The prophet Micah says, “What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” chap. 6: 8; thus plainly intimating that the requirements of God are summed up in these three particulars. In a former article we have noticed the importance of doing justly, and have seen that it lies at the very foundation of Bible religion. The prophet next speaks of “loving mercy” as one of those things he requires in all who please him. I believe there is a natural order here that is suggestive. To love mercy is a higher attainment even than to do justly. It is a step further in the direction toward holiness and perfection. It could not for a moment be supposed that a person too selfish to act honestly with his fellow-men would from a settled principle advantage him at his own expense.
Mercy is defined to be “a disposition to overlook injuries or to treat an offender better than he deserves, to forgive obligation out of compassion for the offender; an act of favor, pity, compassion, or tenderness.”—Webster. It relates to the feelings we should permit ourselves to cherish toward those who have injured us, or are under obligation to us, and to the course we should pursue toward those more needy than ourselves. There is no attribute of Deity that should more interest mortals than mercy; for it is through this alone they can be saved. So there is none they should strive harder to imitate toward those less favored than themselves. Those will go to Heaven who form a character here in accordance with the principles of Heaven. To such, God will intrust a never-ending life in which to carry them out. Those who do not, God will cut off as unfit to be trusted with such a valuable boon.
The Lord in proclaiming his own character on a most solemn occasion does it as follows: “The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, long-suffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity, and transgression, and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty.” Ex. 34: 6, 7. How prominently the Lord sets forth those traits of his character pertaining to this grace we are considering, as though he ever desired his creatures to think of him in that light. We hope to live in the presence of this God, to share his loving favor. Can we hope to do it with a character contrary to his? Oh! how surpassingly great God’s mercy is! waiting so many years for men to turn from sin, sending his Holy Spirit to gently call after them in tenderness to come back to receive his forgiveness, having provided a full and complete plan of salvation even by the death of his own beloved Son!
God simply desires us to appreciate these principles by which he is actuated, and to form characters after such a glorious model. Doing so, we shall be received into his loving, happy presence; failing to do so, we shall be forever shut out from it, among those who have misspent their probation, as worthless and lost.
We find ourselves in this world descended from selfish beings, and consequently selfish ourselves. We are exposed to the temptations of an artful foe of great power, who, because he could not rule, determined to ruin, as far as possible, God’s work. Selfishness in its varied forms is perhaps the most potent foe we have to contend with. That love so beautifully manifested by our Saviour in all his life on earth is almost a stranger to our selfish human nature. Without it as the ruling principle of our hearts we never can reign with him in the future glorious life. How shall we obtain it? We must be first convinced of our lack of it, and then of its great importance to our well-being; in short, look at it like sensible men and women, and determine to make it henceforth our rule of life; and having seen our selfishness in the past, and by hearty repentance turned from it, we should cry to God earnestly for the transforming power of his Spirit to enable us to discern the proper course and impart strength to follow it, and then above all begin to act upon the principle of “loving mercy.” Be honestly looking for chances to do good, and then doing it. Do others injure us? Let us ask ourselves, How has God done by us when we were in sin? Do others speak harshly of us? Let us think how many times we have erred in the same way, always remembering the great thing for us to attend to is to be sure we form our own characters after the heavenly model.
We are principally interested in that, so that when the judgment sits and that searching Eye examines every case, ours may be found of the right character. Our characters are formed by habits of thought carried into action. We cannot form a character of righteousness without habitually doing right. We cannot form a merciful character without being habitually merciful. Here many err. They attend meeting and hear right principles proclaimed, and do not carry them out. The light is given; but they do not walk in the light, so darkness comes upon them. They become hardened, and are the worse for the light they have had. The most hopeless condition in the world is to be hardened by truth, hearing much of it and not obeying. It shows a radical love of error and wrong. Many will assent that principles of mercy are all important.
