rolls the anthem of God’s mercy—“Whosoever will.” Jesus Teaches Repentance Through His Own Example
JESUS teaches all his servants by his example where their ministry is to begin—namely, with the doctrine of repentance. Hearing the Grass Grow and the Roar of Silence
If we had a keen vision, and a feeling of all ordinary human life, it would be like hearing the grass grow, and the squirrel's heart beat, and we should die of that roar which lies on the other side of silence. WHAT IS POETRY?
By J. Matteson
Composed by a poor journeyman in Denmark; translated for the Review by J. MATTESON. What is poetry?
Precious gems of mind extending,
On the wings of angels wending
Through this world of darkness, sending
Light to make us free;
Dreams of glory bright descending,
All that's great and good commending,
With life's duties gently blending,
In sweet harmony.
Gracious light from God in Heaven
To poor wanderers kindly given,
Strengthening souls by sorrow riven;—
This is poetry. What is poetry?
Nature in her freshness shining,
Fragrant flowers in beauty twining,
Happy birds from tree-tops chiming
In sweet melody.
Wreaths of waves the ocean cresting,
Dewdrops on bright roses resting,
Myriad stars the heavens vesting,
In their majesty.
Sunny arrows, lightning wonders,
Fearful, strong, volcanic thunders,
Light our northern heaven that sunders;—
This is poetry. What is poetry?
Scenes from ancient times and places,
Deeply interesting traces,
Gathered from the copious pages
Of man's history;
By the strength of art now winging,
Now from chisels loudly ringing,
Or by form and color bringing
Life's true imagery.
Lightning trained to make grand speeches,
Steam on land and sea to teach us
Lessons, which all nature preaches;—
This is poetry. What is poetry?
Every word of Jesus given
To the worn and tempest riven
While by pain and sorrow driven,
To his cross we flee;
Sacred blood from Jesus flowing,
Heavenly love within him glowing,
While his head in death is bowing,
All to make us free;
Happy angel voices singing,
Heaven's bright dome with victory ringing,
Glory to the conqueror bringing;—
This is poetry. How to Mend the World.
By Observer
“My dear, good mother used to say, If we would find fault with people less, and pray for them more, it would do them more good and ourselves too.” So said my friend, and I fancied that in this I saw one secret of her life. Of course, I do not know what her prayers may have been, for her prayers, like her alms, were in secret; but she certainly found fault with people very little. And if she followed one part of the precept, it is fair to infer that she did the other also. “It reminded me of the man who exclaimed, ‘I have tried everything with that boy; I have tried indulgence and severity, coaxing and kindness, and scolding and whipping, and nothing does any good.” “Have you tried praying for him?” Somehow after a little while, the boy grew better, and his parents more in sympathy with him. But then, we believe in praying for our children. Let us consider the rest of the world—any one who seems wrong, any one who troubles you or who ought in some way to be different or to be better. You may not be able to talk to him or her; it will never do to talk of him, against him. What is left but to pray?—Observer. The Hour of His Judgment Come.
By Uriah Smith
This will be true when the message of Rev. 14: 6, 7, is fulfilled; for so it declares: “Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his Judgment is come.” Whenever God’s word announces anything concerning the Judgment, every mind should give attention, every ear should listen. This is something which concerns all mankind. Other subjects may not interest, because they may treat of things with which we have no especial connection. Not so the Judgment. All are concerned here. For between us and the future world, the searching ordeal of the Judgment inevitably lies. None can escape it. Every member of the human family must pass its trying test, and receive from its decisions a sentence that will determine his or her condition for all that period covered by the fearful word—Eternity! Let us then not carelessly nor irreverently inquire what, and when, the Judgment is, to which we are brought by the message before us. This Judgment is a part of the gospel; for the everlasting gospel is what the angel was sent to preach, and all that the prophecy brings to view of his preaching is this appeal to all the people to fear God and give glory to him; for the hour of his Judgment is come. In the gospel scheme, then, where does the Judgment have a place? and what is it? The gospel is the good news of pardon and salvation through Jesus Christ. And this salvation is secured to us by the following acts on the part of Christ:— 1. Coming down to earth to establish, as prophet and teacher, the new covenant with his people. 2. Dying as our sacrifice. 3. Ministering before the Father, as our priest and mediator, during the gospel age. 4. Coming again in the clouds of heaven to raise the righteous dead and change the righteous living. 