In the nature of things, it is impossible but that it should appear lovely in others. We all love to have it manifested toward ourselves, and therefore think we “love mercy.” But actions speak louder than words. What we do shows what we love. We must practice mercy to meet God’s requirements. But says one, “When the cause of God requires help, or the poor are to be cared for, I try to do something, many times at a great sacrifice of my feelings. I know I have such a duty to do, and if it is unpleasant I mean to do it, for I want to be saved.” Our text says God requires us to “love mercy.” The man who tries to be merciful from a sense of duty has made some advancement perhaps, but has not fully come up to God’s requirements yet. When we do a thing we love to do, we can accomplish far more than we can when we do it from a sense of duty. What the Lord wants is, that every one of us should be merciful because the principle is one of such intrinsic value in itself. “It is more blessed to give than to receive,” says Christ. It is a principle that will make us happier here and hereafter. It is the true principle of life. Our failing to believe this is only the result of our selfish character and ignorance. I firmly believe a man will spend a happier life in this world, who lives out this principle than if he does its opposite. Was Howard the philanthropist an unhappy man? Was Paul an unhappy man? He and Silas could sing, with their feet fast in the stocks and their backs covered with bloody stripes, till the old jail rang again. Granted that a man may not lay up as many dollars, granted that a man may find the lack of many things he would like, yet I don’t believe the Rothschilds, the Astors, the Girards, with their supreme love of self, have given us the true aim of life, even for this world. But how is it when we come down to that point where we can take perhaps the truest view of this short existence? when the current of life seems ebbing away forever, and the bustling throng chasing after earthly vanity are receding from view, and the portals of the tomb are opening before us? What then seems the true principle to us? Was ever a man known to be sorry for a noble act done in the past? Did he regret that he had helped the poor, assisted the oppressed, aided the cause of God? How many of the great and rich who left noble opportunities neglected have mourned over it then. Why then cannot we be wise, and “love mercy” because of its value?
We must love the principles of Heaven. Would to God our eyes might be opened to see the beauty of this principle, and the baseness of selfishness; that our aim in life might be noble and generous; that we might truly follow Christ. Then the people of God would be like a city set on a hill. Then our prayers would be heard. Then the love of God would fill our souls, and we might benefit the world. Then we might at last hear those sweet and soul-cheering words, Well done, good and faithful servant, enter thou into the joy of thy Lord. GEO. I. BUTLER.
For the People Had a Mind to Work.
By Francis Gould
The above declaration was spoken by Nehemiah when he and his associates built the walls of Jerusalem. Nehemiah became very much grieved and distressed when he saw the desolation of the city, and his brethren given to reproach. By fervent prayer and confession of sins to God, he and his brethren went up and began to build the wall and the waste places, repair the breaches, and restore the worship of God. But the enemies of the Lord were there to oppose the work, and began to scoff and ridicule. Said one, Will they revive the stones out of the heaps of the rubbish which are burned? Said another, If a fox go up, he shall even break down their stone wall. The enemies of the Lord sought to call away the attention of Nehemiah from the work of God, that it might cease. Come now, therefore, said they, and let us take counsel together. But the prophet sent unto them saying, “I am doing a great work, so that I cannot come down.” The people of God wrought faithfully amid great opposition, and the Lord blessed them; “for the people had a mind to work.”
We learn from the sacred Scriptures that in all ages of the world God has had a specific work to be done, and has raised up a class of individuals from time to time to do it. He has raised up men, qualified them, and sent them forth to proclaim present truth which has been adapted to the wants of the people; and they performed their duty notwithstanding the enemies of truth multiplied and many of the people of God were slain for the word of God and the testimony which they held.
The prophetic pencil plainly delineates that we are living in a time when an important message is being proclaimed, a specific truth is being set before the people, the last message of mercy to man. The work of this message is to build up the old waste places, restore truth, and repair the breaches made in the great plan of redemption by the enemies of God. Honest men and women are taking their respective positions to do the work to which the Lord has assigned them. The enemies of God’s law and of his truth have sought to overthrow the work, and have failed. The work will be accomplished; “for the people have a mind to work.”
Truth is a unit. The people of God are one. And if ever there was a time in the world’s history when they should get into good working order, it is now, moving out with decision of purpose and unity of action. A set of machinery is made subservient to the will of the inventor. If any part of it gets out of order, the work is retarded. If all moves harmoniously, then it is as it should be.
The apostle recognizes the workings of this principle in the church: “Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation; he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that showeth mercy, with cheerfulness.” Rom. 12: 6–8.
The gift of prophecy may be considered the leading gift, “for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” It occupies a conspicuous place in the church; but it cannot do all the work. Ministers and teachers have their proper place. Next comes exhortation. This gift is designed to fill a place that no other can. “Then they that feared the Lord spake often one to another; and the Lord hearkened, and heard it, and a book of remembrance was written before him for them that feared the Lord, and that thought upon his name.” Mal. 3: 16.
Again: “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another; and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching.” Heb. 10: 25. This precious gift is too often neglected. In the first place we are to meet together as often as we can; and secondly, we are to exhort one another. I think there needs to be a reform in this department of the work at the present time. There are but a few ministers in the broad harvest field. They can spend time to minister to the churches only occasionally; therefore it is important and necessary, as far as we can with the help of the Lord, to “work out our own salvation with fear and trembling.”
The smallest gift in this direction cannot be dispensed with. I have found by observation, and it is a fact in my experience, that the more we improve upon our gifts, however small they may be, we are adding strength to strength, and gaining a rich experience. The gift of exhortation supplies a lack, or fills a vacuum in the church without which the church would be imperfect.
Brethren and sisters, my heart beats in unison with the plan of salvation and with the people of God. Let us work in harmony, “till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ.” Eph. 4: 13. FRANCIS GOULD.
Stowe, Vt.
Be Zealous, and Repent.
By M. E. Williams
LONG since, the message came to us, to be zealous and repent, and open the door, and let Jesus in, and he would sup with us, and we with him. How many have heeded the message and let him in? And how many have their hearts locked and barred against him still? Locked with pride, and barred with selfishness; hearts full of rubbish; no place for Jesus. Pride, selfishness, and Jesus, can never dwell together in the same heart.
How many times have you heard him knocking, gently knocking at the door? How many times has he turned away in sorrow that you let him not in? You intended to let him in; yea, and sometimes bade him come in; but, ah! was the heart in order? Was there room for him? Again with some affliction he cometh knocking louder and louder; the heart is softened a little; for a time you think you will obey, and make some faint efforts to do so, but soon grow weary and sink back into the same state of apathy and indifference from which you were aroused.
At times the preached word is applied with such power to your heart that you strive to take heed to your ways and get your heart right. But these spasmodic efforts will not accomplish the work; it must be diligent, continual work, not occasional.
He will not always wait. No doubt he will knock for the last time at some heart ere long (oh! is it mine?), and wearily turn away from his thankless task.
What! and is it possible that He, the chiefest among ten thousand, and the one altogether lovely; he who bore our sins, our sorrows, and shame, and who is soon coming King of kings, and Lord of lords, deigns to knock at the door of the hearts of such worms as we, and we let him not in? What base ingratitude is this?
O thou long-suffering, compassionate Saviour, with justice mightest thou spue us out of thy mouth; but wait still a little longer. We will set about our work in earnest. We will tear down the bars, and withdraw the bolts; and then, remembering that thy precious blood cleanseth from all sin, we will wash and be clean, and bring thee in a welcome guest, that thou mayest abide with us forever. M. E. WILLIAMS. Millgrove, N. Y.
THE SABBATH.
By M. A. B.
We have heard from the east, from the south, and the west,
Of commotion and tumult, and dreadful unrest;
For the Sabbath of man is profaned by man's servants,
And men call for law to enforce its observance.
Can it be that wise men have so blinded their eyes,
That they cannot perceive how the matter now lies?
Lo! the Sabbath, on which they say men have so trod,
Is the Sabbath of man, not the Sabbath of God.
Vain man! if so grieved when your own statutes are spurned,
Shall not God's vials of wrath on you now be turned?
Before you discover such faults of another,
Take from your eye the beam, then look to your brother.
Can it be that man thought, when he made this decree,
That from henceforth, the first day the Sabbath shall be,
That the edict of man shall forever abide,
While the law of Jehovah is thus set aside?
God's Sabbath at first disregarded with spurn,
See! 'tis man's Sabbath now that is taking its turn.
What fruit could be surer? Let man never forget,
That the seventh-day Sabbath is God's Sabbath yet.
—M. A. B., Centralia, Ill., in Sabbath Recorder.
“The Overthrow of Popular Government.”