5. Clothing them with immortality, and giving them positions of surpassing glory in the kingdom which he shall establish, which shall never end. But the great event which determines for us all the momentous question who shall be the subjects of Christ’s eternal kingdom, is the Judgment of the great day. This fixes the destiny of every one. Paul says that we must all appear before the Judgment seat of Christ that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done whether it be good or bad. 2 Cor. 5: 10. And he told the Athenians that God had appointed a day in which he would judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he had ordained, whereof he had given assurance unto all men in that he had raised him from the dead. Acts 17: 31. And when John, in prophetic vision, saw a great white throne, and One sitting thereon before the glory of whose face the earth and heavens dissolved and disappeared, he saw the dead stand in the presence of that Being, and receive judgment according to the things written in the books. Among the great events of the gospel, the Judgment thus holds an important and prominent place. It transpires at the conclusion of human probation. It declares the result of the working of the plan of salvation for 6000 years. The gospel is one gospel, but it embraces distinct and separate truths, which, at different times, become leading themes of its proclamation. Thus, in the first years of what is known as the gospel dispensation, the burden of evangelical preaching was a crucified and risen Saviour; or, the fact that Christ had appeared in the flesh as a sacrifice for men. In the days of the great Reformation, it was, Justification through Christ, without the intervention of a human priesthood. As we draw near the end, when the Judgment is impending, and the everlasting kingdom of Christ is to be established, taking such only among the living as are ready to enter therein, this fact, as a matter of course, and from the very nature of the case, rises into prominence, and becomes the leading idea to be urged upon the attention of the people. So in Matt. 24: 14, when the kingdom is about to be established, it is called, “This gospel of the kingdom;” the same gospel as at the beginning, only bringing out more prominently the establishment of the kingdom which the gospel embraces, and which is then soon to be set up. And in the passage before us in Revelation, it is the everlasting gospel; but it here brings to view especially the Judgment, which is the great event impending when this message is given. By the expression “everlasting gospel,” we are not to understand a gospel which is to be preached everlastingly, and never end, but one, the work and results of which are everlasting, being accomplished once for all. The proclamation of Rev. 14: 6, 7, is therefore a second advent proclamation, and can be in order only when the second coming of Christ and the Judgment are near at hand. This consideration alone effectually bars all attempts to apply this message to any movement in generations past. But as some, in obedience to a prevailing impulse which inclines people to locate all important events “not in your day or mine,” attempt to find this message in past ages, even going as far back as the days of the apostles, we inquire if anything has transpired in those ages which can be urged as a fulfillment of this prophecy. The apostles did not proclaim the hour of God’s Judgment come. It would not have been true if they had proclaimed it. Instead of this, they pointed to the future for that event. Paul reasoned before Felix of a Judgment, not come, but to come, sometime in the future. Acts 24: 25. And he told the men of his generation, not that a day had come, but that one was appointed still in the future, for that purpose. Acts 17: 31. He also expressly wrote to the believers in Thessalonica, that Christians should not expect that day till after the long period of papal apostasy. 2 Thess. 2: 3. The temporary preaching of the millennium near the close of the 10th century did not fulfill the prophecy. For those engaged in that work did not proclaim the hour of God’s Judgment come. It would not have been true if they had proclaimed it. And, moreover, that movement was based on a mistaken application of the prophecies respecting the thousand years. The reformers did not fulfill this prophecy. Martin Luther held and taught that the Judgment would not come for 300 years from his day. The “Fifth Monarchy Men” of Cromwell’s time did not fulfill it. For that movement was unscriptural and fanatical, limited in extent, and brief in duration. But we come to our own time and find a movement which shook the churches of all Christendom. We find men moved as if by a divine impulse, giving utterance to a definite and specific proclamation through Europe, Asia and Africa; while a thousand ministers took up the theme in the more enlightened lands of England and America. We find them sending forth the tidings to every missionary station on the globe. And what was it? The announcement of the advent near; the proclamation of the soon coming of Christ, and the end of the present dispensation. The great Advent movement of the last 33 years cannot be ignored. Many may affect to regard it as a very insignificant affair, and reserve their heartiest terms of contempt for occasions of its mention. But it matters not that multitudes are blind to the importance and significance of this movement. The scribes and Pharisees saw in Christ himself only a malefactor worthy of death. But the sound has gone forth, and who has not heard it? This is enough. Those who were engaged in preaching the soon coming of Christ between the years 1840 and 1844, claimed to be giving the first message of Rev. 14. And the movement answers to the prophecy in every particular. 1. It answers to it in time; for it has come forth at the very time when all prophecy and all signs show that the end is at hand. 2. It answers to it in the nature of the message proclaimed; for it points to the Judgment. 3. It answers to it in extent; for it has gone to all the world. Now, no movement ever took place at the very time when such a movement was predicted to occur, and accomplished the very work specified in the prophecy, without being a fulfillment of that prophecy. In the great Advent movement of the present generation, therefore, we have a fulfillment of the first message of Rev. 14, which announces the hour of God’s Judgment come. The nature of this Judgment will be considered in our next. Elder Preble on the Thirteenth Chapter of the Sabbath History.