By Conrad Wilson
In a recent leading article of the Times, under the head of “New Phases of Popular Government,” the writer has revealed a condition of public affairs which is entirely too critical and startling for the people longer to slumber over it. But the one fact in this connection is perhaps more critical and amazing than all the rest is—that the people do not realize the situation. They do not seem to be conscious of the actual and degrading subjection to which they have been reduced by the desperate and daring men who, having first usurped the power, are now everywhere devouring the substance of the people. They do not seem to be aware that through the persevering and defiant invasions of their rights by the arch leaders of Tammany, our citizens are already virtually disfranchised, and their sovereignty is practically extinguished. There is, indeed, no longer any doubt as to “the utter overthrow of popular government which,” as you justly affirm, “has been accomplished here.”
It seems to me that the guilt and infamy of the demagogues you have so vigorously arraigned will be found, when all the facts come to light, even more aggravated than any representation yet made to the public. Incredible and astounding as are the facts repeatedly exposed in the columns of the Times, we do not yet fully comprehend the tremendous force and magnitude of the peril that surrounds us. Is it not then the highest duty of the Press everywhere to keep this subject before the people with ceaseless iteration, till they shall be compelled to see and feel the utterly abject condition to which their political masters have reduced them? To my mind it is perfectly clear that the one single event that, more than any other, accounts for the present situation, the one immense and overshadowing fact that has colored the whole of our recent politics, was the election of Hoffman in 1868. That election was a deliberate, premeditated, clearly-defined system of fraud, forgery, and falsehood, without a parallel in history. It was a virtual act of treason against the inherent rights of the people. It was a foregone conclusion; a calculated and intended seizure of power; a naked and predetermined usurpation; and as such, it has held its position, and means to hold it with immovable firmness.
Since that event no election has fairly represented the public sentiment, or expressed the popular will. Since that event there has been no rightful and legitimate administration, no supreme authority emanating from the popular choice, and the government of the Empire State is at this hour essentially a government without the consent and against the will of the people—a despotism, absolute, unmitigated, and intolerable.
In this dark hour of our humiliation it is satisfactory to know that we have one solid ground of hope, one firm foundation left to stand upon. If the people have no longer a government, they have a public Press, which, while it continues free, fearless and unbought, is abundantly able to cope with, and will eventually crush the despotism that is now grinding us in the dust. Journals that can be purchased cease to be a power in the community, and can work but little harm. Those that stand firm in the hour of trial, and “hold fast their integrity” to the end, grow in influence and power with every blow they strike, and rally to their support the aggregate intelligence and the unwavering confidence of the loyal millions.—CONRAD WILSON, in N. Y. Times.
“Glorify the Lord in the Fires.”
AMONG the many illustrations of Scripture which Whitefield often introduced into his sermons, one is truly worthy of record. Preaching from the words, “Wherefore glorify ye the Lord in the fires,” Isa. 24:15, he says: “When I was some years ago at Shields, I went into a glass house, and standing very attentively, I saw several masses of burning glass of various forms. The workmen took one piece of glass and put it into one furnace, then he put it into a second, and then into a third. I asked him: ‘Why do you put that into so many fires?’ He answered me: ‘O sir, the first is not hot enough, nor the second, and therefore we put it into the third, and that will make it transparent. ‘Oh!’ thought I, ‘does this man put this glass into one furnace after another, that it may be rendered perfect?’ O my God, put me into one furnace after another, that my soul may be transparent, that I may see God as he is.’”—British Workman.
The Meaning of Happiness
WHAT does happy mean? A little girl lately said it is “to feel as if you wanted to give all your things to your little sister.” You smile, but I scarcely see why you should. This little girl felt that to be happy, she must be unselfish. She was right, and you know it. Did you ever feel happy when you had selfish feelings in your breast? I guess not.
Be Not Penny Wise
Be not penny wise. Riches have wings, and sometimes they fly away of themselves; sometimes they must be set flying to bring in more.—Lord Bacon.
Of What Were the Gentiles to Repent?
PAUL in his interview with the elders of the church of Miletus, Acts 20:17–38, told them that he had kept back nothing that was profitable, “testifying both to the Jews and also to the Greeks, repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.” Verse 21.
These here termed Greeks were Gentiles. There can be no doubt about that; and Paul, whose mission was especially to the Gentiles, went about urging upon them, with all the energy of one commissioned of Heaven to do the work, repentance toward God.
Repentance signifies sorrow for sin as morally wrong. It is the renouncing of the love and practice of sin. “Repent, . . . that your sins may be blotted out,” is the order laid down and the direction given by an inspired apostle. Acts 3:19.
As repentance is thus seen to be the putting away of sin, the New-Testament definition of sin naturally deserves a place right here. John testifies that sin is the transgression of the law, 1 John 3:4; and Paul tells us that by the law is the knowledge of sin, and that sin is not imputed when there is no law. Rom. 3:20; 5:13. So that we know not what sin is, nor when it is, nor where it is, and indeed there is no such thing as sin, unless there is law to reveal, define, and condemn it.
We thus have the matter quite definitely before us. Paul charged the Gentiles, as the very first step toward securing the favor of God, to repent. Repentance is putting away sin. Sin is law transgressed; and to put away sin is to cease from such transgression. Of what law were the Gentiles at this time living in violation?
Paul was at this time on his last journey to Jerusalem. The chronology of this visit is set down as A. D. 59. It was only twenty-five years before this that Paul was converted to the Christian religion. In the first chapter of Galatians he tells us the course he pursued after his conversion. He did not go immediately up to Jerusalem, and labor among the Jews, his countrymen; but with the gospel he had just received from God, he went immediately into Arabia. Returning to Damascus, he spent three years more in those parts, and then went to Jerusalem, and enjoyed the society of Peter and James for fifteen days. Thence, without even visiting the churches in Judea, he went into the regions of Syria and Cilicia, the Christians of Judea knowing only this about him, that he now preached the faith which he once destroyed. Fourteen years after, he went up again to Jerusalem, and he went up by revelation, and communicated unto them, he says, that gospel which he preached among the Gentiles. This brings us down to within at least eight years of the time when he testified to the elders of the church of Miletus that his business had been to preach to the Gentiles repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ. But we find not an intimation in all this, that he went forth to promulgate a new system of morality from that which had been binding on the world up to that time. If, as some hold, the previously-existing law had been abolished, and a new one was promulgated with the introduction of the new dispensation, the first work would have been to acquaint the world with that fact. They must first have a knowledge of their obligations, before they could be charged with blame for violating them, and held to repentance for such violation. But Paul’s course was first of all to preach repentance: showing that the law they had violated was one of long-standing obligation and well-understood principles. When Paul said, Repent, they knew what he meant, and on what authority he pronounced them guilty.
Again, he testified to Jew and Greek alike. But when he spoke to a Jew about repentance, what would the Jew understand by it? All well know that his mind would go at once to that great moral code, the ten commandments, which God had deposited with them as a nation for safe keeping and for transmission, when the fullness of the time should come, to the followers of Christ. Acts 7:38. But Paul made no difference between Jew and Greek. He testified to both alike, showing that both were under the same moral obligations, amenable to God in exactly the same particulars.
How men can suppose that God has different requirements, in a moral point of view, for men in different quarters of the globe, or in different ages of the world, is past our comprehension. How they can suppose that he will judge one class by one rule and another by another, when he had one rule of righteousness for Noah and all the antediluvians, when the inhabitants of Canaan were cast out for violating the same principles the Israelites were required to keep, and when Paul, this side the cross, testified repentance to Jews and Greeks alike, is an anomaly not easily explained.
VERSE 5 reads thus: “And Abram took Sarai his wife, and Lot his brother’s son, and all their substance that they had gathered, and THE SOULS that they had gotten in Haran; and they went forth to go into the land of Canaan; and into the land of Canaan they came.”
When Abram was about to enter the land of Egypt he thus addressed his wife, according to verse 13, “Say, I pray thee, thou art my sister; that it may be well with me for thy sake; and my soul shall live because of thee.”
In the first of these texts it is evident that the word soul is used as in Gen. 2:7, simply as designating persons. The word soul is therefore here used for the whole man.
In the second text it is used in a very similar manner. It was used as the equivalent of Abraham. It is the same as though he said, “I or myself shall live because of thee.” Certain it is that Abraham believed it possible for his soul, i. e., himself, to die. He was not immortal even in his soul; or if he was he surely was unaware of the fact.
THE REQUEST OF THE KING OF SODOM.
“And the king of Sodom said unto Abram, Give me the persons, and take the goods to thyself.” Gen. 14:21.