By John Nevins Andrews
In a former article, we showed what kind of an answer Eld. P. makes to the twelfth chapter of the History of the Sabbath, the chapter with which his attack commences. We now briefly state the contents of chapter thirteen, and the reply made to it by him. ANALYSIS OF CHAPTER XIII.
EXAMINATION OF THE FIRST WITNESSES FOR SUNDAY.
1. Contradictory statements of Mosheim and Neander. Mosheim affirms the apostolical institution of first-day observance. Neander declares that the festival of Sunday, like all other festivals, was always only a human ordinance. Maclaine's Mosheim, cent. 1, part 2, c. 4, sect. 4. Rose's Neander, p. 186. 2. The ecclesiastical writers of the first century, the age referred to by Mosheim and Neander, are the proper standard of appeal to determine which is right. These are Barnabas, Pliny, and Ignatius, the only writers outside of the New Testament, prior to A. D. 140, who are supposed to mention the first day of the week. 3. The Epistle of Barnabas quoted, and shown to be a forgery on the testimony of Mosheim. Eccl. Hist., cent. ii., part 2, c. 2, s. 21, and Hist. Commentaries, cent. i., s. 53, and of Neander, Rose's Translation, p. 407, Prof. Stuart in Gurney's Hist. Sab., p. 86, Dr. Killen, Anc. Church, p. 368, Prof. Hackett, Com. on Acts, p. 251, Mr. Milner, Hist. Church, cent. i., c. 15, or Kitto, Cyc. Bib. Lit., art. Lord's Day; Relig. Encyc., art. Barnabas, Eusebius' Eccl. Hist., b. 3, c. 25, Sir Wm. Domville, Ex. of the Six Texts, p. 233, Coleman's Anc. Christianity, c. 1, s. 2, and specimens of the Epistle itself cited in proof of its spurious character. 4. The Epistle of Pliny quoted, and shown not to designate the day of the week used for divine worship. He says merely that they were accustomed to meet on a stated day. Coleman says that whether this was the first or last day of the week does not appear. Buck's Theol. Dict. makes it entirely indefinite, art. Christians. W. B. Taylor speaks of it in the same manner as Coleman, ob. of Sabbath, p. 300. Bochner asserts that it was the Jewish Sabbath. Mosheim's Eccl. Com. cent. i., s. 47. 5. The epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians examined. Only three of the fifteen epistles ascribed to Ignatius are acknowledged by critics as genuine, and among these is not found the epistle to the Magnesians which contains his reputed testimony in behalf of Sunday. Dr. Killen, Anc. Church, pp. 413, 414, pronounces them all a grave imposture. John Calvin condemned every one of them, Anc. Ch. p. 407. Prof. Hudson does not acknowledge the epistle to the Magnesians as genuine. Future Life, p. 290. Domville, Ex. of the Six Texts, p. 237, and Robinson, Ed. Researches, c. 6, likewise speak of the doubtful character of these epistles. But were the epistle to the Magnesians genuine, it would say nothing about Sunday had not the word day, ἡμέρα, been fraudulently inserted in the text. For proof, see Kitto, Cyc. Bib. Lit., art. Lord's Day, Morer, Dialogues on Lord's Day, pp. 206, 207, Domville, Ex. of the Six Texts, pp. 250, 251. The first of these points is, that Mosheim and Neander contradict each other, one asserting that first-day observance “was founded upon the express appointment of the apostles,” and the other declaring that it “was always only a human ordinance, and it was far from the intentions of the apostles to establish a divine command in this respect.” Eld. P. replies by attempting to show, first, that Mosheim is more worthy of credence than Neander, and, secondly, that after all there is no contradiction between them. To show that Neander is less worthy of our confidence than Mosheim he quotes the translator of Neander's last edition to the effect that the changes in the work were so extensive that he could not use the translation of the former edition, but must translate this edition anew. This Eld. P. offers as proof that Neander changed the doctrine of his first edition. But Torrey does not affirm this. Many years having elapsed since his former edition, he wished to combine new matter and to present the entire work in a new form, and for this reason re-wrote his history. Neander never repudiated his first edition as untruthful or unworthy of credit. But it is claimed that Neander virtually retracted the statement that Sunday was always only a human ordinance, by omitting this language in his last edition. The truth is, he maintains therein precisely the same doctrine on this point as in his first edition, though he states it in language less calculated to offend the observers of Sunday. Thus he states the several things which made up the observance of Sunday in the early church. “Sunday was distinguished as a day of joy, by being exempted from fasts, and by the circumstance that prayer was performed on this day in a standing and not in a kneeling posture, as Christ, by his resurrection, had raised up fallen man again to heaven.” Torrey's Neander, vol. 1, p. 295, ed. 1852. This is Neander's entire summary of Sunday observance in the early church. It is exactly what the early fathers describe it to be. And no Sunday-writer will deny that if Neander has truthfully stated early first-day observance, it was indeed only a human ordinance, for not one feature of this above-named Sunday-keeping was ever commanded by the apostles. Eld. P.'s remarks, p. 394, that Neander was born of Jewish parents, and that he changed his book when he became better acquainted with Christianity, are therefore of no account, for his first edition is as plainly opposed to Judaism as is his second; and his second maintains the same doctrine respecting the Sabbath and first-day as does the first. But another method of setting aside this testimony of Neander is to assert that he did not mean to deny that the apostles established a divine command for Sunday as the Christian Sabbath, but meant to assert that they did not establish a divine command for Sunday as a Catholic festival! But Neander expressly denies that the apostles either constituted or recognized Sunday as a Sabbath, and he represents Sunday as a mere festival from the very first of its observance, and established only by human authority. Eld. P.'s final method of disposing of Neander's testimony is to show as well as he can (395) that Mosheim, in affirming that Sunday observance “was founded upon the express appointment of the apostles,” and Neander in affirming that “it was far from the intentions of the apostles to establish a divine command in this respect,” do not contradict each other! Neander also declares that it was far from the intention of the apostles “to transfer the laws of the Sabbath to Sunday.” This was manifestly written to head off the modern seventh-part-of-time theory by which the fourth commandment is made to sustain and enforce Sunday. Eld. P. tries to parry this blow by saying that Neander meant to say that the apostles did not transfer the stoning system, and the prohibition of fires, which is a most absurd supposition, as it makes Neander refute what no person ever maintained! Eld. P. has not the fairness to state the fact that the History of the Sabbath determined the question between Mosheim and Neander by quoting and examining all the writers who lived in the age covered by the statements quoted from them. Whoever will candidly do this will see that Neander states the truth rather than Mosheim. Next, Eld. P. states that I impeach the fathers, and compares my work to that of infidels who attempt the overthrow of the authenticity of the Scriptures. Pages 395, 396. But the synopsis of chapter 13 enables the reader to see just how the writers of the first century were treated in the first edition of the History of the Sabbath, and the reasons and authorities for what was done.29 Thus the so-called epistle of Barnabas was shown by the strongest evidence not to be his production; the epistle of Pliny was also shown to be no evidence in support of Sunday, and the allusion to Sunday in Ignatius was proved to be an interpolation. Eld. P. does not bring before his readers any of this evidence, but gives a long, rambling reply. Pages 396–406. I give all his points. On page 397, he wishes to know why I spoke of Mosheim as speaking in behalf of early first-day observance as a divine rather than as a historian. My reason is that divines when writing in behalf of Sunday take liberties with facts that historians dare not take. As an example of this, I cite the fraud of Gilfillan, exposed in the REVIEW of Nov. 11, 1872, page 172; and, to come nearer home, I refer to his own extraordinary quotations, as shown in the REVIEW of Dec. 9, 1873, page 204. He asks why then I cite Mosheim as witness in the case of Barnabas. My answer is, that as I was showing that there was nothing to sustain Mosheim's strong Sunday statement, it was entirely pertinent to show that even Mosheim regarded the epistle of Barnabas as written by a later hand. He asks how I can say that there is nothing to sustain the Sunday testimony of Mosheim when Justin Martyr speaks of Sunday as he does? My answer is, that Mosheim testifies respecting the first century, while Justin Martyr speaks of things in the middle of the second. He quotes authorities to show that the epistle of Barnabas is an ancient document, all of which I freely admit. It was not written by the apostle of that name, but was written, probably, about the middle of the second century. But now comes something very remarkable. Eld. P. says (p. 400):— “One more of your witnesses we will bring to the stand: ‘Justin Martyr, A. D. 140,’ and see what he will say about the epistle of Barnabas.”