This was said to Abram when he had returned from the overthrow of the kings. The marginal reading shows how the word soul was used in that time. The margin gives us the Hebrew form of expression which was this, “Give me the souls, and take the goods to thyself!” Here the word soul is used in the same sense as when first applied to man in Gen. 2:7. It is simply the whole man, which is by far the most general use of the word in the Bible.
“WITHIN THY GATES.”
This clause occurs in the fourth commandment. It relates to the stranger. He is to do no work upon the Sabbath. This is reasonable. If he spend the Sabbath within our gates he must desist from labor. If he spend it elsewhere, he is accountable indeed to God, but we have no duty to control him. The clause “within thy gates” relates solely to this thing. It is therefore an utter perversion to apply this expression also to our cattle and our hired help as though they might labor for us if they do this outside our gates. Be not deceived by so unreasonable a construction of the plain commandment of God. On that very form of argument you can labor yourself on the Sabbath, provided you do it outside your gate. Some are acting on this plan so far as to employ their hired help to work for them on other men’s farms. But it is evident that no one can do this who fears God from the heart.
NEVER MURMUR.
It is no part of our business to murmur against God or man. God cannot do any unjust thing. It is only a wicked heart that can murmur against his dealings with us. He may chastise us, but it is always for our own wrongs; and even then our good absolutely demands it. No affliction from the hand of God should ever affect us only by way of causing deep humiliation and penitence for our own sins. Men may do us an injury wantonly, and without provocation. Yet it is folly to murmur even then. How much better to accept it as a chastening from the hand of God for our own sins. How much better to take it to the Lord in prayer. What a sad spectacle is a grumbling, complaining, murmuring Christian! Rather, what a contradiction in terms is such an expression. The Christian is a man that rejoices evermore, prays without ceasing, and in everything gives thanks. Murmurers, complainers, and grumblers are not Christians. Men that make God their portion, and that are heirs to endless and infinite felicity, cannot be otherwise than always joyful in God.
J. N. ANDREWS.
The Sabbath and the Mails.
By W. H. Littlejohn
LIKE all other questions, that which relates to the manner in which the Sabbath should be kept, has its difficulties.
As it would be out of the question for the Holy Spirit to draw in full and complete outline the course to be pursued by each individual in every circumstance in life; that has been done which alone was practicable; namely, the Lord has directed in general terms that the day of his rest should be kept holy by giving up the mind to religious contemplation, and withholding the hand from all secular labor.
But it is right here that our trouble originates. From the very necessity of the case, each individual is left to draw for himself the line between the holy and profane; and, as we differ widely in our habits of thought and modes of reasoning, disagreement naturally arises as to where it properly belongs.
Our attention has been called to this fact more especially of late in seeing the diversity of practice which exists among our brethren in the matter of going to the office for their mail on the Sabbath.
While some avoid this with scrupulous care, others engage in it as a practice every way defensible.
Since this state of things is, to say the least, a misfortune; and, as the usage in question must be either right or wrong, perhaps a few reflections bearing upon it would not be out of place.
What, then, are the arguments usually urged in defense of this custom?
So far as our observation extends, they generally relate to the convenience of the opportunity which is afforded by attending church for a visit to the office; or else the necessity that they should have the REVIEW AND HERALD which is a religious paper, with which to spend the hours of God's holy day in a profitable manner.
But are these reasons conclusive?
So far as the first is concerned, it is of such a nature that, should it be admitted that it furnishes a justification in the case before us, it could be pleaded with equal propriety in the behalf of nearly every violation of the Sabbath which has ever occurred. In fact, it would subvert the institution altogether. Or should it stop short of this, it would, at least, cover with its ample folds, as we have seen illustrated in a thousand instances, the adherence to the observance of the first day of the week without any authority, in the place of that of the seventh, which stands upon divine appointment, on the ground that it is so inconvenient to be out of joint in a matter of this nature with society in general.
We can readily see, that to one living several miles from town, there might be a saving of time and expense, by stopping at the office for the mail, while on the way to church, and that at times it might do away with the necessity of a special trip for that purpose.
But is this the proper scale by which to measure the morality of the act?
Is expediency to be consulted when the question at issue is purely one of right or wrong?