And so, after thus saying that he would give Justin's testimony concerning Barnabas, what does he do but quote from notes written by a modern editor of his Dialogue with Trypho. Justin himself never alludes to the epistle of Barnabas. If Eld. P. supposed these notes were written by Justin, his blunder is most extraordinary. But if he knew them to be the work of the editor of Justin's Dialogue, and there is no reasonable doubt that he did, then no words of mine can fitly set forth such dishonesty. As Eld. P. again sneers at my reference to doctors of divinity, I cite his present use of Justin as a further illustration of their course when Sunday is concerned. The synopsis shows that the History of the Sabbath proved Ignatius to have said nothing respecting Sunday only as it has been interpolated into his epistles. Eld. P. does not meet this point at all—for no man can do it—but contents himself in quoting from Domville a classification of the epistles of Ignatius, but which has no bearing upon the case. He also quotes two pages from Reeves to the effect that genuine writings should be not condemned because there are some spurious ones, but he does not touch the point at issue at all. I am not specially at variance with this quotation. Such is the force of Eld. P.'s impeachment of chapter 13. It is of value in one thing. He convicts himself, in quoting the editor of Justin as though it was Justin himself, of extraordinary ignorance or of inexcusable dishonesty. J. N. A. Visit at Battle Creek.
By John Nevins Andrews
I HAVE had the privilege of our attending recent General Conference, and also of participating in the meetings which have followed the Conference. These have all been occasions of great interest. There has never been a series of meetings at Battle Creek, which I have attended, which have been equal to these. They have been of great profit to me personally, and many others can testify to the same fact in their own cases. The glory belongs alone to God, for his arm alone is able to bring salvation to his people. But it is proper that we acknowledge the instrumentality through which he has wrought for us. He made the coming of Bro. and sister White an occasion of great good to those who attended these meetings. They spoke with great faithfulness and plainness, and they had great freedom in their testimony. I have been very grateful to God for the strength and encouragement they brought to my own heart. I feel like consecrating my all to God in a far more perfect manner than ever before. There never was a time when there were so many evidences that God's hand is set to this work as at the present time. There is now a chance for every one, in an especial manner, to take hold and work for God. Shall not all respond by entering heartily into the work? Most earnestly do I pray that God will qualify me for a part therein. I return again to Massachusetts to labor in every way that the hand of God may indicate. I am grateful for all his mercies to me. My courage is good. I know something of sorrow, but I find the Lord present to help. He gives me strength and hope and the consolations of his grace, and I feel that all that I have and all that I am shall be devoted without reserve to Him who loved me and gave himself for me. J. N. A. National Perils.
By Uriah Smith
L. M. Vernon, D. D., in The Methodist, of Dec. 27, 1873, speaking of the late speech of Victor Emanuel, at the opening of the Italian Parliament, says:— “The Government finances have long been chronically ailing. This same disease bore the late Sella-Lanza ministry to the tomb. The new ministry had wrought slight amelioration, and now many hopefully looked that the magic of ‘majesty’ might evoke light out of the troubled darkness. But alas! arithmetic is no respecter of persons. Figures are democratic. Neither will scrip rise, nor debts down at the wave of the scepter. The king could only ask new ‘sacrifices,’ meaning new taxes. These unhappy, yet necessary, words depressed the bourse in every important Italian city. Increasing armies of defense by increasing national debt and decreasing national credit is seen to be perilous—deferring only the evil day. But in this suicidal course Italy has much European company. It is to be hoped that upon a common evil will rise a common remedy.” That is to say, Italy is groping its way through “troubled darkness,” respecting which the only prospect is that it will grow darker still. Italy, with “much European company,” is pursuing a suicidal policy. National suicide is national overthrow. Italy, with many other European nations, is doing the “perilous” work of “increasing armies of defense by increasing national debt and decreasing national credit.” This state of things is a “common evil,” and the “evil day” is only deferred. All that is written and said by rulers and statesmen, in these days, upon the present troubled state of the nations was summed up in prophecy 1800 years ago, in these words: “Distress of nations with perplexity.” Luke 21: 25. And when, among many other things, this feature also should come out in startling relief, we were bidden to understand that the climax of earth’s misrule and mismanagement had come, and that He whose right it is to reign was about to return in power and glory in the clouds of heaven to take the kingdom to himself.