If so, then the purchase, at the same time, of articles at the dry-goods store, of which the family stand in need, and which can never again be obtained at so slight an expenditure of time and labor, would constitute an act every way justifiable.
The issue is not whether the occasion in question furnishes the best opportunity—economically speaking—for the accomplishment of the desired end. But it is this. Is the practice one which the word of God upholds?
If so, it must come under one of two heads. It must be from its very nature either a work which is religious in itself, or one which, while constituting a departure from the prescribed rule, is to be defended on the ground of necessity.
So far as the last proposition is concerned, it will hardly be urged that, ordinarily speaking, it is absolutely necessary that we should procure our papers and letters on the only day of the week which God has reserved exclusively to himself.
Mark it! I do not say that the servant of God can never be so situated that he would be justified in employing the mails on that day, or that God might not be glorified thereby. But this would be an extreme case, one which would very seldom arise, and one which could not with propriety be said to warrant a man in doing likewise in ordinary circumstances, any more than it could be urged that David would have been pardonable for eating the show bread which had been set apart for the priests, had he not acted under the pressure of necessity; or the priesthood in departing in other respects which related purely to their own individual interests, from the law of the Lord, because they were permitted, while exclusively engaged in his service, to perform the work which was inseparably connected with the offering of sacrifices on the Sabbath.
Again: it cannot be urged that the act under consideration is one which is exclusively religious simply from the fact that the paper which is sought to be obtained is a religious one. For should this be insisted upon, then the individual making this plea, resting it as he does upon the character of the periodical which he seeks to obtain, would thereby admit the impropriety of taking other publications and letters of a more secular nature; in this manner rendering it necessary that he should reject all but the one in question; thus placing himself in a position, which, to say the least, would be somewhat embarrassing.
But to illustrate this more fully: suppose that it were desirable, yet not absolutely necessary, that one should have a copy of the Bible on the Sabbath, since his study of the Scriptures would be facilitated thereby. Would he be justified in stepping into a book store to purchase the same?
You readily answer, No. But the case is a parallel one, since his desire to read the Scriptures was most certainly commendable, and they in themselves furnish matter which, above all that can be read or obtained, is free from objections.
Where, then, lies the difficulty? You reply that the transaction was not purely religious, since it involved an unnecessary encouragement of the book-seller in carrying on an illegitimate business for the purpose of gain on God's holy day.
But is this not equally true of the postmaster? The vendor of Bibles labored for the reward which he found in the profit of his books; the employee of the government for the stipulated wages which he received for his work. The principle is the same. The logic which condemns the one will necessarily condemn the other, unless you can show that the latter differs from the former in the fact that it is purely a moral institution.
But this is not so. And for the purpose of testing it, we propound this question: Is the postmaster justified in throwing open the doors of his office, and standing behind his counter on the Sabbath day to wait upon those who may see fit to resort there to obtain the mail?
If he is not, then we should be careful how we unnecessarily encourage him in his offense, lest we become accountable therefor.
Should any one attempt to evade the consequences of this query by arguing that he does not do this for the sake of Sabbath-keepers particularly, but more especially for the larger number who have no regard for the day, then we will shape our question as follows: Would the postmaster be justified in keeping his office open on the Sabbath exclusively for the benefit of those who desire to obtain religious papers?
This of course would be impracticable. But we think, to say the least, all will be compelled to concede that it would furnish an instance of a clear violation of the letter of God's law. It certainly would be doing for wages a work which in itself does not pertain to the service of God; and which, as a consequence, if justified at all, must be upon the ground of absolute necessity.
But this could never be urged in its favor, since its claims could not, as we have already seen, rise above those of mere convenience and expediency.
We urge, therefore, those who have been doing that which we are compelled from the foregoing considerations to regard as wrong, to give our premises and conclusions careful and prayerful attention. And even should they be unable to agree149with us in every respect, we submit, that the question must be regarded as in some respects a debatable one; and that there is a bare possibility that they are mistaken in their views. This being the case, since there is not only danger of offending God by pursuing the course heretofore entered upon, but since also many of those who keep the first day of the week regard the question in the same light in which we have presented it, and since they look upon your conduct with less charity than we have done, and take occasion from it to reproach the cause which we love, would it not be safer, better every way, to avoid even the appearance of evil? W. H. LITTLEJOHN.